British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam Beckett
I don't understand why you think you may be attacked for your views on this forum.
Most posters here welcome a different point of view to try and understand why anyone would strike over what the rest of us see as a minor change to your way of working.
From what you say it appears you were striking over something that you feel MIGHT happen to MTP, not anything more substantive.
To most people that would appear to be a poor reason to put the your job and thousands of your non CC colleagues jobs at risk. The strike has alienated CC from the rest of the company, the media, other unions (and even the majority of non CC Unite members) and most importantly our customers.
The behaviour of the BASSA leadership and some of your militant colleagues has done untold harm to your cause.....there is no support or sympathy for you from any quarter apart from the loony fringe of the SWP.
Do you honestly think that everyone else is wrong and BASSA is always right?
Has it been worthwhile losing large amount of your income over a strike that you can't win?
Is it worthwhile putting at risk your own and others future?
ALL this for a your belief that you MIGHT lose some money at some non-specific future date.
Hand on heart, do you think that is reasonable or sensible in this present economic climate?
I would very much welcome your response..
I don't understand why you think you may be attacked for your views on this forum.
Most posters here welcome a different point of view to try and understand why anyone would strike over what the rest of us see as a minor change to your way of working.
From what you say it appears you were striking over something that you feel MIGHT happen to MTP, not anything more substantive.
To most people that would appear to be a poor reason to put the your job and thousands of your non CC colleagues jobs at risk. The strike has alienated CC from the rest of the company, the media, other unions (and even the majority of non CC Unite members) and most importantly our customers.
The behaviour of the BASSA leadership and some of your militant colleagues has done untold harm to your cause.....there is no support or sympathy for you from any quarter apart from the loony fringe of the SWP.
Do you honestly think that everyone else is wrong and BASSA is always right?
Has it been worthwhile losing large amount of your income over a strike that you can't win?
Is it worthwhile putting at risk your own and others future?
ALL this for a your belief that you MIGHT lose some money at some non-specific future date.
Hand on heart, do you think that is reasonable or sensible in this present economic climate?
I would very much welcome your response..
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam Beckett wrote:
If you think that your union is so incompetent that it cannot make contractual the MTP which BA has offered in writing, then why did you follow its call to go on strike?
By the same reasoning, you must think that the following offers in writing by BA will also not be contractual:
Now, unlike many crew, I found the idea of the MTP quite a positive thing, but not if it is not to be incorporated into contract (and each variety of The Way Forward I have seen seem to refuse to do this, they offer written assurances, but not contractual security).
By the same reasoning, you must think that the following offers in writing by BA will also not be contractual:
- Incremental pay rises will continue to be applied
- a two year pay deal, effective from 1/2/2011
- existing contractual terms will be maintained for the future, unless amended through the agreed NSP negotiating procedures
- honour commitments to make part-time offers to all crew on existing lists by March 2011
- Meal allowances, daily overseas and a number of other allowances will continue to be paid
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam Beckett
No problem. The only reason it stuck in my mind is that I too had a couple of concerns regarding the MTP until Bill actually wrote that in his reply. As like you I had no real issue with MTP in principle I just wanted some reassurances.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
gr8ballsoffire
I did not go on strike only because of a potential loss of income. The introduction of New Fleet meant that all my t&c were facing a very real threat. The company had taken the position that they could unilaterally change parts of those t&c and argued that they were non-contractual.
However, they said that they did not intend to make it impossible for existing to crew to continue to work to version of those terms, and offered the MTP as a way of assuring us of their intention to keep our jobs in existence.
So, it was very important to me that I should be able to trust those assurances. This was drastically undermined by being told that the MTP would be part of the very same agreement that the company said can be changed without my agreement.
The introduction of a completely new tier of employee is not trivial to existing employees, it is very threatening. Would you feel it was trivial if it was introduced in your department or would you be very concerned?
However, they said that they did not intend to make it impossible for existing to crew to continue to work to version of those terms, and offered the MTP as a way of assuring us of their intention to keep our jobs in existence.
So, it was very important to me that I should be able to trust those assurances. This was drastically undermined by being told that the MTP would be part of the very same agreement that the company said can be changed without my agreement.
