British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk VI
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
traveller5
I can. Crew voted YES to strike action to "send willie a message". I've heard this repeated time after time after time. So many really didn't think that Willie would stick to his guns and they'd actually have to strike - with all the risks that brings.
The genuine threat of the loss of Staff Travel for life has brought it all home.
BASSA reps have made it clear that any return-to-work agreement WILL include the re-instatement of Staff Travel.
Wiilie made it 100% clear in his Monday speech that this will NOT happen and that those strikers will lose their ST for life.
Depends who you have your money on, but it's a fair old gamble imho.
Can someone explain why so many BA crews vote for a strike but recent press releases talk of more and more crews coming forward to say they are willing to work? Double standards? "Yes...but no"....
The genuine threat of the loss of Staff Travel for life has brought it all home.
BASSA reps have made it clear that any return-to-work agreement WILL include the re-instatement of Staff Travel.
Wiilie made it 100% clear in his Monday speech that this will NOT happen and that those strikers will lose their ST for life.
Depends who you have your money on, but it's a fair old gamble imho.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
These wouldn't be the [1000+?] people who are volunteering to fill gaps in the CC schedule? And generally getting behind the Company?
Plus (of course) the many YES-voters who will cross that picket line.
Those of us who are working are in the majority and will be backed by another 40,000 (or so) groundstaff and pilots. We're not the ones to worry about traveller5. Rest assured we'll be as present, helpful, safe and professional as always.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London, England
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 developments.
Lots of calls to BAHS from crew too "stressed" to work. Guess the response from BAHS!
Half of level 3 of the T5 short stay carpark is now closed off and is being cleaned to accommodate overflow pax from the terminal.
Willie has received the message. CC won't like his answer.
Half of level 3 of the T5 short stay carpark is now closed off and is being cleaned to accommodate overflow pax from the terminal.
Willie has received the message. CC won't like his answer.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Right Engine,
Do we really, though?
I have been surprised, over and over again by the consistantly reasonable attitude taken by BA during this dispute. Time and time again, Iv'e expected them to go for the jugular and instead they seem to have been bending over backwards to be reasonable with the cabin crew.
Anything but ruthless, I would say.
I think I can agree on the fact that we have ruthless managers. I don't think as an organisation we have a monopoly on that style. I have quite a few friends in other industries who are victims to the harsh realities of corporations muddling through the most entrenched recession in our lifetime. Unemployment focusses the mind somewhat and having had the opportunity to sample that in my early 20's, I don't wish to do it again.
I have been surprised, over and over again by the consistantly reasonable attitude taken by BA during this dispute. Time and time again, Iv'e expected them to go for the jugular and instead they seem to have been bending over backwards to be reasonable with the cabin crew.
Anything but ruthless, I would say.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Society has moved on from those days of "Wicked Bosses at 't Mill". If people don't like their job, or T&Cs, or the shirt the CEO wears, then move on. NOBODY in GB has an absolute employment right to 'self' over 'company', let alone rights over other employees, customers or indeed the Nation.
Surely we're all old enough and well enough protected by law in this day and age to not need unions in the traditionsl sense ?
At the end of this, crew will look at BASSA/UNITE and wonder how on earth they've came out the other end of this with far worse T&Cs, pay and future prospects than they would have done had they simply accepted the initial proposal.
I don't like the war analogies either but i really hope the circuit is complete come the weekend and BASSA is quite literally crushed. I have missed out on at least 2 bonuses directly attribuatble to them over the years and my own pay has not been decided yet as it can't be concluded until the CC dispute is over so i'm still on EXACTLY the same salary as 3 years ago, despite having a huge increase in responsibility (inc a promotion 15 mths ago) and now working extra hours every week.
As you can probably tell, i'm not even CC, yet BASSA has directly affected (negatively) my own take home pay. I'll be thrilled if they go down at the end of this. Long live the PCCC !!!
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fascinating that even a Communist website regards the strike as pretty much doomed:
BA strike plan is classic union-busting technique | libcom.org
BA strike plan is classic union-busting technique | libcom.org
Ich bin ein Prooner.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Home of the Full Monty.
