British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI

[Weather Map]

Ottergirl.

My experience is diffrent to yours, i have heard many of the post 97 crew complain about being sold down the river by the union over the years.I would agree with you that they knew what was on their contract when they sighned it, but rightly or wrongly many of these people do feel disgruntled and complain about being on the new contract as they earn less than the more senior crew.

New Fleet negotiable BASSA have blown that one.

[Bill of the Hamptons]

Plus ca change

BBC News - Aer Lingus delays profit figures after cabin crew vote

[Hot Wings]

Well, one of the most fanatical BASSA 100%ers that I know has just managed to go off sick indefinately, so I can only presume that a strike is coming soon and that the militants are already running for cover. Those in the know will view from safety the slaughter of BASSA lambs.

[Caribbean Boy]

Why crew costs must be reduced

Originally posted by ottergirl:

Regardless, another fleet of people on not only less pay but working to a charter type agreement can not be a desirable way forward from IR perspective.

The issue is costs, not IR. Let's remind ourselves what Willie Walsh said to staff: "On routes to Australia, for example, our cabin crew costs before the complement changes were 31 per cent higher than those of Qantas. Asia will be a massive growth market in the future. We are shutting ourselves out of Asia because our costs are too high."

BA loses money on the Oz flights. If SYD is terminated, then BKK and SIN are under threat as BA needs the fifth freedom traffic. Any pull out would be a serious blow to BA's reputation as a global carrier, especially in view of previous axing of several Asia/Pacific routes, namely:

CGK, SEL, TPE, MNL, KUL, OSA, NGO, FUK, PER, BNE, MEL, ADL, AKL.

And let's not forget that NRT was cut from two to one daily.

The bottom line is that cabin crew costs must come down permanently, which is what new fleet is about. Unite has had 13 months to come up with an alternative to BA's cost cutting plans, but has woefully failed to do so.

[fly12345]

If it wasn t for post 97 crew, probably now there would not be a ba to strike/talk about, they (the union) were wrong then and they are wrong now.
Caribbean boy: Our OZ services are not operated at a loss as we pool resources, profit and losses with QF, as for the other destinations you mention the operating or not is dictated more by market, economy forces more than just cabin crew wages-allowances.

[Caribbean Boy]

fly12345,

I was in the Waterside theatre last Wednesday when Willie Walsh said that Oz flights are loss-making. He made the point that it is cabin crew costs more than anything that makes BA uncompetitive compared with QANTAS.

[fly12345]

We used to have and I am sure it is still valid a pooling agreement with QF on the OZ routes sharing equipment, profit and, or losses, I doubt very much even if we are not profitable on the mentioned routes it is solely down to cabin crew allowances (which are not as exorbitant as one might think) but more to do with the equipment that we use i.e. 747/777 vs A380 etc etc.

[LD12986]

BA and Qantas have a JSA to pool revenues and costs. The problem with LHR-SYD for any airline based at either end of the route (rather than having a hub in the middle) is that it is an extremely poor route for aircraft utilisation and a lot of the traffic is low yield leisure.

[Re-Heat]

Caribbean boy: Our OZ services are not operated at a loss as we pool resources, profit and losses with QF, as for the other destinations you mention the operating or not is dictated more by market, economy forces more than just cabin crew wages-allowances.

It is not simply an arrangement where Qantas and BA throw the lot in the pot, and take the profit 50:50, but one where it covers specific routes and is adjusted for cost inputs as well and revenue generation. I know nothing further of the specifics, but find if highly likely that one party could make a profit from the venture while the other, with higher cost inputs, is not.

[legandawing]

Pay

UK Pay for Cabin Crew
Airline NEW STARTERS
Airline
Basic
Allowances per month average
Route
Average Net


British Airways
£11.000
£750.00
LH
£1500.00
BMI
£14.346 inc LW
£500.00
LH&SH
£1600.00
Virgin
£10.000
£400.00
LH
£1200.00
KLM City
£13.350
£370.00 (£2.06ph)
SH
£1427.00
Tui
£10.650
£391.00
Mixed LH/SH
£1286.00
TCX
£11.412
£170.00 (£2.80ph)
SH
£966.27
EZY
£11.200
£720.00
SH only
£1520.00
BA New Fleet!
£11.000
£630.00 (£2.40ph)
LH&SH
£1400.00


Having worked for 3 of the above including BA, it looks like BA has done the math on the new fleet. I based the figure on 260 hours (or 4.5 trips) on my old roster and yes I know SH will be in there.
I accounted for the 900 hour rule too. Having worked under CAP371 on mixed charter it’s not so bad.