The introduction of a completely new tier of employee is not trivial to existing employees, it is very threatening. Would you feel it was trivial if it was introduced in your department or would you be very concerned?
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 93
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Sam
Thanks for your intelligent contributions.
Just wondering what you think of the assurances BASSA have given or even the comms they have given the crew so far?
I agree any new tier of employee within your dept would be very worrying. But engaging with your employer in a constructive way in order to mitigate these changes is essential.
BASSA chose not to,and looking at last June's offer, compared to where we are now, you must ask yourself what information, and from who, has lead you to go on strike
Thanks for your intelligent contributions.
Just wondering what you think of the assurances BASSA have given or even the comms they have given the crew so far?
I agree any new tier of employee within your dept would be very worrying. But engaging with your employer in a constructive way in order to mitigate these changes is essential.
BASSA chose not to,and looking at last June's offer, compared to where we are now, you must ask yourself what information, and from who, has lead you to go on strike
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in a house
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Sam,
Out of interest, are you pre or post 97? the reason that I ask is, didn't bassa say then that everyone would end up on the new contract? Has BA ever tried to do this in the last 13 years?
Out of interest, are you pre or post 97? the reason that I ask is, didn't bassa say then that everyone would end up on the new contract? Has BA ever tried to do this in the last 13 years?
Join Date: Jun 1997
Location: 5530N
Posts: 845
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i wonder when the dispute finally ends, will the striking cabin crew for the rest of their careers be side lined re promotions in training and on the line? BA could be very vindictive to all concerned........
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a very quick answer to a some questions.
essee, I'm pre 97. As far as I recall, BASSA told me that the introduction of the lower new contracts in 97 could undermine crew as a whole, the same thing they told me about the introduction of SFG and of the regional contracts. I think they were right about all those, don't you?
They also warned that without a really robust agreement for promotion opportunities, the less expensive crew would tend to be promoted over the older contract crew. I understand that the strike of 97 did result in a very carefully negotiated detailed transfer and opportunities agreement.
Bearcat, I only personally know one person who has been told outright that she has jepordised her chance of any promotion by her manager. Though I hear that most of the newly promoted CSD's were told they would lose their promotion if they went out. This particular threat was used more in 97 to discourage striking. (Along with the threat that strikers would be sued for the company's losses).
I guess that fresh threats and sanctions are raised with each threat of IA, because the new and untried ones have more impact and are more intimidating.
Nevermind, personally I have never liked the tone or language of written union communications, but I try to not let a question of personal taste bother me unduly. Honestly, I rarely like the tone of IfCE messages, either, although they are totally different.
In both cases, I have found that the both Bill and his team and the reps at BASSA or Unite are absolutely fine to speak to and none of them sound anything like their emails.
Hotel Mode, I do not think it is true to say that New Fleet was ever never happening. BASSA negotiated hard to have new fleet integrated, but BA insisted that they would only allow this to happen if we gave up a whole list of our scheduling agreements as well, making it IMO a non starter.
Gr8ballsof, Hand on heart, do I think it is sensible? I don't know why you imagine it is the crew who decide when to defend their t&c? Do you think employees choose or control when disputes arise or the general economic climate? I think that if I could control when these things happen I would definately ask BA not to impose change until it suits the employees, but I'm fairly sure that they would still wait until there was their very best chance of winning, as they did in this case.
essee, I'm pre 97. As far as I recall, BASSA told me that the introduction of the lower new contracts in 97 could undermine crew as a whole, the same thing they told me about the introduction of SFG and of the regional contracts. I think they were right about all those, don't you?
They also warned that without a really robust agreement for promotion opportunities, the less expensive crew would tend to be promoted over the older contract crew. I understand that the strike of 97 did result in a very carefully negotiated detailed transfer and opportunities agreement.
Bearcat, I only personally know one person who has been told outright that she has jepordised her chance of any promotion by her manager. Though I hear that most of the newly promoted CSD's were told they would lose their promotion if they went out. This particular threat was used more in 97 to discourage striking. (Along with the threat that strikers would be sued for the company's losses).
I guess that fresh threats and sanctions are raised with each threat of IA, because the new and untried ones have more impact and are more intimidating.