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the end of this, crew will look at BASSA/UNITE and wonder how on earth they've came out the other end of this with far worse T&Cs, pay and future prospects than they would have done had they simply accepted the initial proposal.
It appears that the American trade unions may now become involved, and before you know it, the situation will be being swept along at an ever increasing rate, beyond your control, and possibly your wishes.
A great many people, myself included, fell victim to a very similar situation a couple of decades ago in heavy industry, and if you care to look around you, it wil be clear that nothing benefitting the the ordinary person doing the job became of it. It was a disaster for those involved.
It rapidly became a power struggle between the people at the top of each faction, no-one wanting or willing to back down for fear of losing face.
Don't let it happen to you.
Last edited by Noah Zark.; 18th Mar 2010 at 09:59.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know that this is long ago, but it is part of the roots of todays problems with BASSA/UNITE and the need to ensure that the company is run by its management and not trade unions.
In 1972 the engineering unions at LHR were totally under the control of Trotsy/Marxist leadership, within BEA a small dispute arose in the hangers with early shift, who were called out on strike, when they came on duty, the dayshift came out as well, by 2pm, when the back shift came in, they also went on strike - although the dispute had been resolved and the day shift and morning shift had gone back. When we, the night shift came in, we were told to strike in sympathy, we refused,
On the next few shifts, we were given two reasons why we should go on strike, to show solidarity and to show the 'bosses' that the convenors could call the entire airport out at any time they wished. We still refused.
We then had 13 strike calls (nightshift only), over 11 weeks, each time with meetings called at Barclays at Hatton Cross at 2300 hrs (our shift started at 2230 hrs. There were large union stewards placed in the entrance to the hangers and it was explained to us that if we went in to clock on, we would be blacklisted by the union. BUT the management would be informed that nobody would be allowed to work with any blacklisted individuals, and THEY HAD AGREED with the union that they would dismiss anyone on the blacklist.
So beware, things might be somewhat better today, but the union attitude remains the same of seeking to gain total control. BA has got to win this and cannot possibly afford to back down, and neither can the CC or any other part of BA's workforce allow the union to win.
In 1972 the engineering unions at LHR were totally under the control of Trotsy/Marxist leadership, within BEA a small dispute arose in the hangers with early shift, who were called out on strike, when they came on duty, the dayshift came out as well, by 2pm, when the back shift came in, they also went on strike - although the dispute had been resolved and the day shift and morning shift had gone back. When we, the night shift came in, we were told to strike in sympathy, we refused,
On the next few shifts, we were given two reasons why we should go on strike, to show solidarity and to show the 'bosses' that the convenors could call the entire airport out at any time they wished. We still refused.
We then had 13 strike calls (nightshift only), over 11 weeks, each time with meetings called at Barclays at Hatton Cross at 2300 hrs (our shift started at 2230 hrs. There were large union stewards placed in the entrance to the hangers and it was explained to us that if we went in to clock on, we would be blacklisted by the union. BUT the management would be informed that nobody would be allowed to work with any blacklisted individuals, and THEY HAD AGREED with the union that they would dismiss anyone on the blacklist.
So beware, things might be somewhat better today, but the union attitude remains the same of seeking to gain total control. BA has got to win this and cannot possibly afford to back down, and neither can the CC or any other part of BA's workforce allow the union to win.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jungles of SW London
Age: 77
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Arthurscargill
As an aside, If BA wants to continue to be a full service airline they will need to pay for skills in all departments and be at least market rate. As long as thats the case, we'll all get a decent salary (in comparison to others doing similar work in the UK),
was always "Market Rate + 10%" - is that not what you are saying and is that not pretty much what the union have been trying to ignore? Excuse my ignorance.Roger.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, according to popular belief (aka GalleyFM) the following are backing the CC strike through secondary action:
Air France CC
Portugese pilots
American union members
Italians (not specified)
Fuel tank drivers in the UK
And apparantly several more in the pipelines.
What the GalleyFM (GFM) people are forgetting though, is that in the US, secondary action is not allowed. AF is striking for their own reasons, and so are the Portugese pilots. Secondary action isn't allowed in the UK either, so I doubt the fuel tank drivers will turn up at BFC on Saturday (unless they're on a day off).