Non flyers... the 260 hours is the total time away and not the time in the air!

What is important here is that the press and non flyers understand that there are a large proportion of flyers in all UK airlines that are at the lower end of the scale (including BA crew)

I think these figures are about right?

[cym]

Soz have been busy today, so to cut to the chase (lost the will to live reading the dialog of the analysis of cc costs as per CAA)!

BASSA were supposed to deliver details of their proposed cost saving proposal to BA by cob Friday (didn't happen), figures were due to be delivered today - did that happen?

So from giving BA 4 days to analyse the BASSA proposal we how have at best 1 to 1.5 days if they did actually manage to get their act together - is that a fair understanding of things as they stand?

Sound like lala never learns lessons that have been made very clear - if so time to consider errors made living in LA unemployed may be the future for her and her cohorts

Have finally run out of patience - IA bring it on, this situation needs to be resolved once and for all.

Missing you already LizAnn (not) - the fact that you are prepared to use decent if misguided colleagues as cannon fodder is a disgrace - hope you can sleep well at night

[Papillon]

Well, it depends on whether or not you believe the following:

Hopes of strike deal fade as British Airways queries Unite proposals | Business | guardian.co.uk

Guardian "sources" seem to usually be from the union side rather than the company based on previous reports.

[Caribbean Boy]

It was a lot easier when the JSA started in 1996 when BA/QF had a third of the business, but since then several airlines have entered (or taken seriously) the kangaroo route. Cabin crew costs are fundamentally important, with BA being way more expensive than SQ, TG, QF, EK, EY, MH, VS, etc.

Both BA and QF have cut flights between Europe and Oz over the past several years. The possible withdrawal from SYD by BA must be taken seriously.

[cym]

ah - the usual BASSA gameplaying

One of my best friends is a fulltime union rep (not Unite) and even he has hung his head in disgust at the way in which this situation has been handled by BASSA / Unite - says it all in my opinion

BASSA go for it - will remind me of NUM in 10 years time

[HasFlyed]

End Game?

Well, more of a guessing game really.

We can play the numbers game:
How many volunteers / strikers / wet leases…
The answer comes out, no strike / short strike – defeated.

We can play the strategy game:
New Fleet / BASSA defeat / BASSA face save / contract CC / imposition / Pay cut / strike threat / strike possibility…
Clear answer, New Fleet + BASSA defeat/face save.

We can play the money game:
Targeted cost reductions / cost recovery from BASSA / saving now/future / who pays and when (insert your own list) fat cats/troops.
Only one certainty – savings, (substantial), will be made.

And of course, the damage game:
Strike/possibility of strike / delay / rabble rousing / intimidation (all sides) / divide and rule (all sides) / loss of: Company, Brand, revenue, trust (all sides), revenue, PAX loyalty, Staff Travel, reputation………etc.

The reality is that none of these games is played in isolation. So, our focus during the play tends to shift from one to another, (as in this thread!).

The games could continue for some time yet – and so will the damage.

My sympathy in all this has shifted between all the “players” at various times, (very little mention of very anxious BA pensioners out there!). But it has until recently tended towards the CC “troops”.

I now have no more sympathy. I only see the damage that their poor choice in representation has brought the rest of us.

I ask CC to seek out the facts and make sure that your voice is heard by your representatives before it is too late.

