British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In my opinion, it's not about LGW having to finance LHR crew members. It's about transfer rights and union representation. As LGW have failed to support these two issues, maybe it would be best to exclude them out of the NSP as it's apparently not important to them.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM,
I notice that you never seem to believe that you could be wrong. Is it because you ignore inconvenient truths? For example, you keep repeating that Unite offered a pay cut despite the fact that Unite only offered a pay loan. The offer of a one-year pay loan, repayable in full (Unite's words, not mine), is not in dispute as it is a matter of public record.
I guess that a placard with the words WE OFFERED A ONE-YEAR PAY LOAN WHEN BA NEEDS PERMANENT SAVINGS just wasn't snappy enough.
I notice that you never seem to believe that you could be wrong. Is it because you ignore inconvenient truths? For example, you keep repeating that Unite offered a pay cut despite the fact that Unite only offered a pay loan. The offer of a one-year pay loan, repayable in full (Unite's words, not mine), is not in dispute as it is a matter of public record.
I guess that a placard with the words WE OFFERED A ONE-YEAR PAY LOAN WHEN BA NEEDS PERMANENT SAVINGS just wasn't snappy enough.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flap33
Not control as in manage but to control route and aircraft transfers. As the past proposals have suggested, BA are only willing to discuss it with BASSA.
All of the sudden it's not a hurry to issue P45s or new contracts? Last week I can remember than some on here were debating about it as if Waterside were open 24/7 printing out any of these papers.
License To Fly
I don't see the relevance of your post. I was referring to their original ground based jobs and not their performance as VCC.
Not control as in manage but to control route and aircraft transfers. As the past proposals have suggested, BA are only willing to discuss it with BASSA.
All of the sudden it's not a hurry to issue P45s or new contracts? Last week I can remember than some on here were debating about it as if Waterside were open 24/7 printing out any of these papers.
License To Fly
I don't see the relevance of your post. I was referring to their original ground based jobs and not their performance as VCC.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Loss of staff travel
JWFI wrote:
ST was removed 15 days after the second strike. On that basis, strikers would expect to lose ST on about 24 June.
Has staff travel been removed from those that struck in the second wave of stikes in May/Jun ??
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: cheltenham
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
A genuine question Miss M if I may.
Do you ever doubt what you say? Do you ever read other posts and have pause for thought?
It's not a snide remark or a "put down" it's a genuine question. After looking at all sides, examining what evidence there is (including court papers etc) I now have very firm opinions on this subject. Even so when a sensible, rational comment is made that opposes my view I occasionally have had to stop and re-examine my view, and the balance of evidence.
Do you do this?
Do you ever doubt what you say? Do you ever read other posts and have pause for thought?
It's not a snide remark or a "put down" it's a genuine question. After looking at all sides, examining what evidence there is (including court papers etc) I now have very firm opinions on this subject. Even so when a sensible, rational comment is made that opposes my view I occasionally have had to stop and re-examine my view, and the balance of evidence.
Do you do this?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LGW
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jetset lady
I have to disagree. Transfer's were part of the dispute from the very start and not thrown in at the last moment as you would like others to believe. I went on strike at LGW for my Transfer. My wife is at LHR and it was always my career plan to transfer up to a LHR fleet someday. I feel that hard earned right has been stolen from me. We at LGW have fought for our transfer rights for many years to be included in the NSP. Currently there are over 800 crew on the transfer list and I was prepared to give 2.4% in order to achieve that transfer right. Personally, I feel Gatwick has given enough in the formation of Single fleet and delivered more than enough costs savings since 2006. I striked in order to protect the MOA against the clear breaches outlined in the ballot, to return the 2nd PSR to the 3 class a/c and ultimately for my transfer right. Those reasons were on my ballot paper, I fully supported them and took action to protect them. I feel Gatwick has more reason to take industrial action than LHR, I mean can you imagine if our Flight Crew colleagues opportunity of base or fleet transfers agreements were torn up. They’re would be uproar amongst the flight crew community I suspect. No?
Sorry but I disagree. That's exactly what it was about. Transfer rights were thrown into the pot in an attempt to gain the support needed. Unfortunately, it seemingly never occurred to Unite that many of us at LGW weren't sitting around, dreaming of the day we could transfer to the golden runways. Nor did it occur to them that of those that were yearning for a transfer, most didn't want it badly enough to take a pay cut, temporary or not, on behalf of LHR. And finally, it never occurred to Unite that the majority of LGW crew had finally had enough. Enough of being pushed around between the company and the union. In my opinion, LGW has finally grown up.