Do the GFM people really believe their own hype? I guess the answer to that question is "yes"
And I was under the impression that a union isn't allowed to solicit secondary action? Am I wrong?
Gg
Ps. It wasn't me on the radio, just for the record
Air France CC
Portugese pilots
American union members
Italians (not specified)
Fuel tank drivers in the UK
And apparantly several more in the pipelines.
What the GalleyFM (GFM) people are forgetting though, is that in the US, secondary action is not allowed. AF is striking for their own reasons, and so are the Portugese pilots. Secondary action isn't allowed in the UK either, so I doubt the fuel tank drivers will turn up at BFC on Saturday (unless they're on a day off).
Do the GFM people really believe their own hype? I guess the answer to that question is "yes"
And I was under the impression that a union isn't allowed to solicit secondary action? Am I wrong?
Gg
Ps. It wasn't me on the radio, just for the record
Last edited by Glamgirl; 17th Mar 2010 at 23:57. Reason: adding something
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Either back down, or BA might not exist anymore, and more then likely your jobs will have gone. Fancy RYR? No airline will touch you after this, good luck and good riddance!
I feel sorry for the CC who do not support this action and stance, look out for number one first!
This is what I meant. Although I don't support this strike, strinking is a legal right. Why does some people have this almost erotic desire of seeing striking cabin crew out of a job, and if possible, forever? What have they done to deserve such hate? Why are you saying things like "good riddance"? Are you a shareholder? I don't believe you would want the same fate for them if your daughter/son was one of them!
Strike is a legal right, and you have to respect people going on strike. they are not killing or stealing, they are enforcing their legal rights. If you don't want workers to have the right of striking, I can suggest a few countries you could go to and live happily without the threat of striking employees. Then again, if you are not rich enough (sure you are, by the comments you write) you will have to be a second class citizen!
I feel sorry for the CC who do not support this action and stance, look out for number one first!
This is what I meant. Although I don't support this strike, strinking is a legal right. Why does some people have this almost erotic desire of seeing striking cabin crew out of a job, and if possible, forever? What have they done to deserve such hate? Why are you saying things like "good riddance"? Are you a shareholder? I don't believe you would want the same fate for them if your daughter/son was one of them!
Strike is a legal right, and you have to respect people going on strike. they are not killing or stealing, they are enforcing their legal rights. If you don't want workers to have the right of striking, I can suggest a few countries you could go to and live happily without the threat of striking employees. Then again, if you are not rich enough (sure you are, by the comments you write) you will have to be a second class citizen!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Age: 18
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA /Unite says "No"
Rights are normally associated with responsibilities. The CC's right to strike should surely be associated with the responsibility of only doing so if absolutely necessary and not just to "give Willie Walsh a message".
Other staff in the company surely have a right to expect that their colleagues do not jeopardise everyone's job who works for BA without good cause, particularly when they have done what was asked of them to help the company survive and prosper. Something that BASSA/Unite only recently accepted was necessary after months of "negotiation"ie saying no not us, we're so special
Other staff in the company surely have a right to expect that their colleagues do not jeopardise everyone's job who works for BA without good cause, particularly when they have done what was asked of them to help the company survive and prosper. Something that BASSA/Unite only recently accepted was necessary after months of "negotiation"ie saying no not us, we're so special
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Air France flight attendants reportedly will strike March 28-31 in protest of an airline proposal to reduce crew numbers on some domestic and European flights. Six unions are involved. CGT Secretary Eyal Jonas told Bloomberg News that the walkout will occur unless the sides can come to an agreement, while The Connexion reported that AF plans to cut the equivalent of 750 fulltime cabin staff positions by the end of 2011. The airline did not acknowledge the threat.
British Airways promises more services as Air France cabin crew announce strike - Telegraph
No doubt WW, in his role as Chairman of the Association of European Airlines, is offering words of advice on how to handle the troublemakers.
British Airways promises more services as Air France cabin crew announce strike - Telegraph
No doubt WW, in his role as Chairman of the Association of European Airlines, is offering words of advice on how to handle the troublemakers.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: london
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
US Unions
Just a quick note on our unions in the US...
