British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by PC767
But the proposal is for a new fleet and it is transparent that as new fleet grows so old fleet will shrink. Your current earnings are only protected whilst you operate routes with higher allowances, overtime and box payments. If you were a BA manager who would you use to crew such trips?
For example, group all the trips in to highest paying, mid and low paying. Have an agreement that for every high paying trip transferred to New Fleet, a mid and low one are transferred too. In fact, I seem to remember Bill F offering such a matrix to allay concerns about the NRTs and SINs all moving across overnight.
However, if BASSA refuse to negotiate (and I mean in good faith, rather than saying they have offered £170m+ of savings that turn out to be £54m, and that they want paid back in 2yrs anyway), and then go on to strike, I would fully expect and hope that BA would move across all the high earning trips to New Fleet as fast as they could to recover the massive sums of money that BASSA would no doubt cost the company (and in turn the other 30,000 employees)
From a business point of view, it makes no sense at all to have New Fleet Crew and Legacy crew on the same aircraft. The savings come about because NF crew can do fixed links, shorter nightstops, longer days, earlier starts etc. If you have a mixed crew, then the 'herd' can only move at the pace of the slowest Wildebeest. (to use an analogy from Mother Nature). Also, from the point of view of a Legacy crew, if you want to be selfish (and I don't hear many crew saying they are willing to take a slight pay cut to make sure new joiners are on the same deal) you want to get maximum savings from the NF crew, to minimise the impact on the legacy crew. If BA could get £100m savings from NF on a separate fleet, and only £30m from an integrated approach, where do you think they are going to look for the other £70m? Yes, Legacy crew, exactly.
From a CRM point of view, having mixed crews is a nightmare. "Can you do the duty frees?" - "Why don't you do it? You're getting paid over twice what I am, and you've got a stand-over and I'm on min rest - do it yourself!" - You think I'm exaggerating? Talk to crew who have worked for an airline that has merged with another one, with different Ts&Cs! There are some recent examples to learn from...
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bath Road
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA need to pull themselves together before it's too late and lose any chance of reaching a mutual agreement - maybe instead of balloting for a strike they should try and get a good deal on the MTP before it's taken off the table.
New crew working along side existing crew - sounds far too complicated - they will be on different terms and conditions and be working to scheme. Are you suggesting that existing crew should work with one set of new crew outbond and another set of new crew inbound?
BA wants to have a flexible fleet - letting new crew work with existing crew won't have the flexibility they are looking for.
It's very clear who's running the show and it ain't BASSA as some seem to think.
New crew working along side existing crew - sounds far too complicated - they will be on different terms and conditions and be working to scheme. Are you suggesting that existing crew should work with one set of new crew outbond and another set of new crew inbound?
BA wants to have a flexible fleet - letting new crew work with existing crew won't have the flexibility they are looking for.
It's very clear who's running the show and it ain't BASSA as some seem to think.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's strange, but not a single one of the old BASSA stalwarts have contributed to the thread over the last several days - with the notable exception of Watersidewonker.
I wonder why? Surely they must have thoughts and opinions to share with the rest of us?
I wonder why? Surely they must have thoughts and opinions to share with the rest of us?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you have a mixed crew, then the 'herd' can only move at the pace of the slowest Wildebeest.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767,
The facts published about the Monthly Travel Payment are that it will be paid regardless of the roster flown.
In a question to to Bill Francis about how the payment would be adjusted year to year, where the questioner asked whether it would be increased in the same way variable pay is at the moment, ie according to whatever % pay deal is agreed, from memory, Bill Francis said that it was something he wanted to discuss with the union, but yes that would be a probable option.
The Monthly travel payment, as proposed, is based on TOTAL COLLECTIVE (non-meal) allowances paid to the whole crew community based on 08/09 figures, NOT individual yearly payments to individual crew, so what you say your manager told you sounds extremely unlikely to be accurate.
Quite appart from anything else, do you really think that BA wants the expense of calculating INDIVIDUAL variable pay old v new method for 12,500 crew?
I also strongly suggest you ask BASSA why they will not discuss a formula to transfer work, proposed by the company, that would prevent exactly what you fear will happen.
