British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yaletown;
You have neatly demonstrated the brainwashed crew mentality about rejecting the hourly rate because it will be £2/hr and you will be worse off. This is pure BASSA spin. CC89 were in negotiations on the matter, but BASSA closed down the whole thing before any numbers were even discussed. (Averaged out allowances would only be good for the average crew member, flying an average month, not an old contract 'girl' flying a hand picked roster....)
Crew: I'd never have hourly rate, never never never! It would be £2/hr [footstamp +huff]
3rd Party: What if it was £100/hr, would you have it then?
Crew: Well, obviously. But it wouldn't be, BASSA says...etc
This stupid figure of £2/hr keeps on coming back again and again. The figure is whatever you negotiate it to be. Someone with a calculator, who is an average crew member, look at your allowances, and divide it by how long you have been away from base for in a month. Bring some sense to this issue!
I'll start. In December, I reckon my time away from base (swipe to chocks) on SH was about 260 hours. What's a typical CC allowance payment for a month? £1200? That would make the hourly rate about £4.60/hr. If they got rid of all the people that are needed to administer all the allowances, the savings would be huge. How about if BA then offered £5/hr, would you take it? If it was indexed linked to the restaurant cost etc?
Part of the reason I think crew wouldn't have an hourly rate (which incidentally would enable bidding on longhaul) is because they don't trust BASSA to be able to hammer out a watertight deal that BA wouldn't try and welsh on!
You have neatly demonstrated the brainwashed crew mentality about rejecting the hourly rate because it will be £2/hr and you will be worse off. This is pure BASSA spin. CC89 were in negotiations on the matter, but BASSA closed down the whole thing before any numbers were even discussed. (Averaged out allowances would only be good for the average crew member, flying an average month, not an old contract 'girl' flying a hand picked roster....)
Crew: I'd never have hourly rate, never never never! It would be £2/hr [footstamp +huff]
3rd Party: What if it was £100/hr, would you have it then?
Crew: Well, obviously. But it wouldn't be, BASSA says...etc
This stupid figure of £2/hr keeps on coming back again and again. The figure is whatever you negotiate it to be. Someone with a calculator, who is an average crew member, look at your allowances, and divide it by how long you have been away from base for in a month. Bring some sense to this issue!
I'll start. In December, I reckon my time away from base (swipe to chocks) on SH was about 260 hours. What's a typical CC allowance payment for a month? £1200? That would make the hourly rate about £4.60/hr. If they got rid of all the people that are needed to administer all the allowances, the savings would be huge. How about if BA then offered £5/hr, would you take it? If it was indexed linked to the restaurant cost etc?
Part of the reason I think crew wouldn't have an hourly rate (which incidentally would enable bidding on longhaul) is because they don't trust BASSA to be able to hammer out a watertight deal that BA wouldn't try and welsh on!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FlexSRS, RWY, Power Set.......I could go on...you speak well son(daughter).
However; on the issue of trust, the members DO trust BASSA. This is what I find so incredulous - that a workforce of such intellect and diversity can be so corralled by a minority of self-serving reps. How can it be?
GF
However; on the issue of trust, the members DO trust BASSA. This is what I find so incredulous - that a workforce of such intellect and diversity can be so corralled by a minority of self-serving reps. How can it be?
GF
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: An anger-management clinic.
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't sound like a matter for BA or BASSA, but more like one of HMRC trying to close some lucrative loopholes. Who was talking about "Tax Havens" a while back? There appears to be one inside the UK.
American colleagues will know that some people [i.e. the poor lowly-paid servers] are taxed on their "expected" gratuities, whether they get them or not. It seems that HMRC are getting switched on to those who have managed to keep their 'expenses' outside the tax system.
American colleagues will know that some people [i.e. the poor lowly-paid servers] are taxed on their "expected" gratuities, whether they get them or not. It seems that HMRC are getting switched on to those who have managed to keep their 'expenses' outside the tax system.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It doesn't sound like a matter for BA or BASSA, but more like one of HMRC trying to close some lucrative loopholes. Who was talking about "Tax Havens" a while back? There appears to be one inside the UK.