Last edited by HAHAHAHAHAH; 16th Jun 2010 at 21:52.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M,
I am the one that is shocked. It is BASSA's attitude that is causing New Fleet to arrive faster than intended.
BA always take on new crew arround this time of year. Be they temporary or perminant. I would hope that you would not take it out on any temporary person because they have nothing to do with BA policy.
They are just ordinary people who want to work for BA. This young person actually was a temp last year. Aren't you the lucky one, that when you joined, you were perminent straight away. I seem to remember everyone being very upset that BA was letting go of the temps. I am sure if you are from longhaul you would have flown with some of them last year.
I can't believe you would not be welcoming to any new entrant joining us and keep politics out of it for their sakes. They have nothing to do with this policy. You actually upset me with all your hate.
Of course I am going to welcome anyone joining the airline just like I would have welcomed you when you joined.
That comment was so low. It is I that is the shocked one.
As for your post.
I am sure that something is going to happen, however as WW has been in with ACAS the last few days he could harly send out contracts for us all to accept while in the middle of negotiations, could he.
Well if I were you I would be hoping it is a contract that you see soon because if you STRIKE again you will surely be sacked and after your spiteful comments about temps I wont be shedding any tears,
I am the one that is shocked. It is BASSA's attitude that is causing New Fleet to arrive faster than intended.
BA always take on new crew arround this time of year. Be they temporary or perminant. I would hope that you would not take it out on any temporary person because they have nothing to do with BA policy.
They are just ordinary people who want to work for BA. This young person actually was a temp last year. Aren't you the lucky one, that when you joined, you were perminent straight away. I seem to remember everyone being very upset that BA was letting go of the temps. I am sure if you are from longhaul you would have flown with some of them last year.
I can't believe you would not be welcoming to any new entrant joining us and keep politics out of it for their sakes. They have nothing to do with this policy. You actually upset me with all your hate.
Of course I am going to welcome anyone joining the airline just like I would have welcomed you when you joined.
That comment was so low. It is I that is the shocked one.
As for your post.
I am sure that something is going to happen, however as WW has been in with ACAS the last few days he could harly send out contracts for us all to accept while in the middle of negotiations, could he.
Well if I were you I would be hoping it is a contract that you see soon because if you STRIKE again you will surely be sacked and after your spiteful comments about temps I wont be shedding any tears,
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuchinchow
It is shocking to see a colleague who are welcoming a person who will eventually take over our routes and aircraft. Let's see next year, or the year after, if Betty Girl has the same attitude when she, and everyone else who crossed the picket line, will realise that they have done.
Why do I need a shoulder to cry on?
BASSA are wanting to be able to negotiate what routes and such should go over to New Fleet. They are not wanting to manage it. BA will only agree to discuss it with our union. The definition of discussion is vague and if we agree to it, we will be shafted. To discuss is not to negotiate or to agree.
jetset lady
If nobody is wanting a transfer to LHR or even less willing to fight for the transfer rights, I can't see any reason as to why LGW should remain in the NSP.
BA have stated that LGW is too expensive and I should imagine that there might be some changes there soon in the near future. LGW will no be protected from New Fleet either. Why else do you think they haven't replaced your stone aged old 737 fleet yet? Wait and see what happens. If I were you, I would be wanting some sort of union representation.
Caribbean Boy
BASSA tried to match BALPA's deal. We offered savings equivalent to 15% of our costs to BA. BALPA offered a proposal which would save them less than half of 15%.
DeThirdDefect
We all know BA cannot lie "because they are a PLC" but they are experts when it comes to spinning with their figures. When they say that 70% of all rostered crew reported for duty, I have no doubt that those numbers included LGW, which would have brought up the numbers heavily as almost 100% crew down there reported for duty, ICC and crew on SEP and other ground duties. Should we also assume that they included downroute crew who cleared at LON on the days of the strike?
It is shocking to see a colleague who are welcoming a person who will eventually take over our routes and aircraft. Let's see next year, or the year after, if Betty Girl has the same attitude when she, and everyone else who crossed the picket line, will realise that they have done.
Why do I need a shoulder to cry on?
