British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HiFlyer14,
The savings are in new disruption agreement, removal of telephone allowance, two year pay freeze and new contracts for future crew. Should BA want to change scheduling and how we are rostered they can't really do anything on WW because most crew are working as much as possible. Maybe they could look at EF and LGW.
Back to monthly travel payment. Can't you see it's a carrot for BA to use for us to accept NewFleet? It will protect your income, they say. For how long? Until NewFleet is up and running and they are moving destination and destination from both EF and WW until there's nothing left. Do you think they'll let us be on this monthly payment until retirement? No! When enough crew are sat at home it'll come down to lack of work and they'll tell you to either hand in your uniform or sign a new contract. Can't you see that?
The savings are in new disruption agreement, removal of telephone allowance, two year pay freeze and new contracts for future crew. Should BA want to change scheduling and how we are rostered they can't really do anything on WW because most crew are working as much as possible. Maybe they could look at EF and LGW.
Back to monthly travel payment. Can't you see it's a carrot for BA to use for us to accept NewFleet? It will protect your income, they say. For how long? Until NewFleet is up and running and they are moving destination and destination from both EF and WW until there's nothing left. Do you think they'll let us be on this monthly payment until retirement? No! When enough crew are sat at home it'll come down to lack of work and they'll tell you to either hand in your uniform or sign a new contract. Can't you see that?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So it's a strike over problems???
To be willing to bring an airline down over PROBLEMS such as these makes me think your union has done an even worse job than I thought of explaining its case. Blimey.
BTW, I now ask every sector if there have been any problems with the service. I haven't had one single adverse comment (apart from working a bit harder(!)) from any SCCM. So each trip I've been able to pass back positive feedback to your management, as requested.
So have they been making you work more than 21 days in 28? (As a reminder, you said you were being made to work more than 75%, despite your 75% contract).
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back to monthly travel payment. Can't you see it's a carrot for BA to use for us to accept NewFleet? It will protect your income, they say. For how long? Until NewFleet is up and running and they are moving destination and destination from both EF and WW until there's nothing left. Do you think they'll let us be on this monthly payment until retirement? No! When enough crew are sat at home it'll come down to lack of work and they'll tell you to either hand in your uniform or sign a new contract. Can't you see that?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re the door 5 issue. For 15 years BA told its 747-400 pilots to fly 10kts faster than the flap manouevering speed, lest the aircraft fall out of the sky. Every pilot, every flight, every take off, every landing. 10kts extra. Then overnight it changed. Turns out it wasn't necessary, Boeing didn't ask for it and no other airline did it. Moral of the story: just because BA have been doing something for years doesn't mean it's right.
You don't need door cover at doors 5.
You don't need door cover at doors 5.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that's the management's job! (And insulting their qualifications for the job doesn't help your argument.) Do you think the cabin crew should decide on the service standard? I'm afraid that's not how any scholar of business methods would approach the issue.
So it's a PROBLEM that you have to work a bit harder? Or it's a PROBLEM that the business passenger has a bit longer with the service going on around him?
I don't think it's fair on our customers that they need to put up with a Club service that takes 3 hrs to complete, sleep for a couple of hrs and woken up when the lights come on for the 2nd service earlier than usual because otherwise there won't be enough time.
BTW, I now ask every sector if there have been any problems with the service. I haven't had one single adverse comment (apart from working a bit harder(!)) from any SCCM. So each trip I've been able to pass back positive feedback to your management, as requested.
So have they been making you work more than 21 days in 28? (As a reminder, you said you were being made to work more than 75%, despite your 75% contract).
Can you confirm you and the union are suggesting people strike over New Fleet, and the erosion of future earnings?
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Give it a rest about the bl**dy doors!
If there were any safety issues with regard to the new crewing levels, the CAA would have stopped BA from going ahead by not granting approval.
They didn't. There aren't. The end.
They didn't. There aren't. The end.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much less time in the bunk are you getting?
Is this your rationale for IA? The company have to pay for the service you provide, and they've decided they can only afford a certain level of service. Or would you take a pay cut to pay for an improved customer experience? No, didn't think so.
675 hours is well within that limit. But I'm sure you knew that.
Who suggested you would be limited to 75% of 900 hours?
Good, as long as we're all agreed this dispute has nothing to do with New Fleet.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's still all about power. Past management have swung the lead and given BASSA too much power. Now they want to take it away and, predictably, BASSA don't like it.
This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.