As a BA employee who has worked in London/WTS and is now based in New York, I can confirm to you that our union over here is very different to that of Unite/BASSA. THe union here is reasonable, logical, and has a very fair balance between looking out for the wellfare of its members, versus the wellfare of the company. It accepts the needs for change, and supports the company in achieving this in the fairest, and least intrusive way possible (as a Union should to - BASSA please take note).
As for the Cabin Crew dispute - both staff and union reps over here have very little sympathy for BASSA. And our Ground handlers are really quite indifferent to the strike, aside from the fact that it means a few less flights for them to worry about. So even if secondary strike action wasn't illegal in the US (which it is) - BASSA would probably have to bribe people for sympathy! (which of course I wouldn't put past them, although that clearly hasn't worked with the Labour Party!)
As a BA employee who has worked in London/WTS and is now based in New York, I can confirm to you that our union over here is very different to that of Unite/BASSA. THe union here is reasonable, logical, and has a very fair balance between looking out for the wellfare of its members, versus the wellfare of the company. It accepts the needs for change, and supports the company in achieving this in the fairest, and least intrusive way possible (as a Union should to - BASSA please take note).
As for the Cabin Crew dispute - both staff and union reps over here have very little sympathy for BASSA. And our Ground handlers are really quite indifferent to the strike, aside from the fact that it means a few less flights for them to worry about. So even if secondary strike action wasn't illegal in the US (which it is) - BASSA would probably have to bribe people for sympathy! (which of course I wouldn't put past them, although that clearly hasn't worked with the Labour Party!)
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Secondary boycotts are illegal in Oz, too.
TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 - SECT 45D Secondary boycotts for the purpose of causing substantial loss or damage
TRADE PRACTICES ACT 1974 - SECT 45D Secondary boycotts for the purpose of causing substantial loss or damage
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Age: 50
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are unions about protecting those not rich enough?
"Then again, if you are not rich enough (sure you are, by the comments you write) you will have to be a second class citizen!"
yes the right to strike was a milestone in the development of modern societies. But let's not get into the meaningless propaganda:
if you are not rich enough: what is rich enough? rich enough to buy a villa in LAX? reach enough to live in another country but work in the UK, commuting and living a lifestyle that to many is a dream?
My mother was a cleaner, she worked 12 hours a day to provide for our family, my father was unable to work. When I was 13 I used to help her after school and on Sundays. We were not poor and we were not middle class. We helped our neighbours when they had nothing to eat (and it did happen quite often) because we could and it was the right thing to do, because when you are poor and believe in values, you believe that you help each other, and you help those worst off. We were left wing because we believed (as a family) that left wing was about workers, was about looking out for those in the lower class. By all means my background has nothing to do with the dispute and I cannot claim the prize for the one with the poor background. HOWEVER when I see certain arguments being used I cannot but want to put this dispute in its context.
The cabin crew job was a job regarded as aspirational, the life style it offered was a dream. It was a job that only few could aspire to, let alone get. Those who were cabin crew had their own house and could not be defined poor by a long stretch of the imagination. The new contracts might be different, but this strike is not about the new contracts, this strike is about the changes in crew numbers. This has been underlined many times.
Cabin crew have the right to strike to maintain T&C. That's a fact. Cabin crew are not the worst off social category that we need to fight for. That's another fact. The social issues of poverty and second class citizenship will not be fought by trying to maintain the privileges of few categories (the economist rightly points out who can afford to go on strike).
So let's be clear: this is not a white knight in a shiny armour in the form of Unite who has come to the rescue of poor second class citizens. This is not about changing the mechanisms of poverty and opening new opportunities for poor people. This is about fighting to maintain a lifestyle and T&Cs that were agreed in a time when being cabin crew was glam and aspirational. It is their right as we said. But if we want to use propaganda, it is also the management right to look after their own T&Cs and privileges including high pay (as Unite keeps on pointing out). Anybody spots the analogy??
yes the right to strike was a milestone in the development of modern societies. But let's not get into the meaningless propaganda:
if you are not rich enough: what is rich enough? rich enough to buy a villa in LAX? reach enough to live in another country but work in the UK, commuting and living a lifestyle that to many is a dream?