BASSA are wanting to be able to negotiate what routes and such should go over to New Fleet. They are not wanting to manage it. BA will only agree to discuss it with our union. The definition of discussion is vague and if we agree to it, we will be shafted. To discuss is not to negotiate or to agree.
jetset lady
If nobody is wanting a transfer to LHR or even less willing to fight for the transfer rights, I can't see any reason as to why LGW should remain in the NSP.
BA have stated that LGW is too expensive and I should imagine that there might be some changes there soon in the near future. LGW will no be protected from New Fleet either. Why else do you think they haven't replaced your stone aged old 737 fleet yet? Wait and see what happens. If I were you, I would be wanting some sort of union representation.
Caribbean Boy
BASSA tried to match BALPA's deal. We offered savings equivalent to 15% of our costs to BA. BALPA offered a proposal which would save them less than half of 15%.
DeThirdDefect
We all know BA cannot lie "because they are a PLC" but they are experts when it comes to spinning with their figures. When they say that 70% of all rostered crew reported for duty, I have no doubt that those numbers included LGW, which would have brought up the numbers heavily as almost 100% crew down there reported for duty, ICC and crew on SEP and other ground duties. Should we also assume that they included downroute crew who cleared at LON on the days of the strike?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ArthurScargil.
The union has been quiet for the same reason as BA. ACAS put a proposal to both parties and they have been looking at it over the last few days.
Today ACAS announced that talks had broken up with no agreement. The union then anounced it would ballot.
Hopes that explains why it has gone so quiet these last few days.
The union has been quiet for the same reason as BA. ACAS put a proposal to both parties and they have been looking at it over the last few days.
Today ACAS announced that talks had broken up with no agreement. The union then anounced it would ballot.
Hopes that explains why it has gone so quiet these last few days.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl
Temporary crew are being shafted and used by the company. This year, they have been told that if they go sick or do not report for duty, their contract will be dismissed immediately. Look at what happened to some of them last year when BA decided to dismiss them half way through their 11 month contract.
It is not hate but they are being brought back to cover for a possible strike. BA, and surely others, might claim that they are being brought back because there's an increase to our schedules. Why should I be welcoming to people who have been employed with the sole purpose to break a strike which I am participating in?
I was recruited by BA when there was no industrial action. When ex-temporary crew were recruited to WW in 2007 and 2008, I had no issues with it as they were fantastic to work with but they were also employed because there were crew shortages. They were not recruited to break a strike.
Temporary crew are being shafted and used by the company. This year, they have been told that if they go sick or do not report for duty, their contract will be dismissed immediately. Look at what happened to some of them last year when BA decided to dismiss them half way through their 11 month contract.
It is not hate but they are being brought back to cover for a possible strike. BA, and surely others, might claim that they are being brought back because there's an increase to our schedules. Why should I be welcoming to people who have been employed with the sole purpose to break a strike which I am participating in?
I was recruited by BA when there was no industrial action. When ex-temporary crew were recruited to WW in 2007 and 2008, I had no issues with it as they were fantastic to work with but they were also employed because there were crew shortages. They were not recruited to break a strike.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LGW
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl
Can you provide evidence of this, where you have seen it stated by the company. Or are you simply scaremongering. If so, it's not constructive debate.
Well if I were you I would be hoping it is a contract that you see soon because if you STRIKE again you will surely be sacked and after your spiteful comments about temps I wont be shedding any tears.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM, I know you will not reply as you stated but ........
LGW crew work harder and longer that any at LHR for less pay negotiated by BASSA. How dare you imply that their voice is unimportant to the current situation. They are worth more to our customers and BA and the rest of BA staff than any 550 hours per year cabin crew at LHR are.
If only all cabin crew were as like minded as LGW cabin crew then this would be a better airline to work for.
Do not dismiss LGW crew as second raters to yourselves at LHR, they are worth more,individually, than LHR cabin crew put together.They understand CRM, professionalism, customer service and downright good manners between working people trying to keep their livelihoods afloat for the future of the company and all those employed.
Get off your high horse and " I am better than them " attitude and join the rest of us to keep 45,000 people in a job for the future. If you and your cronies do not like it then resign.
Which takes integrity.
LGW crew work harder and longer that any at LHR for less pay negotiated by BASSA. How dare you imply that their voice is unimportant to the current situation. They are worth more to our customers and BA and the rest of BA staff than any 550 hours per year cabin crew at LHR are.