This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
This will go to a strike, and MissM, you have to be prepared to take the company down with you.
All prepared.
That says it all! Time to invest a few bob at Paddypower me thinks. While the odds are still good.
This will go to a strike, and MissM, you have to be prepared to take the company down with you.
All prepared.
That says it all! Time to invest a few bob at Paddypower me thinks. While the odds are still good.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lalaland
Age: 55
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm rostered 21 days. Crew can do 900 block hrs a year
75% crew should logically do 75% of that which would be 675 hrs
Surely it is your decision to work part-time, good luck to BA if they can roster you up to 900 hours flying in 75% of full time.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Overseas
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM - your 75% complaint is a great example of the muddleheadedness that has got BASSA into their fix.
You are contracted to work for BA for 75% of a full time contract. As you say thats 21 days out of 28.
The CAA does not allow flying staff to be in the air for more than 900 hours a year.
The two are completely unrelated.
However, BASSA spends its time & money constantly mixing up these entirely disparate legal/industrial entities - door cover, crewing levels, FTL's etc etc - to ensure crew are frightened enough to get the sort of ballot returns we saw in Dec.
Our vast majority of great crew deserve better.
You are contracted to work for BA for 75% of a full time contract. As you say thats 21 days out of 28.
The CAA does not allow flying staff to be in the air for more than 900 hours a year.
The two are completely unrelated.
However, BASSA spends its time & money constantly mixing up these entirely disparate legal/industrial entities - door cover, crewing levels, FTL's etc etc - to ensure crew are frightened enough to get the sort of ballot returns we saw in Dec.
Our vast majority of great crew deserve better.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pensions
A good post and factually correct in what for many is a very complex subject. If BA finds itself broke then the PPF would have to examine in some detail both pension schemes ie APS & NAPS to determine liabilities. NAPS is the fund that is liable to provide a major headache for the Pensions Regulator if the PPF has to come to its rescue. In fact it is likely that a major crisis would ensue as the PPF would not be able to meet its obligations going forward such is the scale of the NAPS funding requirement. This would be worrying for existing NAPS pensioners and might result in some benefits reduction. But for those existing employees who are NAPS members thrown on the dole it would be disaster. Is that what the hot heads in BASSA really want to see. Wake up all of you who claim not to care about BA's future some 20,000 plus fellow employees have a stake in this pension fund and thus the viability of the airline.
52049er - from the perspective of a BA customer, well said. The airline's vast majority of great crew really do deserve far better than the waspish/grievance-riddled/vengeful/effeminate/entitlement-obsessed/crypto-communist/just-plain-thick BASSA hardcore... If this hardcore so detest the company which provides their employment, why don't they seek work in more congenial circumstances elsewhere? That's right. Because nobody else offers such good pay and so many attractive perks. Proper men and strong women who felt such grievance would vote with their feet - not a ballot paper. They would not continue to enjoy the benefits of employment under existing terms while seeking so hard to pull the entire edifice down upon everyone who works for it - the majority of whom would fight for their company, its brand and its future - not fight so selfishly (and with such stupidity) to either get their own way, or destroy it.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why? Surely that's why you were recruited and why you joined?
How much less time in the bunk are you getting?
How much less time in the bunk are you getting?
Why I was recruited and why I joined BA? I don't know why I of all those applicants was recruited. There must have been something BA liked. Maybe my prominent pink eye shadow or my ability to show good teamwork skills. My reason for joining BA was because I couldn't be bothered to do anything else. It would be nice to travel and get paid to do it I thought.
How much less time in the bunk are we getting? Touché, midman!
Is this your rationale for IA? The company have to pay for the service you provide, and they've decided they can only afford a certain level of service. Or would you take a pay cut to pay for an improved customer experience? No, didn't think so.
Sorry, not logical. 900 hours is a stated limit for a 12 month period, no matter how many days you go to work. You can do 900 hours in 6 months and then have the rest of the year off - totally legal.
675 hours is well within that limit. But I'm sure you knew that.
Who suggested you would be limited to 75% of 900 hours?
675 hours is well within that limit. But I'm sure you knew that.
Who suggested you would be limited to 75% of 900 hours?
Good, as long as we're all agreed this dispute has nothing to do with New Fleet.
gl
It's still all about power. Past management have swung the lead and given BASSA too much power. Now they want to take it away and, predictably, BASSA don't like it.
This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.
This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.
How would you feel if somebody was trying to take your power away from you?