For example, a lot of large employers with in-house canteens provide employees with a daily use it or lose it allowance to spend in the canteen as part of their remuneration package, because of favourable tax benefits compared to employees just paying for meals in the canteen out of net pay. HMRC announced in the pre-Budget report that they are changing the legislation to restrict the tax benefits.
http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/pbr2009/pbrn25.pdf
As someone who has had a lot of professional experience dealing with HMRC, I can say that most HMRC officers are reasonable people trying to do a good job with very limited resources. There will always be areas of disagreement between taxpayers and HMRC, but in the main treating HMRC officers as human beings and with respect, getting good advice and working co-operatively with them to help them do their job can (most of the time) make a world of difference (though that's not to say that HMRC are a pushover!).
It does not surprise me at all that (if as claimed) flight crew have achieved a completely different result to cabin crew because of the apparent differences in approach between BALPA and BASSA.
Would be interested to know if BASSA sought professional advice to work on this, as it could have helped them a lot.
Last edited by LD12986; 15th Jan 2010 at 19:47.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: An anger-management clinic.
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A perfectly fair call, and I have no issue with 'benefits in kind'. In all my dealings with HMRC [and their predecessors] I have found them perfectly sensible people. Of course, as a Govt employee, I didn't have the option of negotiating matters - they just happened for me.
If I had worked in the private sector, I would have assumed that both my employer [and union, if applicable] would have done the best for me personally as well [transparently, honestly and without any attempt to fudge issues].
If I had worked in the private sector, I would have assumed that both my employer [and union, if applicable] would have done the best for me personally as well [transparently, honestly and without any attempt to fudge issues].
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TheTiresome1 - That does also beg the question as to whether BA were involved in negotiations with HMRC and if not, why not. Being a large plc with complex international operations, they will have plenty of in house tax resource and expertise and very regular contact with HMRC.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strike Two!!
Unfortunately if the Union 'attempt' another strike, you know, to "send a message to Willie", or to "get Willie back to the negotiating table" that they themselves left, and that they voted not to go back to on a show of hands for "non-negotiation Hooray!" at a racecourse, I don't think Willie Walsh will wait to see if Unite can make it a spectacularly inept FOUR failed muppet-strike attempts in a row (2 with BA), I think he may just tear up the existing CC contracts and hand out new ones to selected 'moderate' crew with a 90 day expiry date but with a 'take-it-within a week' BONUS....and who could blame him?
Then he can set the hourly rate at whatever he wants, so yes, it could very well be as low as the pilots' rate of £2.79/hr....which when viewed in conjunction with:
-A new Disruption Agreement (which the pilots never needed) to prioritise getting passengers home during disruption rather than wallowing in a hotel for 2 nights on allowances
-Fixed Links (which the pilots already do), not 'needing' to get off for a couple of hours every time the aircraft transits Heathrow
-Cabin Crew to work as many productive flying hours as the pilots (not 450-500 hours SH)
-No more '1 x 1.5hr sector flights out, 2 nights in a plush city-centre hotel, then one sector back to go home' malarchy (3 hours in 3 days towards the 900hrs/annum maximum!)
-A redefinition of Industrial limits, their usage and applicability in line with planet Earth
The interesting thing is this....have a read back over that list and tell me, honestly, that all those qualified and experienced Cabin Crew on the dole at the moment (made redundant by all the carriers that have gone bust in this imaginary recession) wouldn't JUMP at those very generous Ts & Cs above, in ANY company, but to think they'd be joining BA?! WOW, YES PLEASE!!
In fact, when you go ahead and tell them that:
-although the crew you'll work with are being allowed to keep and protect their current pay (Short Haul CSD AVERAGE £52,000 per year, therefore many on £LOTS more), but averagely £30,000 across the board, but that they, as New Entrants on NEW FLEET will be paid 10% MORE THAN the Market Rate, well....they'll be gobsmacked they don't even have to clean the aircraft in a turnaround as they had to at previous airline, they can do a 3 minute security sweep and have an hour off
How many do you think will actively flock to the airline from ALL other carriers? In fact, now that they're talking about further reducing hard working Academic Teachers' pay, do you not think they might be tempted to pop along for the (legal minimum) 2 day Cabin Crew course, come fly with BA and bathe in the money rather than socialising down-route?!?! Not to mention the 1/30th of the entire country's population that's currently JOBLESS!!