If only all cabin crew were as like minded as LGW cabin crew then this would be a better airline to work for.
Do not dismiss LGW crew as second raters to yourselves at LHR, they are worth more,individually, than LHR cabin crew put together.They understand CRM, professionalism, customer service and downright good manners between working people trying to keep their livelihoods afloat for the future of the company and all those employed.
Get off your high horse and " I am better than them " attitude and join the rest of us to keep 45,000 people in a job for the future. If you and your cronies do not like it then resign.
Which takes integrity.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well maybe Miss M that is where we differ because I am more than happy for your completely pointless strike to be broken.
I happily joined in and helped break it myself because I cannot support a union that has made things worse and I want to still have an emplyer to work for in the future and I AM PROUD TO HAVE WORKED.
Just before Christmas a good offer was put on the table, but did the union take the time to ask their members what they thought. No they anounced a strike for 12 days over Christmas instead thus making BA cabin crew the most hated people in the country.
I hold BASSA completely responsible for this whole mess.
They should have talked years ago and not always said NO NO NO to everything. We would not be in this mess if BASSA had have negotiated and not forced Walsh to impose the crew reductions. They left him no choise because they either just said NO or they would not even sit in the room to talk because they were busy arguing with their new friends Amicus.
I happily joined in and helped break it myself because I cannot support a union that has made things worse and I want to still have an emplyer to work for in the future and I AM PROUD TO HAVE WORKED.
Just before Christmas a good offer was put on the table, but did the union take the time to ask their members what they thought. No they anounced a strike for 12 days over Christmas instead thus making BA cabin crew the most hated people in the country.
I hold BASSA completely responsible for this whole mess.
They should have talked years ago and not always said NO NO NO to everything. We would not be in this mess if BASSA had have negotiated and not forced Walsh to impose the crew reductions. They left him no choise because they either just said NO or they would not even sit in the room to talk because they were busy arguing with their new friends Amicus.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Lalaland
Age: 55
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
Originally Posted by MissM
Because you are happy to enjoy the terms and conditions which BASSA, our union, have fought for without yourselves doing a single bit.
I'm not happy with the Spanish practices that Bassa fights so hard to protect.
I'm not happy with lack of transparency in our rostering system, leading to abuse.
I'm not happy with the control Bassa have over the operation and the fact they stick rigidly to rules even if it disadvantages crew and passengers.
I'm not happy with the amount of tax I pay on allowances, whilst the Bassa reps sat back and did absolutely nothing.
In fact I'm really not happy with Bassa period, the only thing Bassa appear to be good at is saying no!
By breaking the strike I feel I've more than 'done my bit'
Originally Posted by MissM
In case you didn't notice, BASSA are trying to control New Fleet but BA will only "discuss" it in the future with them. Check their last proposal. Discuss means nothing.
MissM when you look at the problems caused by Bassa with existing fleets and the day to day running of them why would BA want Bassa anywhere near New Fleet?
Last edited by Meal Chucker; 16th Jun 2010 at 22:10.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: LGW
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Middy wrote
As a Gatwick crew member I support MissM. I disagree, both Unions not just BASSA advised we accept single fleet in the ballot of 2006 as the company told us they would close the base if we didn't accept. From my point of view, the unions at LGW did exactly what they were supposed to do in 2006. Protect jobs.
That said, we have given enough and I feel we've possibly given to much. the company have stated that LH Gatwick is the most profitable part of the business. Why then, is it necessary to breach our agreements, remove the 2nd PSR and take away our transfer rights.
I stand side by side with my colleague MissM. This is a union busting exercise, nothing more, nothing less and as I proud LGW crew member I will resist and continue to support my union at LGW - BASSA who I feel have communicated with me consistently and clearly throughout this dispute.
MissM, I know you will not reply as you stated but ........
LGW crew work harder and longer that any at LHR for less pay negotiated by BASSA. How dare you imply that their voice is unimportant to the current situation. They are worth more to our customers and BA and the rest of BA staff than any 550 hours per year cabin crew at LHR are.
If only all cabin crew were as like minded as LGW cabin crew then this would be a better airline to work for. Do not dismiss LGW crew as second raters to yourselves at LHR, they are worth more,individually, than LHR cabin crew put together.They understand CRM, professionalism, customer service and downright good manners between working people trying to keep their livelihoods afloat for the future of the company and all those employed. Get off your high horse and " I am better than them " attitude and join the rest of us to keep 45,000 people in a job for the future. If you and your cronies do not like it then resign.