So you're suggesting that BA reduce your legal limit pro-rata??
Surely it is your decision to work part-time, good luck to BA if they can roster you up to 900 hours flying in 75% of full time.
Surely it is your decision to work part-time, good luck to BA if they can roster you up to 900 hours flying in 75% of full time.
Firstly, kudos to you for keeping going. Lots of the other cabin crew who've been on here have not fought on for as long as you have so well done for that. You clearly believe in your cause and whatever others may think, your tenacity deserves applause even if I don't agree with everything you say. However, you said
I have never said otherwise about not helping out in other cabins and very few would sit down before everything's completed. Working a bit harder is no problem but when you need to help out in other cabins and it's becoming a habit because of what BA has done, it's a problem.
This monthly travel payment is probably only temporary. I don't trust management for a second about them wanting to protect our income when, or if, NewFleet is started. After that they might realise it's economical and both EF and WW are nothing but a burden to them and then it's time for slaughter.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM, now that you're back, any chance you could respond to my post to you earlier please?
As for one of your latest posts...
I'm baffled as to why you actually stay as cc. Honestly. You've just put yourself in such a bad light, where you come across as lazy (don't want to help in other cabins) and complacent. You claim to have good teamwork skills, but by avoiding helping your colleagues in Club, you don't work as a team. For your own sake, please think before you post. Read it beforehand as a customer/colleague. I'm not attacking you, by the way, just giving you some constructive feedback.
Gg
MissM,
So basically your only safety concern about reduced crewing levels is covering doors 5 during safety demo?
That means that crewing levels on the 777 is perfectly fine as it is now (same as LGW), right? The only thing that needs changing then is for someone to cover doors 5, or as I've said before, CAA are happy with the change during demo, so why fret so much?
Is there, currently, any crew member on board the 747 who doesn't have a demo position? They could easily be covering doors 5 if it was really necessary.
So basically your only safety concern about reduced crewing levels is covering doors 5 during safety demo?
That means that crewing levels on the 777 is perfectly fine as it is now (same as LGW), right? The only thing that needs changing then is for someone to cover doors 5, or as I've said before, CAA are happy with the change during demo, so why fret so much?
Is there, currently, any crew member on board the 747 who doesn't have a demo position? They could easily be covering doors 5 if it was really necessary.
I don't mind helping out in another cabin every now and then but not when it's becoming a habit because of the company's imposition. I don't like to work in Club and because of my seniority I can avoid it like the plague.
Why I was recruited and why I joined BA? I don't know why I of all those applicants was recruited. There must have been something BA liked. Maybe my prominent pink eye shadow or my ability to show good teamwork skills. My reason for joining BA was because I couldn't be bothered to do anything else. It would be nice to travel and get paid to do it I thought.
Why I was recruited and why I joined BA? I don't know why I of all those applicants was recruited. There must have been something BA liked. Maybe my prominent pink eye shadow or my ability to show good teamwork skills. My reason for joining BA was because I couldn't be bothered to do anything else. It would be nice to travel and get paid to do it I thought.
Gg
Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this long thread, but why are BASSA on their campaign literature, using the image of the six US marines erecting the American flag on Iwo Jima (replaced with a BASSA flag). Three of those marines were killed during that same battle, rather a sick use of the image IMHO...
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glamgirl
Sorry, I missed your previous post!
Crewing level on 777 is also an issue when you think about 10 crew on a 3 class as an example. 2 crew looking after a very long WT cabin during 1st break!
Number 9 on 747 doesn't have a demo position but needs to do the PAs and stay at doors 4 because when 5 and 10 starts securing the cabin from the back. 4 and 8 would already be at doors 3 except on High-J when 4 would be half way down the cabin between doors 3 and 4.
I'm not being mean but I can't be the least bothered in which light I put myself in. I'm not lazy for not wanting to help out in other cabins because I do occassionally (I evn took my DF trolley into Club on my last trip!) but when it's becoming a habit because BA has decided to take down crewing levels from 1 to 2 crew I do mind.
Why I stay as CC? Many reasons!
Sorry, I missed your previous post!
Crewing level on 777 is also an issue when you think about 10 crew on a 3 class as an example. 2 crew looking after a very long WT cabin during 1st break!
Number 9 on 747 doesn't have a demo position but needs to do the PAs and stay at doors 4 because when 5 and 10 starts securing the cabin from the back. 4 and 8 would already be at doors 3 except on High-J when 4 would be half way down the cabin between doors 3 and 4.