This would catagorise trips as A (Good - so the NRT/GVAs), B (Middling) and C (Unpopular/not worth a lot) and transfer them in rotational order to New Fleet, ensuring that existing fleets keep the same balance of work as they shrink.
Is it really beyond Unite to negociate that into a robust, binding agreement? No, of course not. That's why it's membership pay them good money, to NEGOCIATE agreements that are unambiguous and fair.
Indeed, I believe some of the Amicus reps were/are keen to do just that, but the BASSA, won't entertain it.
I'd lay good odds, that the majority of crew don't even know such a formula was offered, because UNITE don't want it's membership to know about such ideas. Unite don't want "New Fleet", full stop, because of the reason I mentioned earlier.
PC767, given the seriousness of this whole situation, I suggest it's time that UNITEs members started asking it's union some very searching questions about such issues, and not allow themselves to be fobbed off with the usual "Don't trust BA, WW is out for your T & Cs, he wants to smash the union." The question, "Why won't you even seriously discuss safeguards to prevent the worst you claim would happen with the advent of New Fleet?" might be a start.
The facts published about the Monthly Travel Payment are that it will be paid regardless of the roster flown.
In a question to to Bill Francis about how the payment would be adjusted year to year, where the questioner asked whether it would be increased in the same way variable pay is at the moment, ie according to whatever % pay deal is agreed, from memory, Bill Francis said that it was something he wanted to discuss with the union, but yes that would be a probable option.
The Monthly travel payment, as proposed, is based on TOTAL COLLECTIVE (non-meal) allowances paid to the whole crew community based on 08/09 figures, NOT individual yearly payments to individual crew, so what you say your manager told you sounds extremely unlikely to be accurate.
Quite appart from anything else, do you really think that BA wants the expense of calculating INDIVIDUAL variable pay old v new method for 12,500 crew?
I also strongly suggest you ask BASSA why they will not discuss a formula to transfer work, proposed by the company, that would prevent exactly what you fear will happen.
This would catagorise trips as A (Good - so the NRT/GVAs), B (Middling) and C (Unpopular/not worth a lot) and transfer them in rotational order to New Fleet, ensuring that existing fleets keep the same balance of work as they shrink.
Is it really beyond Unite to negociate that into a robust, binding agreement? No, of course not. That's why it's membership pay them good money, to NEGOCIATE agreements that are unambiguous and fair.
Indeed, I believe some of the Amicus reps were/are keen to do just that, but the BASSA, won't entertain it.
I'd lay good odds, that the majority of crew don't even know such a formula was offered, because UNITE don't want it's membership to know about such ideas. Unite don't want "New Fleet", full stop, because of the reason I mentioned earlier.
PC767, given the seriousness of this whole situation, I suggest it's time that UNITEs members started asking it's union some very searching questions about such issues, and not allow themselves to be fobbed off with the usual "Don't trust BA, WW is out for your T & Cs, he wants to smash the union." The question, "Why won't you even seriously discuss safeguards to prevent the worst you claim would happen with the advent of New Fleet?" might be a start.
Last edited by Beagle9; 19th Feb 2010 at 19:07.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't conceive of any situation in which recruits to New Fleet will work alongside existing crew, as said above, the integration of slip patterns would be too hard to arrange, what with the NF crews working to CAP371 at the Captains discretion (rather than a BASSA reps say so).
No, what is much more likely to happen is that the old crew (who don't/won't sign onto NF) will be corralled onto the B747 and B767 fleets. NF crew will be licensed on the B777 and subsequently the A380 and B787. The old crews will find they then have no work and be let go as their fleets no longer exist, or be given the option to change contract onto NF T&C's.
And the sad thing is that all of this could have been avoided if BASSA had negotiated. Instead they have decided that all existing crew should take one up the ******* for the benefit of the 'leadership'.
Well done Lizanne
you are my hero(ine).
No, what is much more likely to happen is that the old crew (who don't/won't sign onto NF) will be corralled onto the B747 and B767 fleets. NF crew will be licensed on the B777 and subsequently the A380 and B787. The old crews will find they then have no work and be let go as their fleets no longer exist, or be given the option to change contract onto NF T&C's.