[Chickenlickin]

Oh dear, sounds to me like BASSA are about to press the self destruct button.
I wouldn't like to be in the c/c shoes who are rostered to work in the next 7 days. I guess everyone is eagerly looking at their rosters in the hope that they won't be affected. Doesn't seem fair does it?
I guess a lot of this dispute boils down to the status of the CSD. There are a lot of good CSD's out there who have always worked on the trolleys and rolled their sleeves up. Others wouldn't stoop so low. It's up to the individual c/c member to figure out if they feel strongly enough about the change in role of the CSD to warrant strike action. From what I'm hearing the vast majority of the cabin crew community don't care about working a bit harder and the loss of one crew member, so is the sticking point the "status" issues of the CSD?
From personal experience I know striking doesn't work. I have been on strike once and I would never do it again.
I feel the c/c union has not moved with the times. If they had worked with the company to improve company profibility, linked to an employee share insentive scheme then the c/c community may have had a chance. I honestly feel anyone striking will look back on this episode with regret. I'm feeling very sad that some very decent, hard working, cabin crew are about to be led to the slaughter. Please think long and hard about your forthcming actions.

[Flap62]

I wouldn't like to be in the c/c shoes who are rostered to work in the next 7 days. I guess everyone is eagerly looking at their rosters in the hope that they won't be affected. Doesn't seem fair does it?

Much has been made of the 92% and 81% votes - and yes I know that the latter number equates to less than 60% of the total force.

The bulk of the cc community have had almost 1 year to ensure they were adequately represented - they have not done this.
They accepted their union making a ludicrous 12 days strike threat.
They have accepted their union spouting untruths and damaging rhetoric - they stood by and did nothing.
In the final count, 81% of respondees still put a cross in the box saying - are you willing to take strike action. Those who elected not to vote instead of voting no abrogated their responsibilities and are just as culpable.
Every single member of BASSA has a responsibility for anything which happens over the next two weeks. In today's information rich media world, ignorance is no longer an excuse.

Not fair? Oh I think it'll be fair and just.
That doesn't mean it's not terrible if non militant CC lose their jobs but they can't honestly say they don't share the responsibility if that happens.

[PaddyMiguel]

CSDs

Gross inefficiencies in mashed-up BOAC/BEA/BCal working practices are the root of the problem, which the union seems not to want to address.

I guess a lot of this dispute boils down to the status of the CSD.

There are still many 'Wake me up over Windsor' CSDs out there who are clinging to those restrictive working practices drawn up in the 1967 BOAC Scheduling Agreement.
The BASSA CSDs, sorry reps, may not want to address the hodge-podge of scheduling/allowances agreements at the heart of the opposition to New Fleet but you can bet your bottom dollar that BA are not going to let this opportunity of a wholesale clearout slip away. Bill Francis offered to negotiate New Fleet last June. Now he doesn't have to.

[HasFlyed]

Culpability

Flap62

Spot on Post.

I think we are in last chance territory for the CC. The culpapable out there - yes, that includes the "innocent" and the naive and the no-voters, needed to check the facts not go along with the mood and keep their heads down when it got difficult. We can see the consequences coming now.

Hey guys,it is time to come out of your bunker!

[IYCSWICSWICW]

Decision Time

..correct-a-mundo paddy'..and boy, does BA need to get this right.

IMO, this situation is about to get even more dire. Mr Walsh, remains resolute, and as far as I can see BASSA are still trying to 'negotiate', if that's what they call it, on 2 counts that WW has stated, publicly, are non-negotiable, namely, imposition (here to stay) and re-instatement of suspended 'transgressors' (disciplinary issue - not industrial). So WTF! BA are not going to give an inch. BASSA has fallen into just about every trap laid so far, including their own self-laid traps. Trouble is, I've been doing a bit of forward 'looking' at loads. It took time but I reckon I know what the seasonal variations are like and believe me, from April on..the bookings are abysmal.

BASSA, I believe, are about to be slayed. They have to be as this uncertainty can not go on much longer.

CC, please realise what is about to happen. BASSA have mis-represnted you to a new-level of incompetence. History will show that the BA LT have been fair throughout this debacle, but they can wait no more to deliver the silver bullet. Good Luck. Make sure you know the facts before you walk.

I urge you to do this. Read the Court Report by Justice Holland, then read your ESS mails from the company, then read the BASSA communiques. Compare them, sift the emotional claptrap from where you detect/read it, then decide. Ask other people for their views - Fellow CC, Pilots, TRMs, Engineers, Baggage Boys et al, and form a balanced vew. Then, decision made, act and stick to your guns, after all you came to the decision with ALL the facts - right?.

Finally, I urge you not to walk on the BASSA information alone. You be the judge, after digesting all the information. Your decision is massive.

GF