If Cabin Crew strike, I mean, if the bungling union somehow manages to join the dots and get past the stumbling block of....tschhh....'THE LAW' as regards INDUSTRIAL ACTION, like, their specialist subject of choice for goodness sake whatever (!)....IF, they strike, what's to stop the company wheeling in the cheap labour and getting them to help-out all the No-Voters (800 Cabin Crew), Non-Voters (2400) and current Non-Union Cabin Crew (2000), so approx 5,200, together with the 1000+ that are rumoured to be trained up and in the holding pool and those crew who were on Temporary Contracts?
What's to stop Willie bringing in a travel/cash hungry mob (plus those mercenary primary school teachers) to supplement the 6 or 7,000 cabin crew he already KNOWS will continue the operation when it comes down to it....in fact, those are the ones who are ALREADY onside/obliged to work. What about all those YES VOTERS? The 'didn't-really-mean-it-just-blindly-box-ticked-and-won't-ACTUALLY-risk-my-job-by-striking' brigade?
By my back-of-a-fag-packet maths, Willie only really needs about 2000 (which equates to less than a quarter of the yes-voters) to flip-flop and he can continue running a FULL operation on the NEW agreements (non-negotiated) that he will implement (imposingly). I make that about 8 or 9,000 crew working to sensible levels, which just happens to be EXACTLY equivalent to 14,000 working at current productivity levels!
...and yes, Romans, I DO have 'written proof (fag packet)'!.....plus you LEGALLY HAVE to believe me because I'm a BASSA rep, "Look into my eyes, not around my eyes, but into my eyes...!!!"
Then he can set the hourly rate at whatever he wants, so yes, it could very well be as low as the pilots' rate of £2.79/hr....which when viewed in conjunction with:
-A new Disruption Agreement (which the pilots never needed) to prioritise getting passengers home during disruption rather than wallowing in a hotel for 2 nights on allowances
-Fixed Links (which the pilots already do), not 'needing' to get off for a couple of hours every time the aircraft transits Heathrow
-Cabin Crew to work as many productive flying hours as the pilots (not 450-500 hours SH)
-No more '1 x 1.5hr sector flights out, 2 nights in a plush city-centre hotel, then one sector back to go home' malarchy (3 hours in 3 days towards the 900hrs/annum maximum!)
-A redefinition of Industrial limits, their usage and applicability in line with planet Earth
The interesting thing is this....have a read back over that list and tell me, honestly, that all those qualified and experienced Cabin Crew on the dole at the moment (made redundant by all the carriers that have gone bust in this imaginary recession) wouldn't JUMP at those very generous Ts & Cs above, in ANY company, but to think they'd be joining BA?! WOW, YES PLEASE!!
In fact, when you go ahead and tell them that:
-although the crew you'll work with are being allowed to keep and protect their current pay (Short Haul CSD AVERAGE £52,000 per year, therefore many on £LOTS more), but averagely £30,000 across the board, but that they, as New Entrants on NEW FLEET will be paid 10% MORE THAN the Market Rate, well....they'll be gobsmacked they don't even have to clean the aircraft in a turnaround as they had to at previous airline, they can do a 3 minute security sweep and have an hour off
How many do you think will actively flock to the airline from ALL other carriers? In fact, now that they're talking about further reducing hard working Academic Teachers' pay, do you not think they might be tempted to pop along for the (legal minimum) 2 day Cabin Crew course, come fly with BA and bathe in the money rather than socialising down-route?!?! Not to mention the 1/30th of the entire country's population that's currently JOBLESS!!
If Cabin Crew strike, I mean, if the bungling union somehow manages to join the dots and get past the stumbling block of....tschhh....'THE LAW' as regards INDUSTRIAL ACTION, like, their specialist subject of choice for goodness sake whatever (!)....IF, they strike, what's to stop the company wheeling in the cheap labour and getting them to help-out all the No-Voters (800 Cabin Crew), Non-Voters (2400) and current Non-Union Cabin Crew (2000), so approx 5,200, together with the 1000+ that are rumoured to be trained up and in the holding pool and those crew who were on Temporary Contracts?
What's to stop Willie bringing in a travel/cash hungry mob (plus those mercenary primary school teachers) to supplement the 6 or 7,000 cabin crew he already KNOWS will continue the operation when it comes down to it....in fact, those are the ones who are ALREADY onside/obliged to work. What about all those YES VOTERS? The 'didn't-really-mean-it-just-blindly-box-ticked-and-won't-ACTUALLY-risk-my-job-by-striking' brigade?