And the sad thing is that all of this could have been avoided if BASSA had negotiated. Instead they have decided that all existing crew should take one up the ******* for the benefit of the 'leadership'.
Well done Lizanne
you are my hero(ine).
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's strange, but not a single one of the old BASSA stalwarts have contributed to the thread over the last several days - with the notable exception of Watersidewonker.
I wonder why? Surely they must have thoughts and opinions to share with the rest of us?
I wonder why? Surely they must have thoughts and opinions to share with the rest of us?
I suspect many may have turned!!
If I was BA crew, I would be utterly furious reading what I have read today, the judge has in effect stated that the imposition BASSA are balloting on has in effect been forced upon BA management, through the Unions almost imature pig headedness and unwillingness to negotiate.
What do they pay these people for?? Seriously what? I would be demanding my subs back, fair play to the poster earlier who said they had withdrawn their membership.
I firmly believe Unions are as important today as they have ever been and especially for BA CC, this whole campaign has been a farce though, it looks like they have only served to quicken the sale of their members down the river
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The loony lefts take on things, which no doubt is already being churned into another UNITE missive:
I do believe BA are more than ready to weather the storm (which will probably end up being insufficient to even bother a teacup).
Added: BASSA should check out the poll at this link before they think about striking:
BA strike all but certain after High Court ruling | Cheapflights.co.uk
Curse those nasty media types!
BA cabin crew are fighting serious attacks. If BA succeeds in pushing through the cuts it will embolden other bosses who are looking for any opportunity to impose cuts on their workers.
It’s likely that the ballot will deliver an overwhelming vote for action. Unite must act on the result with militant action to beat BA’s assault – and if bosses run to the courts again it should strike anyway.
It’s likely that the ballot will deliver an overwhelming vote for action. Unite must act on the result with militant action to beat BA’s assault – and if bosses run to the courts again it should strike anyway.
Added: BASSA should check out the poll at this link before they think about striking:
BA strike all but certain after High Court ruling | Cheapflights.co.uk
Curse those nasty media types!
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: motorway services
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This rather caustic analysis from the GL group:
Summary
If the cabin crew and union leadership are still intent on pushing for industrial action, their jobs are firmly on the line.
Analysis
In delivering the verdict from the High Court today, Mr Justice Sir Christopher Holland said today:
"If the new complements materially and fairly contribute to the preservation of British Airways and more importantly for present purposes job security and pay, how can I condemn the less than extreme changes as unreasonable?"
The union leadership has a straightforward choice:
Either silence their crowing for strike action and get on with the business of turning British Airways around, or continue down the path to oblivion by forcing industrial action.
The whole basis of the union arguments against British Airways’ changes has been obliterated and no legal justification exists to call for strike action.
From the very beginning of this sorry mess, the Unite union has systematically ignored the precarious financial position British Airways is in – without that being secured, job cuts are still a clear and present danger.
British Airways’ oneworld alliance partner, American Airlines too, is being held hostage to similar wage demands by the Transport Workers Union – both unions on both sides of the Atlantic are either too ignorant to understand the financial weakness both airlines have, or their sheer self-interest coated in stupidity blinds them from seeing how fragile the entire sector is.
Many transport industries have suffered in the wake of this financial recession and quite frankly these union members should be glad that they still have jobs to go to, despite the shift away from premium traffic amidst volatile passenger numbers.
The Unite union has been utterly embarrassed twice by the High Court.
If their leadership has learnt anything, they should stop their posturing and save their members’ jobs by telling them to get back to doing the job they’re paid for.
They are expendable assets and there’s plenty of cabin crew staff looking for work who can easily replace the militant union members at British Airways with no problem at all.
Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Contributed by a Member of the GLG Energy & Industrials Councils
If the cabin crew and union leadership are still intent on pushing for industrial action, their jobs are firmly on the line.
