British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disciplinaries
Eddy wrote:
The evidence is to the contrary. Willie Walsh gave these figures at a colleague forum.
For 28 concluded disciplinary cases on bullying and harassment, there were:
5 - no further action
3 - referred back to their manager
13 - final written warning
2 - final written warning and demoted
5 - dismissed
So, 20 of the 28 cases were serious, three fell into the category of worth a slap on the wrist, only five were innocent.
If any of those who were disciplined feel aggrieved, then they have a double-appeal process they can invoke. Why are they not appealing? Because they are as guilty as hell. Unite knows this (as they would have provided assistance during the disciplinary hearings), yet they want Willie Walsh to rescind the penalties.
This I regard as probably the most deplorable act by this union during this dispute. Any right-minded union member should be appalled that Unite wants perpetrators of bullying and harassment to get away with it.
Yes - a lot of the people facing action are innocent.
For 28 concluded disciplinary cases on bullying and harassment, there were:
5 - no further action
3 - referred back to their manager
13 - final written warning
2 - final written warning and demoted
5 - dismissed
So, 20 of the 28 cases were serious, three fell into the category of worth a slap on the wrist, only five were innocent.
If any of those who were disciplined feel aggrieved, then they have a double-appeal process they can invoke. Why are they not appealing? Because they are as guilty as hell. Unite knows this (as they would have provided assistance during the disciplinary hearings), yet they want Willie Walsh to rescind the penalties.
This I regard as probably the most deplorable act by this union during this dispute. Any right-minded union member should be appalled that Unite wants perpetrators of bullying and harassment to get away with it.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posted by The Blue Riband
The majority of the Bassa mentalists only communicate via the Bassa forum.
They do not read ESS .
They do not listen to anybody who doesn't agree with the lemmings views.
They seem incapable of rational thought or developing any kind of discussion.
Any contrary view is quickly derided in as rude a manner possible.
Everyone is against them. Everyone else is wrong
The majority of the Bassa mentalists only communicate via the Bassa forum.
They do not read ESS .
They do not listen to anybody who doesn't agree with the lemmings views.
They seem incapable of rational thought or developing any kind of discussion.
Any contrary view is quickly derided in as rude a manner possible.
Everyone is against them. Everyone else is wrong
Today in CRC, I witnessed the most appalling intimidating behaviour against non striking cabin crew encouraged by a BASSA rep sitting around in the cafeteria with her fellow strikers.
I personally never had a problem with Willie Walsh returning Staff Travel with seniority, but now I can't wait for him to do whatever he has to to get rid of this militant minority and their despicable behaviour. They give the rest of BA cabin crew a bad name and I cannot wait to see the back of some of them.
Miss M,
With regards to your suggestion that I should go to New Fleet, Mr Bunker has answered most eloquently on my behalf. I'd like to add though, Miss M, as your Union BASSA failed you, perhaps you and your fellow strikers a should give it a go because there may be nothing else left for you on any other fleet. Infact you'd be really lucky if you're even given an option to go on it.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by MissM
Crew crossed the picket line for several reasons but no doubt they are supporting our management. The rest of us are trying to save our careers by trying to get the best possible deal with BA.
Originally Posted by MissM
Crew crossed the picket line for several reasons but no doubt they are supporting our management. The rest of us are trying to save our careers by trying to get the best possible deal with BA.
Please look at the bigger picture.
Our jobs would not have been that much different the first strikes round if we'd accepted the offer on the table.
You may feel our careers are protected by strike.
I feel our careers are put in jeopardy with every step we take along the path with striking. The reason being that we lose money as a result of every strike, and the more
key we lose, the more someone in the company will suffer. How is that fair?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
Caribbean Boy.
I'm led to believe, though I have no figures to hand, that the number of cabin crew suspended and/or dismissed as a consequence of industrial unrest is closer to 60. The figure of 28 may have been added to.
And although you state 20 out of 28 were serious, on who's assessment was this based. Have you the details of all cases? And therein lies my point. BA management believe they were serious. They may well have been serious, but without independent assessment how can those decisions be trusted. And I'm certain that had 20 people been released with no further action, then ardent supporters of Walsh and his way would have been equally suspicious of the result and outcome.
I'm led to believe, though I have no figures to hand, that the number of cabin crew suspended and/or dismissed as a consequence of industrial unrest is closer to 60. The figure of 28 may have been added to.
