British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: motorway services
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It looks to me as if Unite have taken the judgement, misunderstood some of the wording and then put their own spin on it for their members.
As Bill of the Hamptons says, the Unite legal team recognise a good earner when they see one and so they are more than happy if Unite appeal.
It's worth reading the Judge's words again:
There is no point in flogging a dead horse.
As Bill of the Hamptons says, the Unite legal team recognise a good earner when they see one and so they are more than happy if Unite appeal.
It's worth reading the Judge's words again:
how can I condemn the less than extreme changes as unreasonable?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 76
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pccc Members On Bbc Tv London Friday
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in a house
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slidebustle
I hope, hope, hope for everyone's sake BASSA/Unite pull their socks up, and there is no strike!
Willie Walsh has said it himself - he expects a strike.
(was it also you who said "like lambs to the slaughter?) the problem appears to lie with long standing reps who have no other strategy than saying 'NO!'
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The cost of intransigence
The unions' legal costs for the most recent (failed) action in the High Court have been estimated at somewhere north of £1,200,000. I suppose that a similar drain on the unions' assets for each of the two previous actions conducted last year can be assumed. Let's be charitable, and make that a round three million pounds in total.
Mercifully for BASSA and CC89 subscription payers, BA did not claim its costs in the earlier court cases, but it could well do so for the case that ended yesterday. Again, let us mitigate and estimate those costs on the (very) low side at a further £3,000,000.
So BASSA and CC89 between them have incurred a potential liability of at least six million pounds for Lala Malone's intransigence, vanity and stupidity.
I do not take into account intangible losses, such as loss of credibility, both among the public at large and in the trades unions community. Let's face it: would any person with a scintilla of common sense or intelligence ever pay heed to BASSA's chairman and directing force now or in the future?
My question are these: if BASSA, CC89 and their backers Unite and/or Amicus are forced to pay British Airways' legal costs - and it is entire possible that Willie Walsh will claim for every last penny, having won at every legal step - where will the money come from and what will be the consequences for BASSA/CC89?
I can see the action moving around the corner from the High Court in the Strand to the Bankruptcy Courts in Carey Street.
The ultimate people to pay will, of course, be BA cabin crew, who have their monthly union dues lifted from their pay packets.
Lala Malone and the rest of the cabin crews' union leaders will evade any personal liability, of course.
Mercifully for BASSA and CC89 subscription payers, BA did not claim its costs in the earlier court cases, but it could well do so for the case that ended yesterday. Again, let us mitigate and estimate those costs on the (very) low side at a further £3,000,000.
So BASSA and CC89 between them have incurred a potential liability of at least six million pounds for Lala Malone's intransigence, vanity and stupidity.
I do not take into account intangible losses, such as loss of credibility, both among the public at large and in the trades unions community. Let's face it: would any person with a scintilla of common sense or intelligence ever pay heed to BASSA's chairman and directing force now or in the future?
My question are these: if BASSA, CC89 and their backers Unite and/or Amicus are forced to pay British Airways' legal costs - and it is entire possible that Willie Walsh will claim for every last penny, having won at every legal step - where will the money come from and what will be the consequences for BASSA/CC89?
I can see the action moving around the corner from the High Court in the Strand to the Bankruptcy Courts in Carey Street.
The ultimate people to pay will, of course, be BA cabin crew, who have their monthly union dues lifted from their pay packets.
Lala Malone and the rest of the cabin crews' union leaders will evade any personal liability, of course.
Last edited by Chuchinchow; 20th Feb 2010 at 17:08. Reason: Last sentence: "escape" replaced by "evade".
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 45
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
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
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South of MAN, North of BHX, and well clear of Stoke ;-)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Slidebustle, Why don't you leave BASSA?
UNITE's response is mindblowingly naive and beligerent to the bitter end.
If I were Willie Walsh, I'd use the prospect of going for costs as a silver bullet in these last gasp negotiations towards an agreeable settlement; no concessions, no willingness to engage in negotiation, then go for the BASSA jugular and bankrupt them.
Not to be forgotten also is the fact the union yet again managed to send ballot papers out to long-retired/moved on ex-staff, some of which I know for fact were mailed on to BA for them to use as they see fit; can UNITE honestly try once again for IA with a likely 2nd injunction and 3rd court defeat as a distinct possibility?