Analysis
In delivering the verdict from the High Court today, Mr Justice Sir Christopher Holland said today:
"If the new complements materially and fairly contribute to the preservation of British Airways and more importantly for present purposes job security and pay, how can I condemn the less than extreme changes as unreasonable?"
The union leadership has a straightforward choice:
Either silence their crowing for strike action and get on with the business of turning British Airways around, or continue down the path to oblivion by forcing industrial action.
The whole basis of the union arguments against British Airways’ changes has been obliterated and no legal justification exists to call for strike action.
From the very beginning of this sorry mess, the Unite union has systematically ignored the precarious financial position British Airways is in – without that being secured, job cuts are still a clear and present danger.
British Airways’ oneworld alliance partner, American Airlines too, is being held hostage to similar wage demands by the Transport Workers Union – both unions on both sides of the Atlantic are either too ignorant to understand the financial weakness both airlines have, or their sheer self-interest coated in stupidity blinds them from seeing how fragile the entire sector is.
Many transport industries have suffered in the wake of this financial recession and quite frankly these union members should be glad that they still have jobs to go to, despite the shift away from premium traffic amidst volatile passenger numbers.
The Unite union has been utterly embarrassed twice by the High Court.
If their leadership has learnt anything, they should stop their posturing and save their members’ jobs by telling them to get back to doing the job they’re paid for.
They are expendable assets and there’s plenty of cabin crew staff looking for work who can easily replace the militant union members at British Airways with no problem at all.
Analyses are solely the work of the authors and have not been edited or endorsed by GLG.
Contributed by a Member of the GLG Energy & Industrials Councils
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA Lose AGAIN?!??!!!
But...?......but....? Unless....we.....blame someone........reallyfast....people will realise that all along it's been US failing them.....US wasting their money, selling them false dreams of invincibility and embittering/poisoning them against their own work-colleagues, lying about MOST things, blocking ALL company progress, denying the need for obvious change, refusing to be held accountable when so clearly at criminal fault, openly risking THEIR careers and their futures for OUR OWN selfish and despicable preservation, just like we did with the bases, and with Gatwick, and of course we'll do with New Fleet.
Who can we blame??!.................................................... ..watch this space!
p.s. Why have most of the senior level BASSA reps been off 'sick' for so long?
BA Benefit fraud anyone? Oh, no, best not ask...our 'democratically' elected and financially PAID reps don't like questions of any kind. Do BALPA reps take payment (second salary from the Union coffers)? No, I didn't think so......so if the BASSA reps have been paid a generous rep's salary (on top of the generous BA salary) do the members have grounds for suing the reps for shoddy service?
Hilarious how BASSA tried to use Moo-Moo Malone and that other Sicknote as 'witnesses' to the huge, unmanageable and dangerous increase to the workload of the dreaded 'imposition'........seems they even lied to their defence lawyer about that one.....the Judge DID mention in his firm judgement against BASSA that NEITHER 'witnesses' had actually flown on a BA aircraft since the changes came in!!!!
What do they care?! Strike on!! The muppet membership will never ask and if they do, we'll lie, and any that STILL ask we'll persecute for being non-believers and have them 'disciplined' (which we like to deliberately let people think we CAN do, even though obviously we categorically CANNOT punish union members, but like, whatever, whilst the nose may be growing longer it just becomes a better tool to poke people with)
I hope BA sues the militant shirt off BASSA's militant back for what they've done and makes them pay back each and every Cabin Crew members' monthly subscriptions that they've taken in good faith and used to pay themselves handsomely and to bankroll the worst political party since the last labour government (which they ALSO funded).....how could you fund Gordon Brown's TV interview/crying on queue coaching with the money that should be earmarked for your Professional Industrial Representation?!?!?! 'KING LIBERTIES!!!!
Who can we blame??!.................................................... ..watch this space!
p.s. Why have most of the senior level BASSA reps been off 'sick' for so long?
BA Benefit fraud anyone? Oh, no, best not ask...our 'democratically' elected and financially PAID reps don't like questions of any kind. Do BALPA reps take payment (second salary from the Union coffers)? No, I didn't think so......so if the BASSA reps have been paid a generous rep's salary (on top of the generous BA salary) do the members have grounds for suing the reps for shoddy service?