My mother was a cleaner, she worked 12 hours a day to provide for our family, my father was unable to work. When I was 13 I used to help her after school and on Sundays. We were not poor and we were not middle class. We helped our neighbours when they had nothing to eat (and it did happen quite often) because we could and it was the right thing to do, because when you are poor and believe in values, you believe that you help each other, and you help those worst off. We were left wing because we believed (as a family) that left wing was about workers, was about looking out for those in the lower class. By all means my background has nothing to do with the dispute and I cannot claim the prize for the one with the poor background. HOWEVER when I see certain arguments being used I cannot but want to put this dispute in its context.
The cabin crew job was a job regarded as aspirational, the life style it offered was a dream. It was a job that only few could aspire to, let alone get. Those who were cabin crew had their own house and could not be defined poor by a long stretch of the imagination. The new contracts might be different, but this strike is not about the new contracts, this strike is about the changes in crew numbers. This has been underlined many times.
Cabin crew have the right to strike to maintain T&C. That's a fact. Cabin crew are not the worst off social category that we need to fight for. That's another fact. The social issues of poverty and second class citizenship will not be fought by trying to maintain the privileges of few categories (the economist rightly points out who can afford to go on strike).
So let's be clear: this is not a white knight in a shiny armour in the form of Unite who has come to the rescue of poor second class citizens. This is not about changing the mechanisms of poverty and opening new opportunities for poor people. This is about fighting to maintain a lifestyle and T&Cs that were agreed in a time when being cabin crew was glam and aspirational. It is their right as we said. But if we want to use propaganda, it is also the management right to look after their own T&Cs and privileges including high pay (as Unite keeps on pointing out). Anybody spots the analogy??
Last edited by christmaslights; 18th Mar 2010 at 08:19. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sorry tigerjohn but you take a very simplistic view of all this. If you are a customer with that attitude...
All you have done is put your acid spin on this. I assume you know all the inside details and everything you posted is fact?
People need to take a long hard look at all the consequences of failure and success in this case for the whole of the aviation industry. If you are advocating that the quicker EVERYBODY in this industry gets down to the t&c and working practices levels of Ryanair ....wake up and smell the coffee.
Dont you ever dare lecture me or anyone else about my right to strike or my t&c's as long as tickets continue to be sold for a quid!
All you have done is put your acid spin on this. I assume you know all the inside details and everything you posted is fact?
People need to take a long hard look at all the consequences of failure and success in this case for the whole of the aviation industry. If you are advocating that the quicker EVERYBODY in this industry gets down to the t&c and working practices levels of Ryanair ....wake up and smell the coffee.
Dont you ever dare lecture me or anyone else about my right to strike or my t&c's as long as tickets continue to be sold for a quid!
Last edited by Safety Concerns; 18th Mar 2010 at 08:22.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Scotland
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Safety your right to strike and t&c's are irrelevant if Ryan Air continues to sell tickets for a quid and BA can hardly give them away.
No BA results in your right to sign on.
"They made a desert and called it victory."
No BA results in your right to sign on.
"They made a desert and called it victory."
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your striking because you can not accept the company needs to make changes, changes are fine, as long as it does not involve you.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: UK
Age: 69
Posts: 475
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the postings once this is over will be more interesting than now. Perhaps after the event regardless of the outcome the real facts may come to light.
Its interesting that with Gordon Brown recently having to admit to getting his FACTS mixed up and numerous papers having to admit in front of a judge that the story they published was FICTION that 99% of this thread is based upon info from the media.
If those who are opposed to the strike would simmer down and allow those who are going to strike to voice their opinion, you would all be better placed to judge. Until that happens everything here is opinion based upon little or no fact.
Its interesting that with Gordon Brown recently having to admit to getting his FACTS mixed up and numerous papers having to admit in front of a judge that the story they published was FICTION that 99% of this thread is based upon info from the media.
If those who are opposed to the strike would simmer down and allow those who are going to strike to voice their opinion, you would all be better placed to judge. Until that happens everything here is opinion based upon little or no fact.
