British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Oxford
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Vote
I do understand that the ballot is objecting to "imposition" by BA and the FEAR is that if BA impose the crew compliment change now they will impose Nufleet on existing crew tomorrow.
However BF's letter of 22nd Jan seems clear;
Vote No & Don't strike-
Keep existing T&Cs, almost, RISK of Nufleet
Vote Yes & Strike-
Lose staff travel & you WILL be given new contracts ie you are nufleet.
Given the choice of MIGHT or WILL which one should you back?
I'm not saying it's right or fair but it is the choice.
However BF's letter of 22nd Jan seems clear;
Vote No & Don't strike-
Keep existing T&Cs, almost, RISK of Nufleet
Vote Yes & Strike-
Lose staff travel & you WILL be given new contracts ie you are nufleet.
Given the choice of MIGHT or WILL which one should you back?
I'm not saying it's right or fair but it is the choice.
Guest
Posts: n/a
From the FQTV business traveller perspective, J is often so good these days that it is difficult to justify the difference for F.
Given that many of us who travel on business prefer to sleep over eating and drinking, even more so.
Some airlines have dropped first completely or partially, e.g. Qatar and Emirates.
But a cautionary note to BASSA members, you have alienated many of us (over a number of years) with threatened strikes and we do not take kindly to the disruption it causes for us.
I used to take crica 60 flights per year with BA, last year I only took 10, all C/J.
This year, none to date and no plans to book any. I could have booked LON/RUH/LON for later this week, but instead booked with bmi.
I know there are many other individuals and companies who have a 'no BA' policy because of this constant threat of disruption.
You need to understand that we don't really care whether it is the fault of management or the union, we regard you all as being 'BA' and won't use your services when your combined efforts threaten our business and our clients.
Given that many of us who travel on business prefer to sleep over eating and drinking, even more so.
Some airlines have dropped first completely or partially, e.g. Qatar and Emirates.
But a cautionary note to BASSA members, you have alienated many of us (over a number of years) with threatened strikes and we do not take kindly to the disruption it causes for us.
I used to take crica 60 flights per year with BA, last year I only took 10, all C/J.
This year, none to date and no plans to book any. I could have booked LON/RUH/LON for later this week, but instead booked with bmi.
I know there are many other individuals and companies who have a 'no BA' policy because of this constant threat of disruption.
You need to understand that we don't really care whether it is the fault of management or the union, we regard you all as being 'BA' and won't use your services when your combined efforts threaten our business and our clients.
Last edited by Final 3 Greens; 25th Jan 2010 at 12:39.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Ireland
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA's proposal
Where ARE the savings in BASSA's proposal?
It doesn't take a degree in finances or less than a genious to see that if BA were to accept BASSA's proposal it would mean nothing but financial suicide.
Crewing levels to be re-instated (£40 million)
It could be done "by a range of options". Here are some of the best bits:
Increase to contract type. AFAIK it costs them a lot more to increase part-time contracts than recruiting new crew onto full-time contracts.
Zone closure and capture First Class. What would happen to those affected passengers? Who pays your wages?
Specific Flight Cancellations. The most amusing part of the proposal. Would BA earn any money having their aircraft on the ground? How much would it save them if BA were to cancel a full 747 because there's one less crew member onboard?
BASSA say they care about BA's customers. Not very obvious from their proposal, is it?
World Wide: Every flight which leaves one down should be eligible to "one down payment" to every crew member. Expensive... ?
Disruption Agreement. Removal of 2 local nights but only on inbound services. Why not on outbound services? 13½ hours rest too from hotel key given to wake up. Talk about restrictions.
Euro Fleet: A319 to go back to a minium of 4 crew. Purser back on 767 on specific flights and until then cabin service is to be reduced. Is it impossible to run cabin service without a purser telling you what to do?
STR Payment to every crew member operating a flight on which crewing level is still reduced.
Single Fleet: Ever crew member operating MLE flight to receive a £100 payment and another day off. Crew operating LCY-SNN-JFK to nightstop in SNN.