Hilarious how BASSA tried to use Moo-Moo Malone and that other Sicknote as 'witnesses' to the huge, unmanageable and dangerous increase to the workload of the dreaded 'imposition'........seems they even lied to their defence lawyer about that one.....the Judge DID mention in his firm judgement against BASSA that NEITHER 'witnesses' had actually flown on a BA aircraft since the changes came in!!!!
What do they care?! Strike on!! The muppet membership will never ask and if they do, we'll lie, and any that STILL ask we'll persecute for being non-believers and have them 'disciplined' (which we like to deliberately let people think we CAN do, even though obviously we categorically CANNOT punish union members, but like, whatever, whilst the nose may be growing longer it just becomes a better tool to poke people with)
I hope BA sues the militant shirt off BASSA's militant back for what they've done and makes them pay back each and every Cabin Crew members' monthly subscriptions that they've taken in good faith and used to pay themselves handsomely and to bankroll the worst political party since the last labour government (which they ALSO funded).....how could you fund Gordon Brown's TV interview/crying on queue coaching with the money that should be earmarked for your Professional Industrial Representation?!?!?! 'KING LIBERTIES!!!!
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Though I've followed this for this and preceeding threads I've stayed out of it for numerous reasons.
This may be of interest
BBC Media Player
apparently it will be repeated at 22.25
This may be of interest
BBC Media Player
apparently it will be repeated at 22.25
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Sunny Berkshire
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Daily Mail...
A high-ranking aviation source close to the AEA meeting in the Belgian capital which Mr Walsh was chairing said: 'Willie Walsh made no bones about it. He told all the airline bosses at the meeting: "We now have 1,000 pilots who are going to train as cabin crew and act as crew on the flights".'
He also said he expected the strike would go ahead.
He also said he expected the strike would go ahead.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
flybymerchant - a very passionate post but oh so true!!
I am angry I have being paying my subs and well I just don't know. I feel they have failed the community.
You DAREN'T say that on Bassa forum or Crewforum though, or (god forbid) in person to one of these militants. When people have done people have quite literally pounced on them;
''How dare you, you are being disrespectful to our hard working reps''
''our reps work hard and put their neck on the line to protect sc*** like you''
''BASSA MOD please investigate this member and ban them from the forum.''
''You should be thrown out of BASSA''.
etc etc
Excuse me I should be thrown out of BASSA? Well I am paying MY money so it is my choice to remain in BASSA. It should be (some) of the reps that are thrown out for being a total disgrace and quite frankly leading us to the slaughter. I will say, I know there are probably some reps who are decent, and may even have (shock horror) more rational views. However the most senior ones who hold the power of BASSA have really messed this up.
Also think it is sad that Amicus/CC89 no longer have a voice. They have been swallowed up. Sounds to be they are more willing to look at ways rather than taking the ''No, I hate change I do'' mentality that BASSA has. Don't get me wrong I don't think anyone would want to completely tear up our contracts and rewrite them, but Amicus seem to be more rational (when they had a voice of their own!) When I joined I was led to believe BASSA was ''bigger and better'' and that we are oh so protected and they do wonders for the crew community that's why I joined.
Hats off they have held on to excellent t&c's for a long time. However we are now being led like lambs to the slaughter and the non-contractual changes to our crew complements have been brought about by BASSA not negotiating savvily, and bickering with Amicus reps (or so we are led to believe) What's worse, is will BA be forced to do 90 days notice to contractual changes??
Yes there are worries and concerns as we don't want our lifestyles, t&cs wiped away, however Unite should have savvily negotiated. I am not totally against a New Fleet - as long as an official agreement is made up to protect us and also to transfer work evenly/fairly. Not cherry pick the best routes. And also to only grow the fleet based on attrition/shortfalls so we (old fleet crew) are not on endless standby. And also ensure us current crew have promotion prospects. (Even if it is on New Fleet but make it attractive to us) BA were willing to discuss this grouping of routes but BASSA were not having any of it. Oh, except their lukewarm messy counter proposal, but after that it was no further concessions. Then bickering with Amicus reps. BA were forced to impose non-contractual changes. UNITE like a child not getting their way went nuts and balloted. Then the fiasco at Christmas which turned the public and media totally against us. Now we are here
I hope, hope, hope for everyone's sake BASSA/Unite pull their socks up, and there is no strike!