Last edited by StoneyBridge Radar; 20th Feb 2010 at 08:16.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UNITE/BASSA (which ironically is an anagram of Abuse Stain!) claim they are going to appeal, which could incur further costs, but to be reasonable, let's take the six million figure and divide it into, what, 10,000 to round it up?
They've probably already wasted (should BA rightly ask for costs) 600 pounds of each of their members money. That's more than three years of subs down the drain. Think what good BASSA could have done with that money. They could have had a relief fund for bereaved or sick members and their families. They could have set up an emergency fund to help out members with unforeseen downroute problems.
But no, they're too busy lining their own pockets and defending their own ludicrous, self-serving rewards.
So how do we interpret their words thus:
Given this, and their other panicked reminders about voting for strike action, one assumes they are already aware that (a) support for a strike - as opposed to ticking a box saying you support it - is going to be negligible, especially if BA do EXACTLY WHAT THEY SAID and remove Staff Travel from strikers PERMANENTLY; and (b) given their previous track record, BA will probably find it easy to block any strike action anyway.
So this could well be softening up process. Prepare for a significant drop in support for strike action, and even if there is a majority, prepare for a massive no-show on strike day. (And prepare for BA and disillusioned BASSA members asking why the reps aren't there on the picket line).
And, of course, one wonders if BA have had quiet word in McLuskey's ear (when he can keep his machismo-spouting mouth shut) with regards the issue of the costs, something along the lines of "You call strike action and we go for the throat". I wonder how successful McLuskey's bid for UNITE "foreman's" job will be when they find out he's thrown away millions of his comrade's money on a dispute that doesn't even affect most of them.
WatersideWonker (who probably never had any intention of standing on a picket line and losing staff travel) and the other "loosers" have gone very, very quiet. One would hope they are starting to see the light.
Good to see the PCCC getting more publicity, I can only hope that those that previously followed the BASSA line, and are starting to see how they are being used, at least ask for themselves what the PCCC can offer them.
As far as I can see it offers the opportunity to be represented by your colleagues as opposed to being led up the ramp by the Judas Sheep.
They've probably already wasted (should BA rightly ask for costs) 600 pounds of each of their members money. That's more than three years of subs down the drain. Think what good BASSA could have done with that money. They could have had a relief fund for bereaved or sick members and their families. They could have set up an emergency fund to help out members with unforeseen downroute problems.
But no, they're too busy lining their own pockets and defending their own ludicrous, self-serving rewards.
So how do we interpret their words thus:
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.
So this could well be softening up process. Prepare for a significant drop in support for strike action, and even if there is a majority, prepare for a massive no-show on strike day. (And prepare for BA and disillusioned BASSA members asking why the reps aren't there on the picket line).
And, of course, one wonders if BA have had quiet word in McLuskey's ear (when he can keep his machismo-spouting mouth shut) with regards the issue of the costs, something along the lines of "You call strike action and we go for the throat". I wonder how successful McLuskey's bid for UNITE "foreman's" job will be when they find out he's thrown away millions of his comrade's money on a dispute that doesn't even affect most of them.
WatersideWonker (who probably never had any intention of standing on a picket line and losing staff travel) and the other "loosers" have gone very, very quiet. One would hope they are starting to see the light.
Good to see the PCCC getting more publicity, I can only hope that those that previously followed the BASSA line, and are starting to see how they are being used, at least ask for themselves what the PCCC can offer them.
As far as I can see it offers the opportunity to be represented by your colleagues as opposed to being led up the ramp by the Judas Sheep.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 724
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not at all surprised that Unite do not understand that leave to appeal is typical in most cases, and not an indication that the judge thinks he is wrong, or some other complete tosh!
Is this the only place where people actually have the freedom to point out these highly misleading, political statements for what they are?
Is this the only place where people actually have the freedom to point out these highly misleading, political statements for what they are?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hot Wings
Comments on the crew bus yesterday were along the lines of a corrupt judge and a corrupt system delivering a corrupt verdict. Talk about burying heads in the sand!!!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roll Call
Watersidewonker - ABSENT
A Lurker - ABSENT
MissM - ABSENT
[Other erstwhile BASSA apologists are also NOT available.]
Is there ANYONE who previously trumpeted their support for the unions, and who gleefully prophesied doom for WW and BA, who is prepared to offer any sort of comment on recent and/or current events in the BA cabin crew dispute?
