British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: SWAPS Inner
Posts: 567
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Thanks for setting me straight BigBrutha - that's all I need to re-afirm my thoughts on certain members of the pilot community"
Yeah Lurker, you could say the same about some single minded members of the cabin crew community. Go have a look in a mirror.
"Shiny bogroll? Right brothers! We're out!"
Yeah Lurker, you could say the same about some single minded members of the cabin crew community. Go have a look in a mirror.
"Shiny bogroll? Right brothers! We're out!"
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was under the impression that they asked the company to withdraw the impositions then re-negotiate ( my understanding from an off the record conversation was that now EVERYTHING would be open to discussion ) At the moment WW is waiting for the outcome of the Feb hearing before engaging in any meaningful talks.
So would you not accept it if BASSA were to approach them now and say "OK, we will accept what you have done on November 16th as a vital measure to cut costs, but we want to discuss some proper bonus-type arrangements for when the situation recovers, which adequately compensate us for our part in both the recovery and future success of the airline".
Last edited by Desertia; 21st Dec 2009 at 11:32. Reason: mixin' up my BAS and BASSAS!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: brighton
Age: 49
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I must say that it's very refreshing to read posts by people who appear to be talking sense.
I'm BA cabin crew and one of the few who voted no to the destruction of our airline.
Most of what you guys have said is totally true. Bassa are, and have been for a long long time, talking complete rubbish.
The only reason they want a strike is that they have no hope of winning the case due in court in February. By then it will be too late to take any action. They galvanise support through totally empty promises with absolutely no foundation in reality.
There are times to fight as a trade union and times to suck it up and accept it....this is the later but unfortunately very few ba cabin crew, including those I thought we're very intelligent, have proved themselves capable of thinking for themselves.
I really do hope they see sense in the coming weeks/months!!
P.S. I'm just about to resign from Bassa!!!
I'm BA cabin crew and one of the few who voted no to the destruction of our airline.
Most of what you guys have said is totally true. Bassa are, and have been for a long long time, talking complete rubbish.
The only reason they want a strike is that they have no hope of winning the case due in court in February. By then it will be too late to take any action. They galvanise support through totally empty promises with absolutely no foundation in reality.
There are times to fight as a trade union and times to suck it up and accept it....this is the later but unfortunately very few ba cabin crew, including those I thought we're very intelligent, have proved themselves capable of thinking for themselves.
I really do hope they see sense in the coming weeks/months!!
P.S. I'm just about to resign from Bassa!!!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being part of a Union doesn't mean you can't think for yourselves. Unfortunately despite the ravings of BASSA a lot of the members still think that they (BASSA) are as pure as the driven snow.
Considering the role of CC and the fact that the (fortunately few) times they need to be sharp and be able to think on their feet during emergencies, it does make me worry about the ability of 'thinking out of the box'.
Maybe a bit of a generalisation but it does make you think. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, either for or against uindustrial action in this particular case, but to not be able to understand or accept what is going on in the background is worrying.
You can accept that the ballot was illegal and still want to vote yes in a new ballot. At least have the intelligence to understand the basic premise of illegal ballots and the fact that your union, despite warnings, went down that route.
As for
That is a contender for the most ridiculous statement during this dispute. Only a contender mind you, because BASSA seem to trot out a new contender every day.
Wake up and smell the coffee - BASSA staged an illegal ballot - as Union members you should be worried that the do not have the balls to admit the mistake - chances are BASSA leaders are the type of people who will not learn their lesson
Considering the role of CC and the fact that the (fortunately few) times they need to be sharp and be able to think on their feet during emergencies, it does make me worry about the ability of 'thinking out of the box'.
Maybe a bit of a generalisation but it does make you think. There's nothing wrong with having an opinion, either for or against uindustrial action in this particular case, but to not be able to understand or accept what is going on in the background is worrying.
You can accept that the ballot was illegal and still want to vote yes in a new ballot. At least have the intelligence to understand the basic premise of illegal ballots and the fact that your union, despite warnings, went down that route.
As for
If she is flying on the 23rd with BA - do you feel that that would have swayed her judgement somewhat?
