British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI

[Andy_S]

Originally Posted by Snas

I can see this being resolved in a day or two with something as wet as BA saying that they won’t impose anything else and we wont force existing crew onto new fleet

The problem that BA will be left with is that the CC will retain their deeply ingrained perception that BA will always back down in the face of a 'Yes' vote for industrial action. They'll be all too willing to respond the next time that BASSA feels like picking a fight.

[pvmw]

The problem that BA will be left with is that the CC will retain their deeply ingrained perception that BA will always back down in the face of a 'Yes' vote for industrial action. They'll be all too willing to respond the next time that BASSA feels like picking a fight.

Agreed. The only sensible solution for BA is to take this opportunity to completely destroy BASSA. If they don't take this opportunity, this scenario will simply continue to erupt every couple of years.

It is quite obvious to the disinterested observer - and as an EX customer I am just that - that BASSA have absolutely no interest in the future of BA, as long as the dinosaurs have their gravy train. BA cannot survive long tem with the millstone that is BASSA round their necks. I just find it beyond rational belief that the CC can't see it either.

[nurjio]

..but BASSA have, over the recent months, since the unveiling of Columbus, peddled the spin (big time) that their member's entire T&C structure is the target for the CEO. The members bought into the 'tittle tattle' - Galley FM - anti-BA rhetoric, believing that their reps would uphold all of their best interests - I believe a ballot on imposition to be nothing more than a euphemism. Unwittingly, and through sheer industrial relations incompetence, BASSA has hastened the delivery of the final assault. The City's mandate to Mr Walsh is to remove the threat of future BASSA intransigence. Mr Walsh is about to deliver, IMHO.

BASSA members, please ask some tough Q's tomorrow at the Kempton Karnival.

Nurj

[JayPee28bpr]

nurjio #1313

The City's mandate to Mr Walsh is to remove the threat of future BASSA intransigence.

It might, de facto, have become this, but investors rarely get involved directly in political or politically-inspired IR.

What investors really want is some comfort that BA is going to sweat assets more. BA needs to refresh its ageing (and hence high maintenance), gas-guzzling fleet. The people it needs to finance this want to see better utilisation rates. If you read the posts on here about how few hours cabin crew seem to work relative to what regulations allow them to work, it suggests either that the planes aren't in the air enough, or that it takes far more crew in total to keep each plane in the air over the course of a year. Either way, it suggests the operating profit/cash flow per plane is likely to be lower at BA than elsewhere. That is not attractive to potential investors.

If "BASSA's intransigence" is seen as preventing BA improving its operational gearing, then investors will want to see BASSA's influence reined in. However, you would be wrong to think this is an objective in itself for investors. They couldn't care less about IR procedures so long as their investment delivers the returns expected. I suspect Willie Walsh had no BASSA-busting agenda 12 months ago either, though I would be less sure about that now.

[strikemaster82]

nurj

the spin (big time) that their member's entire T&C structure is the target for the CEO

If it wasn't the target before (well maybe not a short-term one) then WW must be delighted as he has been handed everything on a plate!

Hence no strike announcement yet, as a low-wattage bulb appears to be glimmering at BASSA HQ!

[nurjio]

JP.. Your explanation/interpretation is welcomed over and above my 'simplistic', view.

Nurj

[Basil]

please ask some tough Q's tomorrow at the Kempton Karnival.

From personal experience I'd have a few well briefed rottweilers on the front row backed up by some pit bulls who don't mind a laying on of hands.
If you are prevented from making a point which is contrary to the party line - well, take it from there.
I was once one of the pit bulls - following slight initial resistance we had our say

[Papillon]

JP.. Your explanation/interpretation is welcomed over and above my 'simplistic', view.

By everybody, hopefully. An excellent analysis.

[JazzyKex]

There are still crew who I chat to who have been working for BA for many years who say "I cannot work for 15,000 per year!", when asked about their reason for voting yes.

When I ask when has anyone said that's what you will be paid they say ANY imposition is just the thin end of the wedge...now one crew member off, next drastic cuts in pay!

It seems that if the current situation continues and BA do invoke SOSR and new contracts for strikers/all crew their expectations may come true...I cannot imagine then that they will consider that the fault of BASSA. It will still be the management to blame. Would that lead to more or less support for even a defunct union?

[Setubal146]

Will BASSA announce strike dates tomorrow or do they plan to leverage ongoing negotiations with the threat of strike action hanging over BA management?

[dave747436]

To paraphrase a rather highbrow thread on the BALPA forum...

The City will expect us to have a firm Willie, going forward.

Much sage agreement that now, indeed, is not a time for our Willie to go prematurely soft.

Amen to that, I say.

[midman]

It's an ever weakening stance not to declare the start of industrial action.

