British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI
WWW
If only the same kind of support could be seen within BA against union bashing
????You're not getting support from the pilots, in fact you're going to be actively undermined, because BASSA's Reps have spent years trying to deliberately antagonise Flight Crew.
Enjoy your meeting, you'd better make the most of it.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiggy
See my previous post! I think your tantrum is not helping things .... There are moderates in the ranks that I´ve not seen on here for some time (myself included) and I wonder why?!
See my previous post! I think your tantrum is not helping things .... There are moderates in the ranks that I´ve not seen on here for some time (myself included) and I wonder why?!
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: About to join the A1, UK
Posts: 213
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Blinking
My hunch is that Willie has been training in the art of not blinking. His moment is here.
Given the wealth of documented evidence now stacked up proving BASSA's negotiating ineptitude, will any one stand up at the KK tomorrow and propose a vote of no confidence in Lizanne Malone?
Nurj
Given the wealth of documented evidence now stacked up proving BASSA's negotiating ineptitude, will any one stand up at the KK tomorrow and propose a vote of no confidence in Lizanne Malone?
Nurj
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Age: 49
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have been spending the last few days speaking to a few people who went out on strike in 1997. Someone said that in 1997 BA wanted to sack the strikers, but a legal loophole was found and so the strikers were re-instated.
Can anyone tell me exactly what that loophole was (if it existed)? The people I spoke to did not know -seems BASSA dealt with it.
And if there was a loophole, has it been closed since then? I think this information could prove influencial to people going on strike.
Any information would be appreciated, can't provide any more detailed info as I don't have anything more.
AD
Can anyone tell me exactly what that loophole was (if it existed)? The people I spoke to did not know -seems BASSA dealt with it.
And if there was a loophole, has it been closed since then? I think this information could prove influencial to people going on strike.
Any information would be appreciated, can't provide any more detailed info as I don't have anything more.
AD
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
binsleepin
Having just come in from a 2 day trip, 3 sectors both days I feel obliged to tell you that WE DO!! What we do is change Flight crew because, in this case, I fly Airbus and Boeings but they do not!
Sorry its taken so long for a real cabin crew member to answer your question, you seem to have scared most of them off. Got a 12 hour day tomorrow so I'll leave you all to your debate.
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
I realise that this only applies to the shorter haul routes
Sorry its taken so long for a real cabin crew member to answer your question, you seem to have scared most of them off. Got a 12 hour day tomorrow so I'll leave you all to your debate.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bassa forum nonsense...
WWW, if your 'story' is true about the Lufthansa Pilot's Union, funny that by highlighting a couple of lines from your post and pasting them into google finds NOTHING. You want to know why this is? Because the story is made up. It's on the BASSA forum and is completely fabricated. Unless of course you can provide a source?? No, thought not. Don't even try 'Reuters' as someone has tagged onto the end of their post there. Reuters funnily enough has no news story of a sort! Try their website....
A direct cut and paste from the said post, where on both here and the BASSA forum, Lufthansa and Association are both spelt wrong. Not to mention the incorrect spelling of 'enployees'
Also:
No such person. Try it in Google if you like.
Pathetic BASSA flight crew hate generation once again.
NEXT!
Lufhansa pilots union the Cockpit Associaton
Also:
Cockpit Association spokesman Jorge Huereds
Pathetic BASSA flight crew hate generation once again.
NEXT!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atlas
Have been spending the last few days speaking to a few people who went out on strike in 1997. Someone said that in 1997 BA wanted to sack the strikers, but a legal loophole was found and so the strikers were re-instated.
Employment tribunals can make such an order (they did it 7 times last year out of 151,000 cases) but employers can ignore it leaving the tribunal the ability to award additional compensation as a result.
24-06
Tantrum - nope, a bit too old for one of those. I'd suggest if you (or WWW) ask many of the pilot volunteers why they answered the call, one reason will be the drip, drip, drip, of anti BALPA/anti pilot comments that have originated from BASSA HQ over a very long period of time. Now this may well have not been done with the agreement of moderate Cabin Crew such as those who have recently posted here, but no one in the BASSA rank and file seems to have wanted to put a stop to it.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Age: 49
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As EF crew myself, thought I would back up ottergirl with ref to the EF rostering. I have done lots of two day six sector days and equally three day eight sector days and these are fairly long days (sometimes about 11hours).
But there are, some equally strange rostered trips such as one sector out to BRU early a.m, all day there and one back the next morning. I believe, and so do many others that this is an area that should be looked at. I am not sure even why these such trips are rostered (nice as they are - even though i rarely get them!) as the EF agreement is not that restrictive that a couple of sectors could be tagged on the end. Or am I missing something here? Exactly which parts of the scheduling agreements stop this?
But there are, some equally strange rostered trips such as one sector out to BRU early a.m, all day there and one back the next morning. I believe, and so do many others that this is an area that should be looked at. I am not sure even why these such trips are rostered (nice as they are - even though i rarely get them!) as the EF agreement is not that restrictive that a couple of sectors could be tagged on the end. Or am I missing something here? Exactly which parts of the scheduling agreements stop this?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Atlas
This is very difficult to answer.