Wake up and smell the coffee - BASSA staged an illegal ballot - as Union members you should be worried that the do not have the balls to admit the mistake - chances are BASSA leaders are the type of people who will not learn their lesson
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posted by A Lurker
for all you 'customers' out there - don't be offended - there is after all a saying that goes "this would be a great job if it wasn't for passengers"
Ask anyone who has done a Nice flight !!!!!
for all you 'customers' out there - don't be offended - there is after all a saying that goes "this would be a great job if it wasn't for passengers"
Ask anyone who has done a Nice flight !!!!!
I disagree, I haven't heard that saying before. The saying I've heard or hear, is that 'If not for the passengers, we wouldn't have a job!'
As far as Nice flights go, most crew have preconceived ideas about Nice passengers. The difference with Nice passengers is that their expectations of the whole in flight experience is different. Treat them like royalty and they'll be putty in your hands. Try it and you'll be pleasantly surprised that 'Nice' passengers are really quite nice! In my experience anyway!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paycut?....
romans44:
Ok, this has got me wondering.... when did BASSA ask their membership what sacrifices they were prepared to make in order to meet the cost savings? BASSA simply copied the pilot's reduction in salary, but NOT the reduction in flying pay, and offered it to BA without so much as a "by your leave" from the membership.
Leaving aside the fact that this proposal came nowhere NEAR the savings required, AND leaving aside the fact that it was offered as a temporary solution, to be repaid in full, is THIS the sort of democratic (they are keen on that word, after all) representation that you deserve?
Sure, YOU may be happy with a pay cut, what about the other 12,000-odd BASSA members? What do THEY want? Don't know the answer?
WELL HOW ABOUT ASKING THEM?
The ONLY people to have actually polled the cc is BA, who concluded that the majority of cc did NOT want a pay cut, so the terms of the imposition have left pay TOTALLY UNCHANGED.
BASSA had 9 whole months to actually behave in the democratic manner of which they seem so enamoured, and yet have NOT ONCE actually sought the opinion of their membership. Major, major industrial relations issues have been decided on a grotesquely undemocratic show of hands in a throwback to 1970s style bully-boy unionism.
Now do you see why the opinion of BASSA is regarded with such little interest? By a combination of wilful misrepresentation, bullying, intimidation, propaganda and outright lies have BASSA managed to convince a large majority of the cc that a strike is their ONLY way out of this mess, when the truth is that the entire situation could have been avoided if they had behaved more like a union and less like sub-sect of the moonies.
Yes, I am saying that.
BASSA has already said that a while ago. Of course I wouldn't expect it to see it on this forum...
BASSA has offered a pay cut, the company is simply not interested in us offering a pay cut for the simple reason that they are after our T&Cs. My apologies for repeating myself but a question was asked.
BASSA has already said that a while ago. Of course I wouldn't expect it to see it on this forum...
BASSA has offered a pay cut, the company is simply not interested in us offering a pay cut for the simple reason that they are after our T&Cs. My apologies for repeating myself but a question was asked.
Leaving aside the fact that this proposal came nowhere NEAR the savings required, AND leaving aside the fact that it was offered as a temporary solution, to be repaid in full, is THIS the sort of democratic (they are keen on that word, after all) representation that you deserve?
Sure, YOU may be happy with a pay cut, what about the other 12,000-odd BASSA members? What do THEY want? Don't know the answer?
WELL HOW ABOUT ASKING THEM?
The ONLY people to have actually polled the cc is BA, who concluded that the majority of cc did NOT want a pay cut, so the terms of the imposition have left pay TOTALLY UNCHANGED.
BASSA had 9 whole months to actually behave in the democratic manner of which they seem so enamoured, and yet have NOT ONCE actually sought the opinion of their membership. Major, major industrial relations issues have been decided on a grotesquely undemocratic show of hands in a throwback to 1970s style bully-boy unionism.
Now do you see why the opinion of BASSA is regarded with such little interest? By a combination of wilful misrepresentation, bullying, intimidation, propaganda and outright lies have BASSA managed to convince a large majority of the cc that a strike is their ONLY way out of this mess, when the truth is that the entire situation could have been avoided if they had behaved more like a union and less like sub-sect of the moonies.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read this thread and the previous one - all I can say is A Lurker, there is no hope for you.
BASSA refused to negotiate - nine months worth of dithering about trying to block the process.