By my back-of-a-fag-packet maths, Willie only really needs about 2000 (which equates to less than a quarter of the yes-voters) to flip-flop and he can continue running a FULL operation on the NEW agreements (non-negotiated) that he will implement (imposingly). I make that about 8 or 9,000 crew working to sensible levels, which just happens to be EXACTLY equivalent to 14,000 working at current productivity levels!
...and yes, Romans, I DO have 'written proof (fag packet)'!.....plus you LEGALLY HAVE to believe me because I'm a BASSA rep, "Look into my eyes, not around my eyes, but into my eyes...!!!"
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To all my CC colleagues: I have to tell you, BA absolutely, completely and utterly WILL NOT BACK DOWN on this! IF you vote for strike action you absolutely definitely will be required to 'walk the walk'.
To think of the result as strengthening BASSA's hand in some hypothetical negotiations, is not the reality!
Also, take it from me, the option of a 'mass sickout' will be removed from you.
It will be very nasty, and BA can afford to sit this out much longer than the vast majority of you as individuals!
As far as the court case is concerned; be careful what you wish for! In the unlikely event that BASSA win, BA's view will be that, if BA cannot determine the numbers of crew on a/c, then CC contracts are clearly not fit for purpose, and they will all be terminated.
BA CAN DO THIS!
And all for what? Working a tiny bit harder! Fight the next battles if/when they come. This is not the right battleground! Use the very capable brains that so many of you are endowed with.
There cannot be an unequivocal win for BASSA here. It is simply not possible. A strike will only result in plans being brought forward, to pay for the damage incurred.
The only way out of this is to vote no, and tell your reps to negotiate in good faith!
Don't be brainwashed, they have not done that so far!!
It's your only chance.
No pleasure taken in explaining the facts!
To think of the result as strengthening BASSA's hand in some hypothetical negotiations, is not the reality!
Also, take it from me, the option of a 'mass sickout' will be removed from you.
It will be very nasty, and BA can afford to sit this out much longer than the vast majority of you as individuals!
As far as the court case is concerned; be careful what you wish for! In the unlikely event that BASSA win, BA's view will be that, if BA cannot determine the numbers of crew on a/c, then CC contracts are clearly not fit for purpose, and they will all be terminated.
BA CAN DO THIS!
And all for what? Working a tiny bit harder! Fight the next battles if/when they come. This is not the right battleground! Use the very capable brains that so many of you are endowed with.
There cannot be an unequivocal win for BASSA here. It is simply not possible. A strike will only result in plans being brought forward, to pay for the damage incurred.
The only way out of this is to vote no, and tell your reps to negotiate in good faith!
Don't be brainwashed, they have not done that so far!!
It's your only chance.
No pleasure taken in explaining the facts!
Last edited by 4468; 15th Jan 2010 at 21:38.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Outsider
What always hits me with BA is Bad Attidude. Management Attitude, that is. Management is about managing people, they're the difficult ones, the customers and workforce. Any accountant can fiddle the books to show anything, anyone can screw up scheduling and route structure and it hardly matters at all. It's people who need skill and judgement, and it's a people business. Our customers are people and BA staff are people. If Management doesn't manage the people they're failing and our favourite airline has suffered from a succession of appallingly bad managers of people.
Nobody makes people work well, they work well because they're well managed. So far, not so good...
Oh and the service on board today was crap...but then who needs a crew that's p****d off...
Nobody makes people work well, they work well because they're well managed. So far, not so good...
Oh and the service on board today was crap...but then who needs a crew that's p****d off...
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Short Haul CSD salary, fact or fiction?
Posted by flybymerchant
Short Haul CSD AVERAGE £52,000 per year
Short Haul CSD AVERAGE £52,000 per year
Short Haul CSD AVERAGE £52,000 per year
Guys, if you are going to quote my salary, please be a little more accurate. I can only dream or wish that it was the above.
Last edited by Tiramisu; 16th Jan 2010 at 00:04. Reason: edited to remove question mark
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The letters detailing HMRC's view on the taxable portion of allowances will be landing on the doormats of the nation's CC up and down the country pretty soon, thaw permitting.
BA CC, please take note:
Your result will disappoint you. Why? Because your payslip, as of Feb 10, will show more taxation creamed off by TCGB.
Now, ask yousrselves this. Could you, as a group, have got a better deal brokered? - Other 'flying' communities within BA have faired much better.