I am angry I have being paying my subs and well I just don't know. I feel they have failed the community.
You DAREN'T say that on Bassa forum or Crewforum though, or (god forbid) in person to one of these militants. When people have done people have quite literally pounced on them;
''How dare you, you are being disrespectful to our hard working reps''
''our reps work hard and put their neck on the line to protect sc*** like you''
''BASSA MOD please investigate this member and ban them from the forum.''
''You should be thrown out of BASSA''.
etc etc
Excuse me I should be thrown out of BASSA? Well I am paying MY money so it is my choice to remain in BASSA. It should be (some) of the reps that are thrown out for being a total disgrace and quite frankly leading us to the slaughter. I will say, I know there are probably some reps who are decent, and may even have (shock horror) more rational views. However the most senior ones who hold the power of BASSA have really messed this up.
Also think it is sad that Amicus/CC89 no longer have a voice. They have been swallowed up. Sounds to be they are more willing to look at ways rather than taking the ''No, I hate change I do'' mentality that BASSA has. Don't get me wrong I don't think anyone would want to completely tear up our contracts and rewrite them, but Amicus seem to be more rational (when they had a voice of their own!) When I joined I was led to believe BASSA was ''bigger and better'' and that we are oh so protected and they do wonders for the crew community that's why I joined.
Hats off they have held on to excellent t&c's for a long time. However we are now being led like lambs to the slaughter and the non-contractual changes to our crew complements have been brought about by BASSA not negotiating savvily, and bickering with Amicus reps (or so we are led to believe) What's worse, is will BA be forced to do 90 days notice to contractual changes??
Yes there are worries and concerns as we don't want our lifestyles, t&cs wiped away, however Unite should have savvily negotiated. I am not totally against a New Fleet - as long as an official agreement is made up to protect us and also to transfer work evenly/fairly. Not cherry pick the best routes. And also to only grow the fleet based on attrition/shortfalls so we (old fleet crew) are not on endless standby. And also ensure us current crew have promotion prospects. (Even if it is on New Fleet but make it attractive to us) BA were willing to discuss this grouping of routes but BASSA were not having any of it. Oh, except their lukewarm messy counter proposal, but after that it was no further concessions. Then bickering with Amicus reps. BA were forced to impose non-contractual changes. UNITE like a child not getting their way went nuts and balloted. Then the fiasco at Christmas which turned the public and media totally against us. Now we are here
I hope, hope, hope for everyone's sake BASSA/Unite pull their socks up, and there is no strike!
I hope, hope, hope for everyone's sake BASSA/Unite pull their socks up, and there is no strike!
As I see it the only way a strike will be avoided is if BASSA/Unite have the awareness to step outside the bubble generated by their rhetoric, become aware of the mess they've got themselves into, and perform a complete climb down ( with perhaps the senior Unite people trying to produce some sort of face saving deal with BA for the BASSA reps). However BA must now be sensing blood and I certainly don't see them rushing to compromise.
Basically short of a revolution at the palace, or senior Unite leaders pulling the plug on the BASSA Reps, I reckon the strike will happen.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree - it will happen through sheer momentum. I think BA will now deliberately destroy the union, break the strike, and issue P45s to anyone who does not turn up to work when scheduled to do so or sign a new contract.
And why wouldn't they? Drag compensation claims through the court, and sure, they might pay out a few million, but it will save them more in the long run and they will be without BASSA/Unite forever more.
They have issued an intention notice to the government to terminate a large number of people, and will validly ask everyone to sign a new contract, with a new disruption agreement to boot, while they have a huge number of temps able to step into the role.
It all seems too easy...thanks to Unite...
It could have been so different. What a shower.
And why wouldn't they? Drag compensation claims through the court, and sure, they might pay out a few million, but it will save them more in the long run and they will be without BASSA/Unite forever more.