Regardless of whether you want to vote yes or no, at least try to understand the fact that your union has screwed up
It was a limited strike directed against bosses who were attempting to completely bypass the trade union
Regardless of whether you want to vote yes or no, at least try to understand the fact that your union has screwed up
Join Date: May 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Lurker. Its like trying to teach a three year old. The judgement said:-
The strike contravened employment law. The strike was therefore illegal. Is that too difficult to understand???
Unite was in possession of information concerning employees who had volunteered for redundancy. In the light of that information it was aware, or ought to have been aware, that the figures provided to BA included those who opted for voluntary redundancy and thus included Unite's members who were not entitled to vote. It was practicable and reasonable to enquire as to which members were leaving BA's employment.
Unite had never issued instructions to members about not voting if they were leaving BA's employment by the relevant date, despite having had opportunities to do so.
Unite had never issued instructions to members about not voting if they were leaving BA's employment by the relevant date, despite having had opportunities to do so.
Pre-pack Administration
Pre-pack Administration
I realise that many of the posts here are still in "what happened" mode.
However, I'm keen to take you to "what might happen" mode.
If I were on the Board of an airline with such a cantankerous - and, yes, cancerous - group, and with such a huge APS/NAPS pension fund deficit, I would insist that the Board should be fully briefed on the pros and cons of arranging a pre-pack administration.
I would want the Board to be briefed on how it could remove all staff who were too expensive compared to their market place, to be fully briefed on how the various historic TU agreements could be removed, and to be fully briefed on whether or not pre-pack administration could be used to remove the overly onerous Pension fund liabilities.
As Board Directors have specific responsibilities associated with their duties to shareholders, I would be extremely surprised if such advice has not been taken already. Maybe it will be tabled at the January Board meeting.
A note on the use of the word cancerous. My father died from cancer. What the doctors described, in terms of how it works, sounds just like how a particular TU has worked, so I stick by the usage of the word.
I realise that many of the posts here are still in "what happened" mode.
However, I'm keen to take you to "what might happen" mode.
If I were on the Board of an airline with such a cantankerous - and, yes, cancerous - group, and with such a huge APS/NAPS pension fund deficit, I would insist that the Board should be fully briefed on the pros and cons of arranging a pre-pack administration.
I would want the Board to be briefed on how it could remove all staff who were too expensive compared to their market place, to be fully briefed on how the various historic TU agreements could be removed, and to be fully briefed on whether or not pre-pack administration could be used to remove the overly onerous Pension fund liabilities.
As Board Directors have specific responsibilities associated with their duties to shareholders, I would be extremely surprised if such advice has not been taken already. Maybe it will be tabled at the January Board meeting.
A note on the use of the word cancerous. My father died from cancer. What the doctors described, in terms of how it works, sounds just like how a particular TU has worked, so I stick by the usage of the word.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
“A strike of this kind over the 12 days of Christmas is fundamentally more damaging to BA and the wider public than a strike taking place at almost any other time of the year,” (BBC)
What business it is of Justice Cox to express her opinion on a matter that should have had no bearing on the ruling handed down. It was obviously at the forefront of her mind to the point where she felt quite happy to attack a democratically arrived-at decision in her summation.
What business it is of Justice Cox to express her opinion on a matter that should have had no bearing on the ruling handed down. It was obviously at the forefront of her mind to the point where she felt quite happy to attack a democratically arrived-at decision in her summation.
Brucie boy argued the merits of the case to say it was not.
Johnny boy argued the merits of the case to say it was.
On the balance of reason and the law, Justice Cox decided it was not.
Brucie and Johnny probably wandered off for a glass of Taylors at Raffles to celebrate their ginourmous fees.
I think this is water under the bridge now. And BASSA aren't appealing it, which should tell you something (and don't think it's just that they can't wait 12 weeks).
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So would you not accept it if BASSA were to approach them now and say "OK, we will accept what you have done on November 16th as a vital measure to cut costs, but we want to discuss some proper bonus-type arrangements for when the situation recovers, which adequately compensate us for our part in both the recovery and future success of the airline
How could BASSA do that?
The imposition on the 16th, was the the reason for the ballot in the first place.
Who is not getting the point now?