Answer. If BASSA had thought this one through (with rigour) and set about a coordinated campaign with it's members AND BA management to best organise a return of receipts from allowances spent, then the outcome may well have been very different. The process undertaken by other flying communities, BA management (yes BA management were there to help) and HMRC required analysis, understanding, and NEGOTIATION. The analysis and understanding bit required nous from all parties including union reps. And here is the nub of my point....
BASSA has not represented it's members at all well during this HMRC exercise - a process that now has COST BA CC MONEY - indeed; a prime example of BASSA weakness, brought about by their outdated confrontational style of operation and a shockingly poor grasp of basic NEGOTIATION skills.
With this classic, up front, non-spinnable loss to your earnings, what makes BA CC so certain that BASSA are best representing their interests over the current imposition debacle?
GF
PS, BASSA should, once again, hang their heads in shame. If Lizanne Malone puts ANY spin on the HMRC outcome, and you buy into it, then there is no hope left for the airline. Blame no-one other than your BASSA reps for this latest erosion of your earnings.
BA CC, please take note:
Your result will disappoint you. Why? Because your payslip, as of Feb 10, will show more taxation creamed off by TCGB.
Now, ask yousrselves this. Could you, as a group, have got a better deal brokered? - Other 'flying' communities within BA have faired much better.
Answer. If BASSA had thought this one through (with rigour) and set about a coordinated campaign with it's members AND BA management to best organise a return of receipts from allowances spent, then the outcome may well have been very different. The process undertaken by other flying communities, BA management (yes BA management were there to help) and HMRC required analysis, understanding, and NEGOTIATION. The analysis and understanding bit required nous from all parties including union reps. And here is the nub of my point....
BASSA has not represented it's members at all well during this HMRC exercise - a process that now has COST BA CC MONEY - indeed; a prime example of BASSA weakness, brought about by their outdated confrontational style of operation and a shockingly poor grasp of basic NEGOTIATION skills.
With this classic, up front, non-spinnable loss to your earnings, what makes BA CC so certain that BASSA are best representing their interests over the current imposition debacle?
GF
PS, BASSA should, once again, hang their heads in shame. If Lizanne Malone puts ANY spin on the HMRC outcome, and you buy into it, then there is no hope left for the airline. Blame no-one other than your BASSA reps for this latest erosion of your earnings.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Tiramisu
I'm sorry, but I think you are in denial if you don't believe the well published figures of AVERAGE salaries for British Airways Cabin Crew.
The Civil Aviation Authority itself hosts the average Cabin Crew wages for all UK airlines on its public website....I know you don't think they are in BA's pocket, although how long before someone else suggests it?!
AVERAGE salary £52,000 per year, so that probably means that the AVERAGE basic salary, the one that people like to erroneously quote, is around the £35-37,000 mark, which has been quoted on here often enough. As, I'm afraid, has peoples' inability/unwillingness to accept/recognise that our salary is made up of two elements, basic wage and variable allowances.
Put those two together and you have your Annual Salary.
I understand with the recent reduction in flying program that CSDs are apparently working a little less hard, but hopefully BA will find them some more work soon, and that their Average allowances will not be too hard hit.
How much do you think you earned ANNUALY in allowances, averagely, in the years 2000-2009....before tax (theres another little cheat) and what's your pre-tax basic salary - don't feel you need to answer that if you don't want to! It would however help if someone could offer ballpark figures for average allowances over the year? I know £20,000 BEFORE tax was quoted somewhere......
If you add together your Basic salary before tax, to your Total Allowances earned before tax, that will be your salary.....if it's WAY below £52,000 then can I suggest you cosy up to more people in rostering, because there are some people doing your job who are earning just as much OVER £52,000 as you are earning UNDER £52,000, put very crudely.
Do BASSA/Amicus publish Cabin Crew salaries in an open and honest manner, like I'm afraid to say those saintly and unblemishable Knights of all that is pure and good BALPA do? Thought not.....did anyone ever think to ask WHY NOT?
If you were earning £70,000 and a colleague doing the same job was on £45,000, would you shout it from the rooftops?
I, personally, don't think that BA should come after peoples' current salaries ,as people live to within their means and it is human nature to adapt very well to our surroundings, including financial lifestyle.