Two year pay freeze
Already been introduced by BA but suggested by BASSA.
"FlexiFleet"
They would be some sort of a manpower company putting crew on existing fleets. Not sure how efficient that is!
Look at their proposal. How much would it save BA? It's absolutely laughable. This proposal suggests nothing but a financial increase.
It doesn't take a degree in finances or less than a genious to see that if BA were to accept BASSA's proposal it would mean nothing but financial suicide.
Crewing levels to be re-instated (£40 million)
It could be done "by a range of options". Here are some of the best bits:
Increase to contract type. AFAIK it costs them a lot more to increase part-time contracts than recruiting new crew onto full-time contracts.
Zone closure and capture First Class. What would happen to those affected passengers? Who pays your wages?
Specific Flight Cancellations. The most amusing part of the proposal. Would BA earn any money having their aircraft on the ground? How much would it save them if BA were to cancel a full 747 because there's one less crew member onboard?
BASSA say they care about BA's customers. Not very obvious from their proposal, is it?
World Wide: Every flight which leaves one down should be eligible to "one down payment" to every crew member. Expensive... ?
Disruption Agreement. Removal of 2 local nights but only on inbound services. Why not on outbound services? 13½ hours rest too from hotel key given to wake up. Talk about restrictions.
Euro Fleet: A319 to go back to a minium of 4 crew. Purser back on 767 on specific flights and until then cabin service is to be reduced. Is it impossible to run cabin service without a purser telling you what to do?
STR Payment to every crew member operating a flight on which crewing level is still reduced.
Single Fleet: Ever crew member operating MLE flight to receive a £100 payment and another day off. Crew operating LCY-SNN-JFK to nightstop in SNN.
Two year pay freeze
Already been introduced by BA but suggested by BASSA.
"FlexiFleet"
They would be some sort of a manpower company putting crew on existing fleets. Not sure how efficient that is!
Look at their proposal. How much would it save BA? It's absolutely laughable. This proposal suggests nothing but a financial increase.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Final 3 Greens,
as a BA staff member it worries me to hear comments like yours - but I have to say I completely agree with you. If only more of my colleagues in the cabin could see your point of view.
All I can do is hope that in years to come, with new crew on New Fleet contracts, we can rebuild our reputation so that we are the airline choice for people like yourself.
as a BA staff member it worries me to hear comments like yours - but I have to say I completely agree with you. If only more of my colleagues in the cabin could see your point of view.
All I can do is hope that in years to come, with new crew on New Fleet contracts, we can rebuild our reputation so that we are the airline choice for people like yourself.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the unite/bassa proposal includes 'zone closures' and 'First Class Caps' and 'Selective Flight Cancellations' and 'month of one down payments'.....
Let me allow the smileys to do there stuff,
then 
then 
then 
.
That's better, I note that it's only a ''cap'' on First thus the Los Angeles route should escape sanction
.
Who is running BA?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
GF
Let me allow the smileys to do there stuff,
then then then .That's better, I note that it's only a ''cap'' on First thus the Los Angeles route should escape sanction
.Who is running BA?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
GF
Guest
Posts: n/a
BusdriverLHR
The particularly sad aspect is that the airborne service is normally very good on BA.
The seats on s/h are par with LH/LX etc and NCW is a very good business class seat (one of the better offers), my last experience was in Nov last yer and I couldn't fault the product or service either way.
So every reason for me to fly BA when I'm travelling from London.
The two anti-BA drivers, lousy ground service and IR problems.
IR does need sorting out once and for all, another compromise will not tempt me back.
The particularly sad aspect is that the airborne service is normally very good on BA.
The seats on s/h are par with LH/LX etc and NCW is a very good business class seat (one of the better offers), my last experience was in Nov last yer and I couldn't fault the product or service either way.
So every reason for me to fly BA when I'm travelling from London.
The two anti-BA drivers, lousy ground service and IR problems.
IR does need sorting out once and for all, another compromise will not tempt me back.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tell you what, I'll answer my own Qs:
A1, Willie Walsh. At last.