I'm not being mean but I can't be the least bothered in which light I put myself in. I'm not lazy for not wanting to help out in other cabins because I do occassionally (I evn took my DF trolley into Club on my last trip!) but when it's becoming a habit because BA has decided to take down crewing levels from 1 to 2 crew I do mind.
Why I stay as CC? Many reasons!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: London,England
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
You say you are prepared to bring the company down. How will that help you or the other 40,000 people BA employ? Are you merely doing it as a matter of principle because BA 'imposed' new crewing levels - as no sensible agreement was come to? I may be making wild assumptions here, but I take it that you accept that the airline industry in general and BA in particular are going through some of the worst trading conditions ever experienced and savings need to be made through all departments, otherwise BA will go out of business. I suspect if you were to ask the vast majority of cabin crew whether they would like to lose large sums of money out of their pay, or work just a little harder when they are at work - they would choose the latter. I cannot think of a more painless solution than the one BA has now imposed - can you? When BASSA suggested a paycut to BA had they asked the crew beforehand if that was their preferred way to make the savings?
The problem BA crew have now is that the vast majority of other employees see BA's imposed solution as reasonable - in that there is no loss of income (unlike most others in the company) - and the downside is minimal eg 14 crew on a jumbo rather than 15. There is also absolutely no support from the public either - I witnessed a very aggressive passenger verbally abusing a crew member as he disembarked the aircraft the other day. Another crew member told me how she was filling her car up at the petrol station (pay at pump) and the cashier made the effort to get up, go outside and tell her that she was not welcome at the filling station.
By your actions before Christmas (and if there is another ballot you will only make things worse) BA cabin crew have made themselves unemployable anywhere else. If you are prepared to bring BA down where exactly do you expect yourself and the rest of your colleagues to get another job. Having been there - life out of work is pretty grim and you can bet your bottom dollar that anyones CV with BA Cabin Crew on will immediately find its way into the bin.
Please explain how it could possibly be in your interest to bring BA down.
You say you are prepared to bring the company down. How will that help you or the other 40,000 people BA employ? Are you merely doing it as a matter of principle because BA 'imposed' new crewing levels - as no sensible agreement was come to? I may be making wild assumptions here, but I take it that you accept that the airline industry in general and BA in particular are going through some of the worst trading conditions ever experienced and savings need to be made through all departments, otherwise BA will go out of business. I suspect if you were to ask the vast majority of cabin crew whether they would like to lose large sums of money out of their pay, or work just a little harder when they are at work - they would choose the latter. I cannot think of a more painless solution than the one BA has now imposed - can you? When BASSA suggested a paycut to BA had they asked the crew beforehand if that was their preferred way to make the savings?
The problem BA crew have now is that the vast majority of other employees see BA's imposed solution as reasonable - in that there is no loss of income (unlike most others in the company) - and the downside is minimal eg 14 crew on a jumbo rather than 15. There is also absolutely no support from the public either - I witnessed a very aggressive passenger verbally abusing a crew member as he disembarked the aircraft the other day. Another crew member told me how she was filling her car up at the petrol station (pay at pump) and the cashier made the effort to get up, go outside and tell her that she was not welcome at the filling station.
By your actions before Christmas (and if there is another ballot you will only make things worse) BA cabin crew have made themselves unemployable anywhere else. If you are prepared to bring BA down where exactly do you expect yourself and the rest of your colleagues to get another job. Having been there - life out of work is pretty grim and you can bet your bottom dollar that anyones CV with BA Cabin Crew on will immediately find its way into the bin.
Please explain how it could possibly be in your interest to bring BA down.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
I'm glad we're agreed that it's about power. No-one is likely to take power from me, as you ask, as it's all laid down in the JPM.
What we need to get to in BA is a situation where the Captain decides what happens with the operation, not the BASSA reps.
Your postings do not cast you in a good light and you sound like you have difficulties with teamwork, but you say you do not care.
These attitudes may lead you into conflict with others, just as BASSA itself is about to have the rug pulled from under its feet.
I'm glad we're agreed that it's about power. No-one is likely to take power from me, as you ask, as it's all laid down in the JPM.
What we need to get to in BA is a situation where the Captain decides what happens with the operation, not the BASSA reps.
Your postings do not cast you in a good light and you sound like you have difficulties with teamwork, but you say you do not care.
These attitudes may lead you into conflict with others, just as BASSA itself is about to have the rug pulled from under its feet.