They have issued an intention notice to the government to terminate a large number of people, and will validly ask everyone to sign a new contract, with a new disruption agreement to boot, while they have a huge number of temps able to step into the role.
It all seems too easy...thanks to Unite...
It could have been so different. What a shower.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time is running out for the unions - and the Labour Party
I note that there are 74 days until Thursday, 5 May 2010: a probable date for a UK general election.
Following their spiteful and destructive actions over the last few months, BA cabin crew and their BASSA union are about as popular as poison in this country.
Highly publicised industrial action by British Airways' cabin crew is the very last thing in the world that Gordon Brown needs if he wants to renew his lease on 10 Downing Street for another five years.
I can see extreme political pressure being placed on each and every union faction to prevent any enforced eviction that might be caused (in no small part) by BASSA/Amicus/Unite stupidity and selfishness.
Following their spiteful and destructive actions over the last few months, BA cabin crew and their BASSA union are about as popular as poison in this country.
Highly publicised industrial action by British Airways' cabin crew is the very last thing in the world that Gordon Brown needs if he wants to renew his lease on 10 Downing Street for another five years.
I can see extreme political pressure being placed on each and every union faction to prevent any enforced eviction that might be caused (in no small part) by BASSA/Amicus/Unite stupidity and selfishness.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Here is somethin from Unite tonight:
I wasn't shocked about the cort ruling, but Im shocked at that statement (above). Im startin to think Unite has been taken over by aliens from annother plannet.
As you will now be aware, today's High Court ruling was not in our favour
and as a result, the Judge did not grant the permanent injunction we
sought. However, our case is far from over. This was simply `round one'.
Our legal team are intent on proving that the crewing level aspect of our
agreement does indeed form part of our contract of employment. To that
end - we are now taking advice from them about the next stage.
Win or lose today - there was ALWAYS going to be a round two - and the
parties were always going to be the same. This is simply the FIRST and
necessary step in our legal battle, in addition to, but entirely separate
from, your right to respond to these impositions in the current ballot -
due to close on Monday.
There are some extremely positive points that you must bear in mind before
you form any erroneous conclusions - especially those proffered by the
media and any predictable company spin.
The Judge did not call our case "nonsense" and certainly did not "throw it
out".
Significantly, Judge Christopher Holland, having delivered his judgment in
person this morning, conversely conceded that he may actually be wrong
about some aspects of his ruling - and that we may wish to appeal. It is
extremely unusual for a trial Judge to grant leave to appeal his own
ruling, but not only did he grant it - he granted `expedited' leave to
appeal, RIGHT THERE and RIGHT THEN! Neither, interestingly, did he award
British Airways costs.
In addition, the Judge was sympathetic in his ruling about the factual
issues of our case. He found and accepts that flying with less crewmembers
means more arduous work for crew and increased stress, exhaustion and
frustration. British Airways cannot appeal such a finding - and therefore
have to live with this fact - having previously tried to mitigate and
play-down the extra workload you now have.
We have strong grounds for appeal on several other legal points - one in
particular which was hardly even addressed in Judge Holland's ruling. Our
legal team are confident about our appeal - and are already busy drafting
the main grounds. In addition, having been granted leave to appeal on two
specific legal points - Mr Hendy QC is seeking to expand our appeal to a
third significant legal point - which can only strengthen our position.
Since we have been granted special `expedited' status, we are anticipating
a hearing date between March and May 2010.
In the meantime, talks with British Airways continue in to next week at
the TUC. We shall of course update you of our progress.
and as a result, the Judge did not grant the permanent injunction we
sought. However, our case is far from over. This was simply `round one'.
Our legal team are intent on proving that the crewing level aspect of our
agreement does indeed form part of our contract of employment. To that
end - we are now taking advice from them about the next stage.
Win or lose today - there was ALWAYS going to be a round two - and the
parties were always going to be the same. This is simply the FIRST and
necessary step in our legal battle, in addition to, but entirely separate
from, your right to respond to these impositions in the current ballot -
due to close on Monday.