A2, No Idea.
A3, The satisfaction for a number of senior bassa members that their lies and deceit have pushed BA over into the abyss.
Sad days ahead I fear.
GF
A1, Willie Walsh. At last.
A2, No Idea.
A3, The satisfaction for a number of senior bassa members that their lies and deceit have pushed BA over into the abyss.
Sad days ahead I fear.
GF
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iycswicswicw
Who is running BA?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
unite's latest bollox!!
by Kaveri Niththyananthan
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
LONDON (Dow Jones)
Unite, the union representing 12,000 of British Airways' PLC (BAY.LN) cabin crew said Monday only 216 staff at the U.K. carrier had volunteered to replace the cabin crew, should they decided to go on strike.
BA is planning to retrain some staff--including pilots and ground staff--so they can fill-in as cabin crew and ensure service doesn't come to a complete halt.
But Unite warned that those 216 BA employees will be "rushed through" BA and the Civil Aviation Authority training courses that begin Monday and conclude with a course on Feb. 6, adding it will be writing to the CAA to demand that corners aren't cut.
Len McCluskey, Unite assistant general secretary, said: "With a cabin crew of 13,500 does BA seriously think this handful of inexperienced individuals will be able to operate a service? BA would be far better channeling its energies into negotiation than pursuing cynical schemes to break its own skilled and professional workforce."
The two sides have been at odds over British Airways' plans to change work practices. After nine months of talks, British Airways in November cut the number of cabin crew on long-haul flights from London's Heathrow Airport to 14 from 15.
That angered unions and they opened a second ballot Monday, which closes Feb. 22, after the first ballot that supported industrial action was quashed by the High Court. The two sides are also set to face each other in court Feb. 1, when it will be decided whether changes BA introduced are a breach of contract.
A BA spokesman said staff would be trained to a standard demanded by regulatory authorities and the CAA - through inspections - will ensure safety standards are maintained.
A spokesman for the CAA said it was monitoring procedures and would ensure safety standards are upheld.
He added BA is adopting two separate procedures: one for pilots most of whom already have a vast majority of safety training and therefore their course will only last about three to four days; and another for ground staff, which will last about 20 to 21 days.
He said staff would be trained to the same level of any new recruit and said there would need to be a hierarchy with at least one senior cabin crew member.
Unite added according to BA's own cabin crew Joint Procedures manual 'experience' is defined as having three months operating experience as cabin crew within the last three years. Half of the minimum required crew complement on all flights must have this level of experience.
According to legal papers dated Nov. 5 and seen by Dow Jones Newswires, BA said, "It takes approximately 3 months to train new cabin crew."
-By Kaveri Niththyananthan, Dow Jones Newswires; 4420 7842 9299; [email protected]
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
LONDON (Dow Jones)
Unite, the union representing 12,000 of British Airways' PLC (BAY.LN) cabin crew said Monday only 216 staff at the U.K. carrier had volunteered to replace the cabin crew, should they decided to go on strike.
BA is planning to retrain some staff--including pilots and ground staff--so they can fill-in as cabin crew and ensure service doesn't come to a complete halt.
But Unite warned that those 216 BA employees will be "rushed through" BA and the Civil Aviation Authority training courses that begin Monday and conclude with a course on Feb. 6, adding it will be writing to the CAA to demand that corners aren't cut.
Len McCluskey, Unite assistant general secretary, said: "With a cabin crew of 13,500 does BA seriously think this handful of inexperienced individuals will be able to operate a service? BA would be far better channeling its energies into negotiation than pursuing cynical schemes to break its own skilled and professional workforce."
The two sides have been at odds over British Airways' plans to change work practices. After nine months of talks, British Airways in November cut the number of cabin crew on long-haul flights from London's Heathrow Airport to 14 from 15.
That angered unions and they opened a second ballot Monday, which closes Feb. 22, after the first ballot that supported industrial action was quashed by the High Court. The two sides are also set to face each other in court Feb. 1, when it will be decided whether changes BA introduced are a breach of contract.