Nevermind, personally I have never liked the tone or language of written union communications, but I try to not let a question of personal taste bother me unduly. Honestly, I rarely like the tone of IfCE messages, either, although they are totally different.
In both cases, I have found that the both Bill and his team and the reps at BASSA or Unite are absolutely fine to speak to and none of them sound anything like their emails.
Hotel Mode, I do not think it is true to say that New Fleet was ever never happening. BASSA negotiated hard to have new fleet integrated, but BA insisted that they would only allow this to happen if we gave up a whole list of our scheduling agreements as well, making it IMO a non starter.
Gr8ballsof, Hand on heart, do I think it is sensible? I don't know why you imagine it is the crew who decide when to defend their t&c? Do you think employees choose or control when disputes arise or the general economic climate? I think that if I could control when these things happen I would definately ask BA not to impose change until it suits the employees, but I'm fairly sure that they would still wait until there was their very best chance of winning, as they did in this case.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
essessdeedee:
Out of interest, are you pre or post 97? the reason that I ask is, didn't bassa say then that everyone would end up on the new contract? Has BA ever tried to do this in the last 13 years?
As you suggest there was a lot misleading information coming from BASSA during the '97 dispute. Along with what you suggest, I also remember being told that we would never get promotion as it will always be cheaper to promote 'new contract' crew. Obviously, we now know that none of these things came true.
However, Sam Beckett's concerns are shared by a good many crew like myself who decided to come to work. And in the end the decision really did just come down to trust. For me and many that came into work we obviously trusted the company more, and as your post proves, historically it seems the union is the one to doubt?
Out of interest, are you pre or post 97? the reason that I ask is, didn't bassa say then that everyone would end up on the new contract? Has BA ever tried to do this in the last 13 years?
As you suggest there was a lot misleading information coming from BASSA during the '97 dispute. Along with what you suggest, I also remember being told that we would never get promotion as it will always be cheaper to promote 'new contract' crew. Obviously, we now know that none of these things came true.
However, Sam Beckett's concerns are shared by a good many crew like myself who decided to come to work. And in the end the decision really did just come down to trust. For me and many that came into work we obviously trusted the company more, and as your post proves, historically it seems the union is the one to doubt?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam,
Thanks for putting forward a very reasoned argument.
You are absolutely right. The MTP and New Fleet affects and worries all of us, strikers and non-strikers. Chigley has very succintly pointed out that at the end of the day it could well have boiled down to who you trust: BA or BASSA? But if you read everything, and knew the law (which is what we pay the Union for) you would come up with the following conclusions:
a. Initially the MTP was offered to those who wanted it. It would, had BASSA agreed it, been the ideal time to let those that were prepared to (I would have taken it) try it. Everyone else could have sat back and watched and seen if it was beneficial or not. Why did BASSA not jump at this chance?
b. It was contractual, as Chigley has pointed out, it was stated by BF. But it also states in the Way Forward agreement that it will increase in line with basic pay. To me, that indicates a contractual agreement. If they were in any doubt, surely BASSA could have changed the wording in the agreement to ensure it was clearly stated that it was contractual. Again, why did they not do this?
c. We seem to be under the myth in our community that contractual agreements are set in stone. Unfortunately they are not.
www.direct.gov.uk
... your employer is not allowed to just bring in a change. However, they can terminate your contract (by giving notice) and offer you a new one including the revised terms - effectively sacking you and taking you back on. Your employer would be expected to follow a statutory minimum dismissal procedure. They may have to follow a collective redundancy consultation process if they plan to do this to a group of employees.
If you don't accept the new contract - or if you've accepted the new one but feel there was no good reason for ending the old one - you have the right to make an unfair dismissal claim provided you've at least one year of continuous service with your employer. You may also be able to claim redundancy if you have at least two years service.
If there is a sound business reason for the change, and your employer has properly consulted you and looked into any alternatives, you could find it difficult to win your claim.
So, armed with the knowledge that this is what BA could have done, I decided NOT to strike.