Bassa know they've got weak support for the strike (the percentages are irrelevant as voting Yes was thought by many to be the end in itself) and BA know they know that. Any delay just reinforces to BA that Bassa haven't the nerve to follow through as it's going to lead to their destruction.

It needs some strong heads to stand up at Kempton and tell Bassa to back down, if they want Bassa to survive.

For the good of the company and cabin crew long term, it's probably better if they don't. That would then allow the PCC to take its members forward into the 'New Fleeted' future.

[binsleepen]

Hi with regard to the following from JP28;

If you read the posts on here about how few hours cabin crew seem to work relative to what regulations allow them to work, it suggests either that the planes aren't in the air enough, or that it takes far more crew in total to keep each plane in the air over the course of a year. Either way, it suggests the operating profit/cash flow per plane is likely to be lower at BA than elsewhere. That is not attractive to potential investors.

Could someone explain why for example: if the flight deck crew can do a 3 sector day with a night stop followed by a 3 sector day the following day the CC don't as well. Surely a "CREW" should be constituted at the start of the work period and fly together until the end of the work period. On the face of it, it seems wasteful and extravagant to have any other system. I realise that this only applies to the shorter haul routes

BA also seems to have very long turn round time at base and at the end of the day if the aircraft is sitting on the ground it's not earning money.


Regards

[Litebulbs]

midman

Im sorry, but the comment about weak support just doesn't sit as and different to the rhetoric that so many here quote Unite on. Well over 7000 crew is not a weak position.

This is just a sense of balance post.

[midman]

Litebulbs, I realise that but I understand there's a difference between the rhetoric and reality.

Especially in the Unite HQ.

[52049er]

Could someone explain why for example: if the flight deck crew can do a 3 sector day with a night stop followed by a 3 sector day the following day the CC don't as well

They have an industrial agreement to have a 2 1/2 hour minimum turnaround at main base (LHR). This goes back to the days of long coach journeys to canteens to ensure a hot meal could be taken during a day. On those occasions when not enough time was available to get to the canteen outside the perimeter of Heathrow, a CAT (Central Area Turnaround) payment was paid - though the 'CAT Lounge' (situated airside in T1) was a fully functioning cafe/TV lounge in its own right.... The CAT payments are still made for 'short' (<2.5hr though never less than 90 mins I think) turnarounds despite crew never needing to leave T5 - I'll leave it to you to decide whether that is still appropriate...

The Flight Crew gave up all those agreements years ago and now can do minimum time (usually 40 mins at LHR, less at LGW) turnarounds whilst staying on the same aircraft. The CC obviously needs to be changed at every LHR turn which, as you say, adds hugely to the operational complexity.

[Sporran]

Just had an interesting discussion with my father-in-law regarding how WW will react to a strike. My f-in-law was the boss of a big works back in the 70s when there was a complete impasse, with the union making impossible demands. The union elected to go for a series of strikes, lasting 10 days or less.

After each 'strike' period the strikers were told not to bother coming to work because there strike action had caused so much hassle....... and of course your lack of working is directly due to your strike action and so you will not get paid for that time.

The strike went: 10 days strike, 10 days not being paid, a few days work, a few days strike, the same number of days not being paid .......... end of strike and end of that bunch of union reps.

With the large number of volunteers that WW has got at his disposal I think this tactic would be very successful. If cabin crew withdraw their labour and the company puts plans in place to run a service, then any accommodation of the cabin crew coming back to work for a few days (before their next strike) would be counter productive for the company.

It seem a much better way, to do as my father-in-laws company did, and inform strikers that due to their striking there was no work for them at the end of whatever length of period the had been on strike for. This would obviously be completely true since the additional effort to go 'back to normal' would rapidly be be undone during the next period of strike.

More than ever I believe that WW and the company have this situation well thought out.

Question. Do bassa members have a case to individually sue bassa reps for negligence, especially in view of the court transcript clearly debunking so much of the pre-ballot lies??

[Snas]

Iwo Jima

Just for your interest - I'm happy to note that the Unite web site has dropped the Iwo Jima image. Still on the BASSA site however.

[3Greens]

BA are still rostering courses for volunteer crew upto and including March 29th.
They have invested a massive amount in training thousands of volunteers as well as several famil flights on a 777 to Cardiff this week alone. I doubt BA would waste this sort of cash if they were going to capitulate.

It will be an interesting meeting at Kempton tommorow, if strike dates are announced then BA are VERY VERY well prepared. I believe BA will dismiss those that fail to show up for work on day 1 and drag it out through the courts for years.
BASSA need an exit strategy and retreat with their tails between their legs to fight another day. Will the hardliners let them?

[wascrew]

other sites

Snas as you seem to have access to the `other sites`
If it is allowed are you in a position to report back on whether any of what i see as a consensus here that BA and WW will win this and they might end up either sacked or given the 90 day SOSR has beeen discussed or debated?
Hardly likely that someone will question the union on Thursday if no-one has on the forums yet.