A BA spokesman said staff would be trained to a standard demanded by regulatory authorities and the CAA - through inspections - will ensure safety standards are maintained.
A spokesman for the CAA said it was monitoring procedures and would ensure safety standards are upheld.
He added BA is adopting two separate procedures: one for pilots most of whom already have a vast majority of safety training and therefore their course will only last about three to four days; and another for ground staff, which will last about 20 to 21 days.
He said staff would be trained to the same level of any new recruit and said there would need to be a hierarchy with at least one senior cabin crew member.
Unite added according to BA's own cabin crew Joint Procedures manual 'experience' is defined as having three months operating experience as cabin crew within the last three years. Half of the minimum required crew complement on all flights must have this level of experience.
According to legal papers dated Nov. 5 and seen by Dow Jones Newswires, BA said, "It takes approximately 3 months to train new cabin crew."
-By Kaveri Niththyananthan, Dow Jones Newswires; 4420 7842 9299; [email protected]
So this must be how they want to find out how many volunteers BA has managed to recruit. Make up a ridiculously low figure which will stop people from booking/flying, then wait for BA to publish the actual figure
As a frequent fully-flex J long haul SLF flyer with BA and others I've an obvious interest in this matter and have been reading this thread daily since the strike announcement. I have avoided the debate thus far as I'm not directly involved.
However, I now feel obliged to comment.
It appears to me as an interested but neutral* observer that the majority of posters on here are anti-strike. However, those pro-strike cannot be dissuaded despite the fact that they are not clear on the reasons for the strike (other than a deep mistrust of BA management) and further, have no clear idea what they hope to achieve by taking this action. (If that is an incorrect assessment I look forward to a reasoned post explaining why it is not so)
I can certainly understand unhappiness, bitterness even, over any reduction in staff numbers or T&C's. I wouldn't like either to be imposed upon me. But if that "imposition" had arisen after several months of negotiation during a period when my company was under clear financial pressure, and as a consequence restructuring across multiple departments, I'm sure a dose of realism would set in. Especially if I thought that IA (or even the threat of IA) could very likely collapse the company.
It seems to me that those voting yes are aware of the risks to themselves (disciplinary action etc) and to the company (bankruptcy) but are determined to proceed nonetheless. Turkeys voting for Christmas is not a fair analagy. Cows voting for wholesale slaughter on the basis of 1 case of foot & mouth disease is more apt.
*Neutral in company vs crew dispute, not choice of airline as I fly BA when I can but am quite prepared (and frequently do) take my business elsewhere.
However, I now feel obliged to comment.
It appears to me as an interested but neutral* observer that the majority of posters on here are anti-strike. However, those pro-strike cannot be dissuaded despite the fact that they are not clear on the reasons for the strike (other than a deep mistrust of BA management) and further, have no clear idea what they hope to achieve by taking this action. (If that is an incorrect assessment I look forward to a reasoned post explaining why it is not so)
I can certainly understand unhappiness, bitterness even, over any reduction in staff numbers or T&C's. I wouldn't like either to be imposed upon me. But if that "imposition" had arisen after several months of negotiation during a period when my company was under clear financial pressure, and as a consequence restructuring across multiple departments, I'm sure a dose of realism would set in. Especially if I thought that IA (or even the threat of IA) could very likely collapse the company.
It seems to me that those voting yes are aware of the risks to themselves (disciplinary action etc) and to the company (bankruptcy) but are determined to proceed nonetheless. Turkeys voting for Christmas is not a fair analagy. Cows voting for wholesale slaughter on the basis of 1 case of foot & mouth disease is more apt.
*Neutral in company vs crew dispute, not choice of airline as I fly BA when I can but am quite prepared (and frequently do) take my business elsewhere.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite know very well that there are 1000's, not 100's of volunteers. They just put this out there to try and get BA to publish the figure, so they can adjust there strategy in accordance.
Also, it has the added "bonus" of scaring even more of the people who pay their salary away from flying with BA during the strike period. Well done!