It appears to me that BA have been more than reasonable. They have conducted more negotiations than we could reasonably expect. They have consistently tried to keep our existing terms and conditions untouched and they have NOT simply sacked us and issued us with new contracts. Something, which quite clearly as above, they are entitled to do.
The very grave problem we have now is how long will this generosity last?
I am BA cabin crew and this is my own viewpoint and not that of BA.
Thanks for putting forward a very reasoned argument.
You are absolutely right. The MTP and New Fleet affects and worries all of us, strikers and non-strikers. Chigley has very succintly pointed out that at the end of the day it could well have boiled down to who you trust: BA or BASSA? But if you read everything, and knew the law (which is what we pay the Union for) you would come up with the following conclusions:
a. Initially the MTP was offered to those who wanted it. It would, had BASSA agreed it, been the ideal time to let those that were prepared to (I would have taken it) try it. Everyone else could have sat back and watched and seen if it was beneficial or not. Why did BASSA not jump at this chance?
b. It was contractual, as Chigley has pointed out, it was stated by BF. But it also states in the Way Forward agreement that it will increase in line with basic pay. To me, that indicates a contractual agreement. If they were in any doubt, surely BASSA could have changed the wording in the agreement to ensure it was clearly stated that it was contractual. Again, why did they not do this?
c. We seem to be under the myth in our community that contractual agreements are set in stone. Unfortunately they are not.
www.direct.gov.uk
... your employer is not allowed to just bring in a change. However, they can terminate your contract (by giving notice) and offer you a new one including the revised terms - effectively sacking you and taking you back on. Your employer would be expected to follow a statutory minimum dismissal procedure. They may have to follow a collective redundancy consultation process if they plan to do this to a group of employees.
If you don't accept the new contract - or if you've accepted the new one but feel there was no good reason for ending the old one - you have the right to make an unfair dismissal claim provided you've at least one year of continuous service with your employer. You may also be able to claim redundancy if you have at least two years service.
If there is a sound business reason for the change, and your employer has properly consulted you and looked into any alternatives, you could find it difficult to win your claim.
It appears to me that BA have been more than reasonable. They have conducted more negotiations than we could reasonably expect. They have consistently tried to keep our existing terms and conditions untouched and they have NOT simply sacked us and issued us with new contracts. Something, which quite clearly as above, they are entitled to do.
The very grave problem we have now is how long will this generosity last?
I am BA cabin crew and this is my own viewpoint and not that of BA.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bearcat
I doubt it.
Nobody will be given any special treatment regardless if you went on strike or not. The non-striking crew won't get any recognition either for coming into work during the strike. It's not BA's style.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. What promotion opportunities will be available on shrinking fleets (EF and WW)?
i wonder when the dispute finally ends, will the striking cabin crew for the rest of their careers be side lined re promotions in training and on the line? BA could be very vindictive to all concerned........
Nobody will be given any special treatment regardless if you went on strike or not. The non-striking crew won't get any recognition either for coming into work during the strike. It's not BA's style.
I wouldn't worry too much about it. What promotion opportunities will be available on shrinking fleets (EF and WW)?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
Nobody will be given any special treatment regardless if you went on strike or not. The non-striking crew won't get any recognition either for coming into work during the strike. It's not BA's style.
I think we will just have to wait and see. Anything is possible, even the re-incarnation of BA as a respected airline....not derided in the other (pax) forums.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam Beckett
Thanks for responding and it does go some way to have someone try to explain the reasoning behind their decision rather than throwing in one-liners.
You, of course have every right to protect your T&C's and as others have said it seems that it boils down to who you trust. BASSA's record is woeful on this, they have consistently lied and withheld important information from it's membership.
On the other hand BA have been consistent and up front at each and every stage.
Again, I take your point that the timing of this dispute was out of your hands, but it is pretty significant that we are in the depths of the worst recession since the war and the airline industry has been affected more than most. I am surprised that you don't appear to have taken that into account when making your decision to strike.
Have you not questioned why it is that the rest of BA have agreed new deals with the company?
Why do you believe CC should be a special case?
Are you prepared to accept ANY change to your T&C's and if sowhat that might be?
Do you look at the bigger picture and see the risk you are taking with your own (and others') job security?