If the company took the 2.6% ( I don't remember the actual percentage now but it was more than 2) x 14.000 of us, long b4 the 16th of Nov. The savings would have been farther greater than they are now. Wouldn't you agree?
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All,
I must've asked this a few times now but can we please, please try and steer clear of personalising the issue. I've no love lost for BASSA and their tactics but can we just state calmly what it is we think without resorting to trying to allude to a diminished mental capacity on the part of the poster. A Lurker may not share your, or indeed, my view on the current situation but he/she does post in a broadly calm and rational manner and, let's be honest, we lack a good number of people on here willing and able to try and argue the BASSA/CC point of view.
Would you rather they gave up and we were occasionally treated to Flying Chick's level of debate?
I must've asked this a few times now but can we please, please try and steer clear of personalising the issue. I've no love lost for BASSA and their tactics but can we just state calmly what it is we think without resorting to trying to allude to a diminished mental capacity on the part of the poster. A Lurker may not share your, or indeed, my view on the current situation but he/she does post in a broadly calm and rational manner and, let's be honest, we lack a good number of people on here willing and able to try and argue the BASSA/CC point of view.
Would you rather they gave up and we were occasionally treated to Flying Chick's level of debate?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Cambridge
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Lurker
This is false. You can read exactly that passage in the High Court documentation released after the hearing, and posted by flapsforty at the beginning of this thread, it is fully within her rights and has every bearing on the ruling. All it does is explain the logic behind the balance of convenience assessment in the decision and was part of the legal proceedings of the case. Any judge would have said basically the same thing as part of that assessment.
So you don't think that if the Judge is flying with BA she would have had this at the forefront of he mind
“A strike of this kind over the 12 days of Christmas is fundamentally more damaging to BA and the wider public than a strike taking place at almost any other time of the year,” (BBC)
What business it is of Justice Cox to express her opinion on a matter that should have had no bearing on the ruling handed down. It was obviously at the forefront of her mind to the point where she felt quite happy to attack a democratically arrived-at decision in her summation.
“A strike of this kind over the 12 days of Christmas is fundamentally more damaging to BA and the wider public than a strike taking place at almost any other time of the year,” (BBC)
What business it is of Justice Cox to express her opinion on a matter that should have had no bearing on the ruling handed down. It was obviously at the forefront of her mind to the point where she felt quite happy to attack a democratically arrived-at decision in her summation.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the company took the 2.6% ( I don't remember the actual percentage now but it was more than 2) x 14.000 of us, long b4 the 16th of Nov. The savings would have been farther greater than they are now. Wouldn't you agree?
(b) They were not worth the 140m BA needed, but added up (with the others suggested by BASSA) to just over a third of what was required.
How could I agree when your numbers do not add up?
Added: Remember BASSA could have looked at the accounts and seen exactly where the company stood, had they accepted the (fair) conditions regarding protecting that valuable, confidential information.
Except, of course, that it would have been temporary and repayable.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we can assume that any paycut iso complement reductions, to deliver the 140m targeted savings would need to be considerably more than 2.6% and the pay cut would need to be permanent. Permanent because the company are looking for structural/fundamental changes to their cost base. Are the BASSA folk really going to go for that ??
BA also need to be able to take day to day operational decisions without BASSA dictating.
BA also need to be able to take day to day operational decisions without BASSA dictating.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Leaving aside the fact that this proposal came nowhere NEAR the savings required, AND leaving aside the fact that it was offered as a temporary solution, to be repaid in full, is THIS the sort of democratic (they are keen on that word, after all) representation that you deserve?
in one word, YES it is...
Bassa's proposal would have been put to the membership and voted on by us the members.
If we the members did not like it, we would;ve had a chance to turn it down.
Tha's how democracy works.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bassa's proposal would have been put to the membership and voted on by us the members.
If we the members did not like it, we would;ve had a chance to turn it down.
Tha's how democracy works.
If we the members did not like it, we would;ve had a chance to turn it down.
Tha's how democracy works.
Oh. Hang on.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Except, of course, that it would have been temporary and repayable
Yes u are right.
Would you say that given up a month salary is a temporary or pernament change?
I am interested to know what you think about that?
I would be very happy to vote for permanent changes but as I said many times before, changes should start from the top and work their way down.