Hopefully, at some point in the future, these people will realise (when another lie like this one comes to light) that maybe they aren't being told the truth by the people they pay to represent them. Let's hope so, for everyone's sake - at the moment the BASSA forum is full of celebratory comments. Why question the Great Leaders?
Also, it has the added "bonus" of scaring even more of the people who pay their salary away from flying with BA during the strike period. Well done!
Hopefully, at some point in the future, these people will realise (when another lie like this one comes to light) that maybe they aren't being told the truth by the people they pay to represent them. Let's hope so, for everyone's sake - at the moment the BASSA forum is full of celebratory comments. Why question the Great Leaders?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I guess it begs the question, how would Unite know how many had volunteered??
I would guess that 216 is probably the number now being trained, i.e. the first batch, meaning that BA can probably have at least 500 in place for the 1st March. Along with 500 "strike breaking crew" that's more than enough to keep about 15 daily long haul services running indefinitely.(working to legal minimum rest etc.) Along with the 3500 or so other "strike breaking crew, I suspect that LHR Longhaul can be kept flying for a long, long time. Meanwhile every 3 weeks another batch of "crew" will be trained and join the fleet.
As to the cr@p from BASSA about volunteers having to worry about their jobs.... I guess the fear that they might be surplus to requirements stops people volunteering whenever there is disruption as well, does it? A lot of the jobs on the ground can be left unattended for a short period without harm, and that is much preferable than having our customer sitting on the ground going nowhere. There is NOTHING sinister about asking people to volunteer, what a total load of cow dung!
"If you can't win an argument with logic and facts, baffle them with BullSh!t and then scare the hell out of them" (page 1 of the BASSA guide to effective Comms)
CB
I would guess that 216 is probably the number now being trained, i.e. the first batch, meaning that BA can probably have at least 500 in place for the 1st March. Along with 500 "strike breaking crew" that's more than enough to keep about 15 daily long haul services running indefinitely.(working to legal minimum rest etc.) Along with the 3500 or so other "strike breaking crew, I suspect that LHR Longhaul can be kept flying for a long, long time. Meanwhile every 3 weeks another batch of "crew" will be trained and join the fleet.
As to the cr@p from BASSA about volunteers having to worry about their jobs.... I guess the fear that they might be surplus to requirements stops people volunteering whenever there is disruption as well, does it? A lot of the jobs on the ground can be left unattended for a short period without harm, and that is much preferable than having our customer sitting on the ground going nowhere. There is NOTHING sinister about asking people to volunteer, what a total load of cow dung!
"If you can't win an argument with logic and facts, baffle them with BullSh!t and then scare the hell out of them" (page 1 of the BASSA guide to effective Comms)
CB
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can't question bassa .....
...... because they don't have the answers!
A colleague encountered a bassa rep the other day. Upon asking why there is another ballot, and what bassa hoped to achieve by it, they were told that it's "far too complicated for you to understand".
So there we have it, direct from bassa ..... vote yes because we tell you to, but don't expect us to tell you why!
I am BA Cabin Crew. These thoughts are my own, not those of my employer.
A colleague encountered a bassa rep the other day. Upon asking why there is another ballot, and what bassa hoped to achieve by it, they were told that it's "far too complicated for you to understand".
So there we have it, direct from bassa ..... vote yes because we tell you to, but don't expect us to tell you why!
I am BA Cabin Crew. These thoughts are my own, not those of my employer.
Last edited by TorC; 25th Jan 2010 at 14:55. Reason: disclaimer added
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a few random thoughts I've had....
Sd...you say we are considering striking over the fear of imposition. The imposition of the first step of the BA proposal happened in November. If we do not strike, are you seriously suggesting that they will just stop? On the basis that Bill wrote a letter?
Bill's letters do not offer a choice about whether or not New Fleet is created...only a choice as to how. Integrated with existing fleets or separate.
Have you read the proposed changes? The point is to eliminate the "unhealthy tenure" of cabin crew. IFCE say, "There is no business value" in crew staying with the airline.