My 'understanding' is that if the strike is deemed protected (ie wholly legal and induced by the union) then BA cannot sack strikers within 12 weeks of the strike.
However, and i'm sure BA know the legal angle inside out, its very murky as to whether or not this strike will be protected based on the fact that its about imposition which the high-court has now deemed non-contractual.
As you can see its a very fine line. I wouldn't like to say with any confidence either way if its a tactic BA will enforce.
If its not a protected strike then they can sack strikers immediately. They can still claim unfair dismissal but if this is the case, its unlikely ANY compensation will be offered and nor will BA be 'requested' (thats all that can be done) to re-employ staff.
My 'understanding' is that if the strike is deemed protected (ie wholly legal and induced by the union) then BA cannot sack strikers within 12 weeks of the strike.
However, and i'm sure BA know the legal angle inside out, its very murky as to whether or not this strike will be protected based on the fact that its about imposition which the high-court has now deemed non-contractual.
As you can see its a very fine line. I wouldn't like to say with any confidence either way if its a tactic BA will enforce.
If its not a protected strike then they can sack strikers immediately. They can still claim unfair dismissal but if this is the case, its unlikely ANY compensation will be offered and nor will BA be 'requested' (thats all that can be done) to re-employ staff.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Age: 49
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for all your responses
Arthur, thats what I thought too. I think most crew are betting on the fact that if the strike were not legal in any way BA would try to stop it in court (just like December). I don't necessarily think that will happen this time, all BA might do is notify UNITE that BA regard the strike to be unprotected.
I am not saying that that is what is happening now, it's just a scenario I am runnning through in my head.
What do others think?
As you can see its a very fine line. I wouldn't like to say with any confidence either way if its a tactic BA will enforce.
If its not a protected strike then they can sack strikers immediately. They can still claim unfair dismissal but if this is the case, its unlikely ANY compensation will be offered and nor will BA be 'requested' (thats all that can be done) to re-employ staff.
If its not a protected strike then they can sack strikers immediately. They can still claim unfair dismissal but if this is the case, its unlikely ANY compensation will be offered and nor will BA be 'requested' (thats all that can be done) to re-employ staff.
I am not saying that that is what is happening now, it's just a scenario I am runnning through in my head.
What do others think?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't decide Atlas. The law in this area is still developing and its case based rather than parliamentary.
I'd assume BA have done their research thoroughly and i certainly wouldn't rule it out.
i'll try and be as clear as possible, the clear laws in place only really offer protection to the people calling the strike (ie the union itself). So a 'protected strike' means BA cannot successfully sue the unions. However, it does appear they can sack individual or groups of strikers and then it is totally doen to the judge to call on whether its justified or not.
If the strike is deemed unprotected then BA can not only sack any strikers it pleases but can also sue the pants off the union. Perhaps this is the masterplan ??
As i said earlier, i can't be sure one or the other if this strike is actually protected
I'd assume BA have done their research thoroughly and i certainly wouldn't rule it out.
i'll try and be as clear as possible, the clear laws in place only really offer protection to the people calling the strike (ie the union itself). So a 'protected strike' means BA cannot successfully sue the unions. However, it does appear they can sack individual or groups of strikers and then it is totally doen to the judge to call on whether its justified or not.
If the strike is deemed unprotected then BA can not only sack any strikers it pleases but can also sue the pants off the union. Perhaps this is the masterplan ??
As i said earlier, i can't be sure one or the other if this strike is actually protected
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Be clear on this one chaps, the question asked was CAN BA sack you whilst on strike, the answer to that is YES.
Protected strike or not only makes a difference to what happens after they have sacked you, unfair/unlawful dismissial or not, but make no bones you are still sacked either way.
Protected strike or not only makes a difference to what happens after they have sacked you, unfair/unlawful dismissial or not, but make no bones you are still sacked either way.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiggy
I wouldn´t dream of discussing volunteering with you or any of your colleagues! To be honest, when the subject has been opened by flight crew I´ve flown with, they have expressed total disapproval. While I am quite happy to work with volunteers, as I have said before on this forum, I see no reason for the jubilation that continues or the wish for the strike to proceed which I see on these pages. I will comment no further as this thread goes round and round in circles, rather like the negotiations themselves. I suspect that some of those on this forum, who do not intend to strike, feel likewise as they have also expressed reservations over the anti-crew stance here on what is supposed to be a discussion forum for cabin crew.
I wouldn´t dream of discussing volunteering with you or any of your colleagues! To be honest, when the subject has been opened by flight crew I´ve flown with, they have expressed total disapproval. While I am quite happy to work with volunteers, as I have said before on this forum, I see no reason for the jubilation that continues or the wish for the strike to proceed which I see on these pages. I will comment no further as this thread goes round and round in circles, rather like the negotiations themselves. I suspect that some of those on this forum, who do not intend to strike, feel likewise as they have also expressed reservations over the anti-crew stance here on what is supposed to be a discussion forum for cabin crew.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Telegraph aren't pulling any punches:
When, shortly before Christmas, the High Court ruled a planned series of strikes by BA cabin staff unlawful, it was tempting to conclude that the union had been saved from its own belligerency. Having come so close to staging an economically crippling stoppage, and having witnessed the public's disdain for such recklessness, it is hard to believe that the union's members are still prepared to step over the precipice. But it appears that they are, with a new ballot showing 80 per cent support for industrial action, though no date has been set for when it might take place. Given the parlous state of the carrier's finances, it defies common sense for BA's cabin crew, who are far better paid than most of their counterparts, to contemplate further damaging the business and their own job prospects. The decision smacks of the mindless militancy that we thought the labour movement had, with a few antediluvian exceptions, dispensed with many years ago.