From what you have said so far it appears that you are looking simply at your own narrow interests regardless of the possible consequences.
BTW, why is that BASSA have never mentioned NF as as cause of IA?
Thanks for responding and it does go some way to have someone try to explain the reasoning behind their decision rather than throwing in one-liners.
You, of course have every right to protect your T&C's and as others have said it seems that it boils down to who you trust. BASSA's record is woeful on this, they have consistently lied and withheld important information from it's membership.
On the other hand BA have been consistent and up front at each and every stage.
Again, I take your point that the timing of this dispute was out of your hands, but it is pretty significant that we are in the depths of the worst recession since the war and the airline industry has been affected more than most. I am surprised that you don't appear to have taken that into account when making your decision to strike.
Have you not questioned why it is that the rest of BA have agreed new deals with the company?
Why do you believe CC should be a special case?
Are you prepared to accept ANY change to your T&C's and if sowhat that might be?
Do you look at the bigger picture and see the risk you are taking with your own (and others') job security?
From what you have said so far it appears that you are looking simply at your own narrow interests regardless of the possible consequences.
BTW, why is that BASSA have never mentioned NF as as cause of IA?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those BASSA supporters who think WW is acting alone, and pleading for Martin Broughton to intervene should take note of Martin Broughton's comments in the Annual Report:
British Airways 2009/10 Annual Report and Accounts
British Airways 2009/10 Annual Report and Accounts
We have succeeded in introducing permanent cost reductions across the airline, including reductions in crew complements. Regrettably, these changes were met by unjustified strike action by Unite’s cabin crew branch. BASSA misrepresented the Company’s position to its members, failed to represent the views of the majority of cabin crew and has been intent on a confrontation with the airline. The vast majority of our employees recognise the need for permanent change and have shown great commitment to British Airways during this difficult year.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
I'm not sure which comms you decide to read or not, but here are the highlights from Bill Francis' email to ALL of us on 22 Jan 2010 - Information that will effect you personally
If you do not support a strike
If the majority of you choose to support our customers and reject a strike, I will continue to offer these assurances. They would allow you to:
Keep your current individual terms and conditions
Keep your current basic pay, with 2%-7% increment rises this financial year and next for 75% of you.
Keep your average variable pay through the offer of a monthly payment
Keep flying an unrivalled network of routes and staying in quality hotels while you’re there.
Keep lifestyle choices, either by changing fleets at Heathrow or transferring to part time.
Keep a commitment from us to keep talking with Unite about how we recruit new crew.
Keep full union representation with an offer from us for Unite to represent future crew.
If you support a strike
This could have a catastrophic effect on our business and our reputation. This is very serious. As a company, we owe it to our customers and all our colleagues to do everything in our power to prevent this outcome.
Therefore before you vote, I want you to be fully aware of the consequences should you vote yes and go on strike. In those circumstances, you would:
Lose staff travel permanently
Lose pay for any duties you miss if you go on strike, including associated days off
We would also need to review all costs in IFCE, including hotels. And of course I would be unable to maintain the assurances for your terms and conditions.
To the vast majority of us this sends a very strong message out that we will not all be treated the same - not sure why you seem so certain that this will not be the case?
P.S. Regarding promotion on 'shrinking fleets'. I disagree, people will still leave due to natural turnover, and a large number of SCCM's are older. Mind you if this farce continues there may be a need for a BIG promotion much sooner?
If you do not support a strike
If the majority of you choose to support our customers and reject a strike, I will continue to offer these assurances. They would allow you to:
Keep your current individual terms and conditions
Keep your current basic pay, with 2%-7% increment rises this financial year and next for 75% of you.
Keep your average variable pay through the offer of a monthly payment
Keep flying an unrivalled network of routes and staying in quality hotels while you’re there.
Keep lifestyle choices, either by changing fleets at Heathrow or transferring to part time.
Keep a commitment from us to keep talking with Unite about how we recruit new crew.
Keep full union representation with an offer from us for Unite to represent future crew.
If you support a strike
This could have a catastrophic effect on our business and our reputation. This is very serious. As a company, we owe it to our customers and all our colleagues to do everything in our power to prevent this outcome.