So, the wish is to create contracts that will not make staying attractive. That is the new fleet contract and why there are no increments to basic pay built in. The other part is to find a way to get crew who ARE on an attractive contract to leave...which is why they need to break the union, because BASSA will not agree to the creation of New Fleet without protection for existing contracts.
I'm under no illusions about who runs BA. The LT runs the company on behalf of the board for the benefit of shareholders. They have decided that experience is of no commercial value and want to restructure so that experience is not rewarded.
I'm not in a position to judge whether their evaluation is correct, does loyalty have any commercial value today? Still, I don't doubt that I have the right to fight their decision to change the basics of the contract they recruited me with.
I'm suprised how many BA pilots seem to celebrate the new ideology of our management. My impression is that the pilot contract is founded upon the concept of rewarding experience. Seniority determines pay, promotion prospects, work patterns, fleet transfers....I would have expected you to feel at least a little disquiet.
I imagine that the only reason this is happening to cabin crew before pilots is because of the huge difference in training costs. As long as it is more cost effective to keep Captains and FO's for their 24 annual increments (than to recruit and train newer cheaper pilots) then I don't doubt the existing system will be kept.
However, as the industry continues to see airlines fail, does that balance begin to shift? Do unemployed pilots become less expensive if there are more of them on the market? Or are you like bankers and have some way of preventing a downturn in your industry creating a downturn for you?
Vote No & Don't strike-
Keep existing T&Cs, almost, RISK of Nufleet
Vote Yes & Strike-
Lose staff travel & you WILL be given new contracts ie you are nufleet.
Keep existing T&Cs, almost, RISK of Nufleet
Vote Yes & Strike-
Lose staff travel & you WILL be given new contracts ie you are nufleet.
Bill's letters do not offer a choice about whether or not New Fleet is created...only a choice as to how. Integrated with existing fleets or separate.
Have you read the proposed changes? The point is to eliminate the "unhealthy tenure" of cabin crew. IFCE say, "There is no business value" in crew staying with the airline.
So, the wish is to create contracts that will not make staying attractive. That is the new fleet contract and why there are no increments to basic pay built in. The other part is to find a way to get crew who ARE on an attractive contract to leave...which is why they need to break the union, because BASSA will not agree to the creation of New Fleet without protection for existing contracts.
I'm under no illusions about who runs BA. The LT runs the company on behalf of the board for the benefit of shareholders. They have decided that experience is of no commercial value and want to restructure so that experience is not rewarded.
I'm not in a position to judge whether their evaluation is correct, does loyalty have any commercial value today? Still, I don't doubt that I have the right to fight their decision to change the basics of the contract they recruited me with.
I'm suprised how many BA pilots seem to celebrate the new ideology of our management. My impression is that the pilot contract is founded upon the concept of rewarding experience. Seniority determines pay, promotion prospects, work patterns, fleet transfers....I would have expected you to feel at least a little disquiet.
I imagine that the only reason this is happening to cabin crew before pilots is because of the huge difference in training costs. As long as it is more cost effective to keep Captains and FO's for their 24 annual increments (than to recruit and train newer cheaper pilots) then I don't doubt the existing system will be kept.
However, as the industry continues to see airlines fail, does that balance begin to shift? Do unemployed pilots become less expensive if there are more of them on the market? Or are you like bankers and have some way of preventing a downturn in your industry creating a downturn for you?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
........... It seems to me that those voting yes are aware of the risks to themselves (disciplinary action etc) and to the company (bankruptcy) but are determined to proceed nonetheless. Turkeys voting for Christmas is not a fair analagy. Cows voting for wholesale slaughter on the basis of 1 case of foot & mouth disease is more apt. ..............
doesn't even register as a blip on their radar.
I am BA Cabin Crew. These thoughts are my own, not those of my employer.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is not the place to discuss 'pilots' terms and conditions.
Suffice to say that the market demographics that dictate pay scales, structure etc. differ significantly from job to job. The expertise base differs and thus the remuneration scales. Ironically, in the current financial environment, BA pilots are very cheap compared to our European counterparts.