LGW crew work harder and longer that any at LHR for less pay negotiated by BASSA. How dare you imply that their voice is unimportant to the current situation. They are worth more to our customers and BA and the rest of BA staff than any 550 hours per year cabin crew at LHR are.
If only all cabin crew were as like minded as LGW cabin crew then this would be a better airline to work for. Do not dismiss LGW crew as second raters to yourselves at LHR, they are worth more,individually, than LHR cabin crew put together.They understand CRM, professionalism, customer service and downright good manners between working people trying to keep their livelihoods afloat for the future of the company and all those employed. Get off your high horse and " I am better than them " attitude and join the rest of us to keep 45,000 people in a job for the future. If you and your cronies do not like it then resign.
As a Gatwick crew member I support MissM. I disagree, both Unions not just BASSA advised we accept single fleet in the ballot of 2006 as the company told us they would close the base if we didn't accept. From my point of view, the unions at LGW did exactly what they were supposed to do in 2006. Protect jobs.
That said, we have given enough and I feel we've possibly given to much. the company have stated that LH Gatwick is the most profitable part of the business. Why then, is it necessary to breach our agreements, remove the 2nd PSR and take away our transfer rights.
I stand side by side with my colleague MissM. This is a union busting exercise, nothing more, nothing less and as I proud LGW crew member I will resist and continue to support my union at LGW - BASSA who I feel have communicated with me consistently and clearly throughout this dispute.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't see any reason as to why LGW should remain in the NSP.
First BASSA sold out the regions, now you suggest they sell out LGW, what will it be next EF? The ruthless self protection by BASSA has partly led to this ill supported strike. The majority of CC can see that unless they are on WW at LHR this dispute is not really about them. That is why LGW was wholly unaffected by the IA and was able to operate all its services on strike days.
You cannot systematically protect a well paid section of the CC community at the expense of everyone else for a prolonged period. BASSA have sold the all their silverware and now have no currency left to spend with BA. BASSA have over the years shown that they only really care about WW LHR, everything else has been subservient to this group, now this is biting them.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HaHaHAha
No of course I don't know but it was MissM that made mention of letters coming out in the post that she had not yet got.
1. I was explaining why this might not have happened yet. eg. talks with ACAS.
2. I was just saying that I would rather sign a contract than run the risk of being sacked for striking if I were her.
It has been a common thought on here that the unions protection of 12 weeks has run out now and although the union say that this new ballot means that the protection will start again, many people feel Willie Walsh will not see it that way and will sack crew if they strike again.
I don't want to scare anyone. I think it is better to be warned than risk believing this very unreliable union that you are all in.
I think you should be scared if you strike but I am not scare mongering. I actually know and like many striking crew and I would not want any of them to lose their jobs.
No of course I don't know but it was MissM that made mention of letters coming out in the post that she had not yet got.
1. I was explaining why this might not have happened yet. eg. talks with ACAS.
2. I was just saying that I would rather sign a contract than run the risk of being sacked for striking if I were her.
It has been a common thought on here that the unions protection of 12 weeks has run out now and although the union say that this new ballot means that the protection will start again, many people feel Willie Walsh will not see it that way and will sack crew if they strike again.
I don't want to scare anyone. I think it is better to be warned than risk believing this very unreliable union that you are all in.
I think you should be scared if you strike but I am not scare mongering. I actually know and like many striking crew and I would not want any of them to lose their jobs.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HaHaHaHa.
You misunderstand me.
LGW cabin crew do not stand by a union who sold then down the road.
Who let their position slide.
Who turned their back when things got difficult.
Who choose to ignore them when things do not suit.
Who choose to offer a pay cut to protect LHR staff when they had already sold LGW out.
LGW cabin crew are the salt of the earth, they should be proud of their positions and asteem within BA and its workforce.
You misunderstand me.
LGW cabin crew do not stand by a union who sold then down the road.
Who let their position slide.
Who turned their back when things got difficult.
Who choose to ignore them when things do not suit.
Who choose to offer a pay cut to protect LHR staff when they had already sold LGW out.
LGW cabin crew are the salt of the earth, they should be proud of their positions and asteem within BA and its workforce.