Therefore before you vote, I want you to be fully aware of the consequences should you vote yes and go on strike. In those circumstances, you would:
Lose staff travel permanently
Lose pay for any duties you miss if you go on strike, including associated days off
We would also need to review all costs in IFCE, including hotels. And of course I would be unable to maintain the assurances for your terms and conditions.
To the vast majority of us this sends a very strong message out that we will not all be treated the same - not sure why you seem so certain that this will not be the case?
P.S. Regarding promotion on 'shrinking fleets'. I disagree, people will still leave due to natural turnover, and a large number of SCCM's are older. Mind you if this farce continues there may be a need for a BIG promotion much sooner?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pogles Wood
Posts: 176
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the 'Telegraph'.
So, if this is solely the ST issue, have the initial issues been resolved?
Travel perks deal offers hope for end to BA cabin crew strike - Telegraph
Travel perks deal offers hope for end to BA cabin crew strike - Telegraph
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust
Chigley wrote:
As I see it, the legalities matter more than trust. Let's remind ourselves that what cabin crew are entitled to and should (or shouldn't) do are set out in their employment contracts and the collective agreements, namely ECCM, WSA and DA. You don't just trust BA to pay your basic salary, it's contractual. Similarly, the MTP would be contractual as it would be agreed with Unite. Willie Walsh reiterated in public that it would be a guaranteed payment. So, why should there be a problem?
To put it mildly, I am in despair that people would strike over matters like this when the company is in financial trouble and the rest of us have already made sacrifices to help keep BA flying.
However, Sam Beckett's concerns are shared by a good many crew like myself who decided to come to work. And in the end the decision really did just come down to trust. For me and many that came into work we obviously trusted the company more, and as your post proves, historically it seems the union is the one to doubt?
To put it mildly, I am in despair that people would strike over matters like this when the company is in financial trouble and the rest of us have already made sacrifices to help keep BA flying.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sam_Beckett wrote; The various formulations of various deals have been discussed and several posters seem to be under the impression that the central part of most of these, the MTP has been offered as a contractual right in The Way Forward documents.
I spoke to several managers prior to deciding how to vote in the ballot for strike action and they told me that it is definately not. (in fact, one said, your variable pay is not part of your contract, so the MTP will not be either)
I spoke to several managers prior to deciding how to vote in the ballot for strike action and they told me that it is definately not. (in fact, one said, your variable pay is not part of your contract, so the MTP will not be either)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trust
I suggested in an earlier post to Fabio747 that he may consider getting out there and finding out from his colleagues in other departments what the realities of change and negotiation have brought.
From where I am, we negotiated, and the company have not reneged on any aspects of our agreements in recent memory. Contracts have never been unilaterally changed, nor have IFCE contracts been changed, as proven in court. I am unaware of any problems in other departments.
Whilst I'm not out to bash BASSA, it's hard not to some times.. the paranoia amongst most strikers stems entirely from BASSA's one sided output. One again, I would urge every crew member to get out there and ask real questions of another 29,000 real people. You may get some real clarity that will help you move forward.
From where I am, we negotiated, and the company have not reneged on any aspects of our agreements in recent memory. Contracts have never been unilaterally changed, nor have IFCE contracts been changed, as proven in court. I am unaware of any problems in other departments.
Whilst I'm not out to bash BASSA, it's hard not to some times.. the paranoia amongst most strikers stems entirely from BASSA's one sided output. One again, I would urge every crew member to get out there and ask real questions of another 29,000 real people. You may get some real clarity that will help you move forward.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: korat thailand
Age: 83
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote post 4961
i wonder when the dispute finally ends, will the striking cabin crew for the rest of their careers be side lined re promotions in training and on the line? BA could be very vindictive to all concerned........
In my old company ( not flight related! )
after a strike years ago,all those who had been on strike,were slowly edged out " due to redeployment,modernisation,reorganisation " ect ect and took early retirement. As far as I know,there was no promotion of these staff.
In my old company ( not flight related! )
after a strike years ago,all those who had been on strike,were slowly edged out " due to redeployment,modernisation,reorganisation " ect ect and took early retirement. As far as I know,there was no promotion of these staff.