There is no new ideology from the LT, merely a new found willingness to push the changes through. As most of us have been in this position in the past where other departments make the savings and BASSA stamps and screams and refuses. In those cases the LT backed down and we, in the other departments, carried the weight of the continuation of the original T's & C's of the cabin crew.
I feel that the sheer spitefulness and intransigence of BASSA in refusing all negotiations and demanding all 'savings' back in 2 years, their patent unwillingness to accept the requirement to make savings, have alienated them in a way that has never previously occurred.
This is not just the feeling within the pilot community but, judging by the take up for 'back BA', from within all of the other communities who have accepted change over the past 9 months.
Suffice to say that the market demographics that dictate pay scales, structure etc. differ significantly from job to job. The expertise base differs and thus the remuneration scales. Ironically, in the current financial environment, BA pilots are very cheap compared to our European counterparts.
There is no new ideology from the LT, merely a new found willingness to push the changes through. As most of us have been in this position in the past where other departments make the savings and BASSA stamps and screams and refuses. In those cases the LT backed down and we, in the other departments, carried the weight of the continuation of the original T's & C's of the cabin crew.
I feel that the sheer spitefulness and intransigence of BASSA in refusing all negotiations and demanding all 'savings' back in 2 years, their patent unwillingness to accept the requirement to make savings, have alienated them in a way that has never previously occurred.
This is not just the feeling within the pilot community but, judging by the take up for 'back BA', from within all of the other communities who have accepted change over the past 9 months.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Who is running BA?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
Why are bassa balloting?
What does bassa hope to achieve by following this course of action?
I conclude that even the most ardent BASSA supporter now has no idea of what they're actually striking over, so I no longer have any interest in seeking answers.
I also conclude that WW has plans in place to ensure the airline stays running.
Which is why I was happy to log in to BA's system again this morning and confidently book some more flights.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reargunner,
Picking you up on one of your points, I think you deliberately misrepresent and misquote the BA position. You say;
Whereas the actual, accurate quote from the document is;
See the subtle difference.
Imagine if I pay someone to mow a lawn today for £10, then have to pay them £11 next time, £13, £14, etc. To a certain extent, after a few times they could say "Well, look at the experience I have, I have mowed it slightly better this time using my skills, a new person wouldn't do that" - Yes, fair enough, up to a point. When it comes to now paying the lawn man £300, letting him borrow my car on a sunday, have 7 tea breaks and a payment if it's raining, I might say to myself, "it's only a lawn for God's sake, how much of a skill level does it really take, and would I notice if I just paid someone else £50, they would probably pick it up pretty quick"
What BA are saying is that if they have crew member, we shall call her Dorris, who has been in the airline since all the planes had propellors, and has remained main crew the whole time, always does the First galley, never anything more than the minimum required, they still have to keep paying her more and more and more every year, for 25 years, despite the fact that she isn't doing anything different. In fact she may be doing things worse, and getting steadily demoralised by the lack of promotion, and is in fact just held in the job with golden handcuffs because of the final salary pension, staff travel and because on the old contracts, you would have to work much much harder in the real world to earn that pay. I know plenty of crew that fit this description, and I'm sure you do too. They do you a disservice.
What BA want is for people to stay in the airline, and be promoted, but to be promoted on the basis of putting in the effort, and improving themselves through training and development, rather than just through hanging about long enough.
Yes, there are some good points about the pilots using payscales like this, but that is to encourage loyalty. I am paid way below market rate now, I get less pay than my mates at EJ and the charters, but I will hang on and stick with BA because I know my time will come. It also means I won't jump ship if EJ make me a better offer, good for BA, they won't incur significant training and recruitment costs to replace me.
The same can not be said of cabin crew. How many people have left to go and join a charter? It just won't happen. How many of the crew are paid less than Ryanair crew?