A Lurker - ABSENT
MissM - ABSENT
[Other erstwhile BASSA apologists are also NOT available.]
Is there ANYONE who previously trumpeted their support for the unions, and who gleefully prophesied doom for WW and BA, who is prepared to offer any sort of comment on recent and/or current events in the BA cabin crew dispute?
Comments on the crew bus yesterday were along the lines of a corrupt judge and a corrupt system delivering a corrupt verdict. Talk about burying heads in the sand!!!
There's no chance of the "revolution at the palace", where the Reps are forced from office by the line members, and BA management cannot work with the current senior BASSA Reps.
It's going to be very ugly.
Last edited by wiggy; 20th Feb 2010 at 09:58.
The Unite response to the judgement, posted by bitsnpieces in post #801 above contains this bald, but economical, statement:
Not yet, he hasn't!!!!!
This is merely another twisting of the truth, which is a common factor in Unite/BASSA 'communications'. What actually happened (and this is from a source in the court when the judgment was announced) is that BA's legal team asked for an interim and immediate payment of some of its substantial costs, based on the judgement being in favour of BA. Because Unite submitted appeals, the judge decided to 'stay' (delay awarding) the costs, thereby keeping them 'in the case' ('stayed' until any appeal, or denial of the appeal). The judge did remark that if the appeal was not awarded, or if the appeal was not expedited, then BA might be some time waiting for it's costs to be recovered. So, the judge has not dismissd costs, but is merely waiting to see if the appeal has any merit and/or will be expedited.
If the appeal is denied, or fails, BA will almost certainly get its costs from then case so far, plus any costs incurred for the appeal. Unite's £1.2 million bill for this case is going to go stratospheric when BA's costs are added, but Unite doesn't want that known by all and sundry, does it?
Neither, interestingly, did he award British Airways costs.
This is merely another twisting of the truth, which is a common factor in Unite/BASSA 'communications'. What actually happened (and this is from a source in the court when the judgment was announced) is that BA's legal team asked for an interim and immediate payment of some of its substantial costs, based on the judgement being in favour of BA. Because Unite submitted appeals, the judge decided to 'stay' (delay awarding) the costs, thereby keeping them 'in the case' ('stayed' until any appeal, or denial of the appeal). The judge did remark that if the appeal was not awarded, or if the appeal was not expedited, then BA might be some time waiting for it's costs to be recovered. So, the judge has not dismissd costs, but is merely waiting to see if the appeal has any merit and/or will be expedited.
If the appeal is denied, or fails, BA will almost certainly get its costs from then case so far, plus any costs incurred for the appeal. Unite's £1.2 million bill for this case is going to go stratospheric when BA's costs are added, but Unite doesn't want that known by all and sundry, does it?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Barking
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lala Malone and the rest of the cabin crews' union leaders will evade any personal liability, of course.
The two questions which should really count are these:
1. Can "Malone and others" afford to cover BA's costs, both legal and losses incurred due to any associated action?
2. If not, will UNITE pay the bill for them?
If I were "Malone and others", I'd be feeling extremely vulnerable at the moment.
Last edited by Dave Bloke; 20th Feb 2010 at 17:31. Reason: To reflect minor change to original quote.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When Unite tried to obtain an injunction to stop the crew changes, I think they told the court they had assets of about £170million of thereabouts (and presumably not all of that is in cash).
So Unite has spent £1.2m on this case. It will be on the hook for at least £2m+ of BA's legal costs. Then there is the money they've spent in their previous two court appearances. Plus the money they will have to spend on paying strikers and what they've spent on racecourse venues etc.
Is Unite really going to fund another appeal on this case?
So Unite has spent £1.2m on this case. It will be on the hook for at least £2m+ of BA's legal costs. Then there is the money they've spent in their previous two court appearances. Plus the money they will have to spend on paying strikers and what they've spent on racecourse venues etc.
Is Unite really going to fund another appeal on this case?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was wondring if people from other area's of Unite is upset with the cost and stuff with the Bassa cort case? I dont think I would like it if my union fee got higher becose of this.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is left?
One question. Now that we have read this ruling and the changes are deemed justified and necessary, what is the upcoming strike about? Seriously. I am not kidding. Does anybody know? (Preferably a pro-strike BA employee)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bitsnpieces
I would like to think that if it happened to me, Unite would spend the same, so I can't be upset about the money spent.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
henkybaby
Sorry for not meeting your preference.