I do however feel it may focus minds in the NO camp a little better if they start with the FACTS, especially when dealing with such a deliberately misinforming union. People may be happier to go onto hourly pay when they realise that some of the top-enders are always going to the same destinations and taking home VASTLY superior sums of money for the same job.
It may also make people more likely to realise how GOOD they've got things at BA, and how much better it is than ANYWHERE else, and how inconsequential working a little harder for that very generous pay packet actually is.....just a thought
The Civil Aviation Authority itself hosts the average Cabin Crew wages for all UK airlines on its public website....I know you don't think they are in BA's pocket, although how long before someone else suggests it?!
AVERAGE salary £52,000 per year, so that probably means that the AVERAGE basic salary, the one that people like to erroneously quote, is around the £35-37,000 mark, which has been quoted on here often enough. As, I'm afraid, has peoples' inability/unwillingness to accept/recognise that our salary is made up of two elements, basic wage and variable allowances.
Put those two together and you have your Annual Salary.
I understand with the recent reduction in flying program that CSDs are apparently working a little less hard, but hopefully BA will find them some more work soon, and that their Average allowances will not be too hard hit.
How much do you think you earned ANNUALY in allowances, averagely, in the years 2000-2009....before tax (theres another little cheat) and what's your pre-tax basic salary - don't feel you need to answer that if you don't want to! It would however help if someone could offer ballpark figures for average allowances over the year? I know £20,000 BEFORE tax was quoted somewhere......
If you add together your Basic salary before tax, to your Total Allowances earned before tax, that will be your salary.....if it's WAY below £52,000 then can I suggest you cosy up to more people in rostering, because there are some people doing your job who are earning just as much OVER £52,000 as you are earning UNDER £52,000, put very crudely.
Do BASSA/Amicus publish Cabin Crew salaries in an open and honest manner, like I'm afraid to say those saintly and unblemishable Knights of all that is pure and good BALPA do? Thought not.....did anyone ever think to ask WHY NOT?
If you were earning £70,000 and a colleague doing the same job was on £45,000, would you shout it from the rooftops?
I, personally, don't think that BA should come after peoples' current salaries ,as people live to within their means and it is human nature to adapt very well to our surroundings, including financial lifestyle.
I do however feel it may focus minds in the NO camp a little better if they start with the FACTS, especially when dealing with such a deliberately misinforming union. People may be happier to go onto hourly pay when they realise that some of the top-enders are always going to the same destinations and taking home VASTLY superior sums of money for the same job.
It may also make people more likely to realise how GOOD they've got things at BA, and how much better it is than ANYWHERE else, and how inconsequential working a little harder for that very generous pay packet actually is.....just a thought
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People may be happier to go onto hourly pay when they realise that some of the top-enders are always going to the same destinations and taking home VASTLY superior sums of money for the same job.
This should be posted in BIG BIG letters on the BASSA and CF websites. It reaffirms that ANY poster saying that their salary is far below the 52k average should ask themselves just how many people are significantly above it!
Honestly, if the pro-BASSA mob had enough brain cells to rub together, they'd be demanding this information from their union leaders - and they'd probably be shocked at some of the results.
And it's why the BASSA junta will lie through their teeth to protect their obscene packages. I'm extremely glad the HRMC changes will hit them the hardest, but of course they are the ones who can afford it ("I'm alright, Jack" springs to mind).
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Age: 56
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
there are other ways
I too worked as cabin crew for a major US airline for many years until 2005. Their per diem was paid by the hour, it was generally a small amount like 2 or 3 dollars an hour. And my hourly pay was straight forward was 45 dollars. It worked a treat. We had an amazing bidding system that gave us all the freedom in world to run our lives and days off as we pleased. We got paid for the hours we worked, which makes sense and if the flight got delayed get paid even more hours. If a flight got cancelled we got a minimum of 5 hours flight pay and if we were stuck on standby for a month we got paid a minimum of 75 hours, regardless if you flew less. There was nothing wrong with that system and I would wish for nothing more than BA also going forward and implementing it because unlike BA's current system this one is logical.
If it was well negotiated we would all benefit from it so much. But of course that would require a Union that is progressive and willing to give and take were it is appropriate and to the long term benefit of the MAJORITY of its members.
If it was well negotiated we would all benefit from it so much. But of course that would require a Union that is progressive and willing to give and take were it is appropriate and to the long term benefit of the MAJORITY of its members.