The main problem with the New Fleet as far as you are concerned could have been sorted if BASSA had negotiated a SCOPE clause like the pilots, (rather than getting in a strop over hot towels for WT+) then you wouldn't be in this mess. Instead they concentrated on feathering their own Longhaul Heathrow Nest, and screw the rest of you. When they allowed worse Ts&Cs at LGW it was the start of the rot. Mind you, if at the time, they had asked you all if you wanted to take a small pay cut to keep everyone on the same pay, how much support would that have got? Everyone is selfish, but Unions should rise above that, that is part of their remit. By just constantly throwing the newbies to the lions ('97) to protect their own interests, crew have brought this on themselves.
Picking you up on one of your points, I think you deliberately misrepresent and misquote the BA position. You say;
IFCE say, "There is no business value" in crew staying with the airline.
No extra business value is obtained for the extra reward in terms of individual productivity or performance
Imagine if I pay someone to mow a lawn today for £10, then have to pay them £11 next time, £13, £14, etc. To a certain extent, after a few times they could say "Well, look at the experience I have, I have mowed it slightly better this time using my skills, a new person wouldn't do that" - Yes, fair enough, up to a point. When it comes to now paying the lawn man £300, letting him borrow my car on a sunday, have 7 tea breaks and a payment if it's raining, I might say to myself, "it's only a lawn for God's sake, how much of a skill level does it really take, and would I notice if I just paid someone else £50, they would probably pick it up pretty quick"
What BA are saying is that if they have crew member, we shall call her Dorris, who has been in the airline since all the planes had propellors, and has remained main crew the whole time, always does the First galley, never anything more than the minimum required, they still have to keep paying her more and more and more every year, for 25 years, despite the fact that she isn't doing anything different. In fact she may be doing things worse, and getting steadily demoralised by the lack of promotion, and is in fact just held in the job with golden handcuffs because of the final salary pension, staff travel and because on the old contracts, you would have to work much much harder in the real world to earn that pay. I know plenty of crew that fit this description, and I'm sure you do too. They do you a disservice.
What BA want is for people to stay in the airline, and be promoted, but to be promoted on the basis of putting in the effort, and improving themselves through training and development, rather than just through hanging about long enough.
Yes, there are some good points about the pilots using payscales like this, but that is to encourage loyalty. I am paid way below market rate now, I get less pay than my mates at EJ and the charters, but I will hang on and stick with BA because I know my time will come. It also means I won't jump ship if EJ make me a better offer, good for BA, they won't incur significant training and recruitment costs to replace me.
The same can not be said of cabin crew. How many people have left to go and join a charter? It just won't happen. How many of the crew are paid less than Ryanair crew?
The main problem with the New Fleet as far as you are concerned could have been sorted if BASSA had negotiated a SCOPE clause like the pilots, (rather than getting in a strop over hot towels for WT+) then you wouldn't be in this mess. Instead they concentrated on feathering their own Longhaul Heathrow Nest, and screw the rest of you. When they allowed worse Ts&Cs at LGW it was the start of the rot. Mind you, if at the time, they had asked you all if you wanted to take a small pay cut to keep everyone on the same pay, how much support would that have got? Everyone is selfish, but Unions should rise above that, that is part of their remit. By just constantly throwing the newbies to the lions ('97) to protect their own interests, crew have brought this on themselves.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 106
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crew comparing their T&C's to Pilots
Reargunner: BA Pilots are already earning market rate +10%. Our union has negotiated cuts where we thought it neccesary, including a 5%ish paycut. We don't put out childish insults in press releases, we don't belittle our employers or shareholders. We don't insult other employee groups (as a body).
Facing these facts, tell me that you don't understand why we're being treated differently as a group of employees?
Also, don't assume we don't care about your fight because we our volunteering - most of us feel you (BASSA) have simply left us no choice. You are not willing to make reasonable concessions and the company has to assure its financial survival.
Facing these facts, tell me that you don't understand why we're being treated differently as a group of employees?
Also, don't assume we don't care about your fight because we our volunteering - most of us feel you (BASSA) have simply left us no choice. You are not willing to make reasonable concessions and the company has to assure its financial survival.