There are some extremely positive points that you must bear in mind before
you form any erroneous conclusions - especially those proffered by the
media and any predictable company spin.
The Judge did not call our case "nonsense" and certainly did not "throw it
out".
Significantly, Judge Christopher Holland, having delivered his judgment in
person this morning, conversely conceded that he may actually be wrong
about some aspects of his ruling - and that we may wish to appeal. It is
extremely unusual for a trial Judge to grant leave to appeal his own
ruling, but not only did he grant it - he granted `expedited' leave to
appeal, RIGHT THERE and RIGHT THEN! Neither, interestingly, did he award
British Airways costs.
In addition, the Judge was sympathetic in his ruling about the factual
issues of our case. He found and accepts that flying with less crewmembers
means more arduous work for crew and increased stress, exhaustion and
frustration. British Airways cannot appeal such a finding - and therefore
have to live with this fact - having previously tried to mitigate and
play-down the extra workload you now have.
We have strong grounds for appeal on several other legal points - one in
particular which was hardly even addressed in Judge Holland's ruling. Our
legal team are confident about our appeal - and are already busy drafting
the main grounds. In addition, having been granted leave to appeal on two
specific legal points - Mr Hendy QC is seeking to expand our appeal to a
third significant legal point - which can only strengthen our position.
Since we have been granted special `expedited' status, we are anticipating
a hearing date between March and May 2010.
In the meantime, talks with British Airways continue in to next week at
the TUC. We shall of course update you of our progress.
I wasn't shocked about the cort ruling, but Im shocked at that statement (above). Im startin to think Unite has been taken over by aliens from annother plannet.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: london
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Age: 18
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well surprise surprise, Mr Hendy QC and his team, who have just trousered a cool £million for failing miserably, think there is a good case for an appeal and of course another earner. Unite had better hope that the case is better than the original one or there will be another £million flushed down the legal toilet
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A flyer that has been posted on the Professional Cabin Crew Council website for a couple of weeks states:
We are cabin crew who can see that the new crew complements are not at all bad, and they have not affected us personally.
We are cabin crew who can recognise that in the current economic climate, a deal that does not reduce our pay in any way is actually a good one.
You can see the full version of the flyer here: www.professionalcrewcouncil.com
In delivering the verdict from the High Court, Mr Justice Sir Christopher Holland said:
"If the new complements materially and fairly contribute to the preservation of British Airways and more importantly for present purposes job security and pay, how can I condemn the less than extreme changes as unreasonable?"
The High Court verdict has therefore confirmed what the PCCC has been saying all along: The changes that BA has made are reasonable. We hope that every cabin crew member can now see the desperate and urgent need for a much-needed change to the way Industrial Relations is conducted at BA.
It’s time for each and every BA cabin crew member to take a long hard look at the facts in this case and to realise that Unite are leading BA cabin crew towards a very dangerous finale. Unite are leading our crew community to certain catastrophe; we must not allow it to happen. We will be there crossing the picket line. We strongly urge each and every single cabin crew member to join us to prevent this catastrophe happening.
We are cabin crew who can see that the new crew complements are not at all bad, and they have not affected us personally.
We are cabin crew who can recognise that in the current economic climate, a deal that does not reduce our pay in any way is actually a good one.
You can see the full version of the flyer here: www.professionalcrewcouncil.com
In delivering the verdict from the High Court, Mr Justice Sir Christopher Holland said:
"If the new complements materially and fairly contribute to the preservation of British Airways and more importantly for present purposes job security and pay, how can I condemn the less than extreme changes as unreasonable?"
The High Court verdict has therefore confirmed what the PCCC has been saying all along: The changes that BA has made are reasonable. We hope that every cabin crew member can now see the desperate and urgent need for a much-needed change to the way Industrial Relations is conducted at BA.
It’s time for each and every BA cabin crew member to take a long hard look at the facts in this case and to realise that Unite are leading BA cabin crew towards a very dangerous finale. Unite are leading our crew community to certain catastrophe; we must not allow it to happen. We will be there crossing the picket line. We strongly urge each and every single cabin crew member to join us to prevent this catastrophe happening.