The union behemoth behind this action is Unite, which seems impervious to the consequences for BA and its customers, many of whom will inevitably switch to other airlines because of the uncertainty over when the strikes might occur. The irresponsibility of this approach owes much to the internal politics of Unite, an amalgam of Amicus and the Transport and General Workers' Union; and while we would not expect the Government to intervene in the dispute, the silence of ministers is deafening. Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, who is rarely shy in coming forward, has failed even to raise a disapproving eyebrow at the damage the union is prepared to inflict upon the country's biggest airline. Might this have anything to do with the fact that Labour, now deserted by business donors, must rely upon the deep pockets of Unite and other unions to fight the general election?
The union behemoth behind this action is Unite, which seems impervious to the consequences for BA and its customers, many of whom will inevitably switch to other airlines because of the uncertainty over when the strikes might occur. The irresponsibility of this approach owes much to the internal politics of Unite, an amalgam of Amicus and the Transport and General Workers' Union; and while we would not expect the Government to intervene in the dispute, the silence of ministers is deafening. Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, who is rarely shy in coming forward, has failed even to raise a disapproving eyebrow at the damage the union is prepared to inflict upon the country's biggest airline. Might this have anything to do with the fact that Labour, now deserted by business donors, must rely upon the deep pockets of Unite and other unions to fight the general election?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW
Can you please explain to be this.. You know your union keeps putting out blatant lies. In fact, as we all know, very little they put out is entirely accurate. Why do you have such enduring faith in a bunch of people who consistently lie to you?
If this was the playground, and someone was caught lying again and again, they would be the laughing stock of the school. So why is it UNITE can maintain such apparent devotion from so many of it's members?
This is a genuine question btw
Can you please explain to be this.. You know your union keeps putting out blatant lies. In fact, as we all know, very little they put out is entirely accurate. Why do you have such enduring faith in a bunch of people who consistently lie to you?
If this was the playground, and someone was caught lying again and again, they would be the laughing stock of the school. So why is it UNITE can maintain such apparent devotion from so many of it's members?
This is a genuine question btw
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW - More BASSA lies
WWW is once again peddling lies spewed from the BASSA. He may or may not just be repeating them but they are lies. BASSA never misses an opportunity to use untruths to try to bolster it's weak and untenable position. Then they wonder why pilots volunteer to help break a strike. It is pathetic.
This BASSA statement is completely untrue and the Lufthansa Pilots Union (VC) have no knowledge of this individual and deny having made any such statement.
"VC have never heard of "Jorge Huereds".
If this person exists, he´s not one of ours.
(Sounds Spanish?)
And there are no VC-statements like this."
This BASSA statement is completely untrue and the Lufthansa Pilots Union (VC) have no knowledge of this individual and deny having made any such statement.
"VC have never heard of "Jorge Huereds".
If this person exists, he´s not one of ours.
(Sounds Spanish?)
And there are no VC-statements like this."
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: on boeings finest
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA must try harder..........
The post by BASSA about Lufthansa (note the t in Lufthansa please BASSA) has been denied by an official within VC
VC have never heard of Jorge Huereds or the statement.
So since WWW was so quick to post is here perhaps he/she could substantiate this.
I note BASSA is crediting Reuters as their source for this yet there is nothing on the Reuters website.
VC have never heard of Jorge Huereds or the statement.
So since WWW was so quick to post is here perhaps he/she could substantiate this.
I note BASSA is crediting Reuters as their source for this yet there is nothing on the Reuters website.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has amazed me from the first days of this dispute how BASSA members continue to believe the utter tripe that keeps on coming from their witless union leaders.
Perhaps the phrase "you get the representation you deserve" most accurately portrays the situation.
One thing is certain: With 75% of the public (according to a recent poll on Cheapflights.co.uk) thinking that BA cabin crew are overpaid and underworked, BA has the mandate to do whatever it likes to put an end to BASSA and UNITE's nonsense.
I just hope that the thousands of cabin crew that do not support this strike get caught in the crossfire. That's why they should make themselves known to the PCC and the company so that they can avoid the carnage.
Perhaps the phrase "you get the representation you deserve" most accurately portrays the situation.
One thing is certain: With 75% of the public (according to a recent poll on Cheapflights.co.uk) thinking that BA cabin crew are overpaid and underworked, BA has the mandate to do whatever it likes to put an end to BASSA and UNITE's nonsense.
I just hope that the thousands of cabin crew that do not support this strike get caught in the crossfire. That's why they should make themselves known to the PCC and the company so that they can avoid the carnage.