And although you state 20 out of 28 were serious, on who's assessment was this based. Have you the details of all cases? And therein lies my point. BA management believe they were serious. They may well have been serious, but without independent assessment how can those decisions be trusted. And I'm certain that had 20 people been released with no further action, then ardent supporters of Walsh and his way would have been equally suspicious of the result and outcome.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And although you state 20 out of 28 were serious, on who's assessment was this based. Have you the details of all cases? And therein lies my point. BA management believe they were serious. They may well have been serious, but without independent assessment how can those decisions be trusted.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Farnham, UK
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767
I understand your concerns about the disciplinary procedures, but why change the process during industrial unrest. These procedures are agreed procedures between union & company. They are published in the Employment Guide and provide a process for dealing with a number of issues that are deemed disciplinary - not just bullying and harasment. These procedures have checks, balances and the ability to appeal. They apply to ALL BA employees; cabin crew, ground staff, pilots, managers, etc.
Why does BASSA feel that the rules that apply to everyone somehow don't apply to them?
I understand your concerns about the disciplinary procedures, but why change the process during industrial unrest. These procedures are agreed procedures between union & company. They are published in the Employment Guide and provide a process for dealing with a number of issues that are deemed disciplinary - not just bullying and harasment. These procedures have checks, balances and the ability to appeal. They apply to ALL BA employees; cabin crew, ground staff, pilots, managers, etc.
Why does BASSA feel that the rules that apply to everyone somehow don't apply to them?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
Tiramisu.
I trust you have reported your allegation to the correct authority and not just highlighted it on here.
I understand that anybody, strikers or non-strikers can apply to join new fleet, albeit with certain conditions inposed. Individuals will make their own decisions. For me, on what I have seen proposed by BA up to now, I'll stay where I am. When the fleet is formalised I'll make another decision. But, business rarely makes changes which benefit employees financially.
I trust you have reported your allegation to the correct authority and not just highlighted it on here.
I understand that anybody, strikers or non-strikers can apply to join new fleet, albeit with certain conditions inposed. Individuals will make their own decisions. For me, on what I have seen proposed by BA up to now, I'll stay where I am. When the fleet is formalised I'll make another decision. But, business rarely makes changes which benefit employees financially.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've just spoken to Tiramisu and heard about what happened in CRC and I'm disgusted. Absolutely disgusted. The immaturity of (fortunately a minority of) people seems to know few bounds.
The more I hear about incidents like this, the more I'm confident that my decision to work was the right one, for I want as little to do with the sort of people who would engage in this behaviour as possible.
The more I hear about incidents like this, the more I'm confident that my decision to work was the right one, for I want as little to do with the sort of people who would engage in this behaviour as possible.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
I've made it clear that these cases are part of an exceptional circumstance. I have not stated a change in procedure should be permanent.
To negate these exceptional times back to normality and to rebuild trust for the benefit of all, I believe an independent solution is necessary. This is not BASSA wanting to change the rules to suit themselves, the outcome may confirm BA's initial assessment.
It is about settling a bitter and damaging dispute and rebuilding trust and cooperation.
I repeat for the final time, this is an exceptional case, subject to the most bitter dispute in BA's history and generally in recent times.
To negate these exceptional times back to normality and to rebuild trust for the benefit of all, I believe an independent solution is necessary. This is not BASSA wanting to change the rules to suit themselves, the outcome may confirm BA's initial assessment.
It is about settling a bitter and damaging dispute and rebuilding trust and cooperation.
I repeat for the final time, this is an exceptional case, subject to the most bitter dispute in BA's history and generally in recent times.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And for the final time, I repeat that I agree that what you propose would be a sensible way forward.... But it doesn't change the fact that a dangerous prescedent would be set.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
Despite my views being more BASSA than BA, I would never condone the behaviour Tiramisu infers. Eddy, you are merely subject to hearsay. Tiramisu I hope, has reported this incident rather than spread gossip.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767,
I am inclined to agree with you. I had a lengthy conversation a while ago with someone in BA who is an authority on this subject who also believes that an independent third party review would be a good idea. The reason was to resolve the dispute. Implicit in this point of view is that BA's disciplinary procedures are robust enough to withstand scrutiny.
I am inclined to agree with you. I had a lengthy conversation a while ago with someone in BA who is an authority on this subject who also believes that an independent third party review would be a good idea. The reason was to resolve the dispute. Implicit in this point of view is that BA's disciplinary procedures are robust enough to withstand scrutiny.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've made it clear that these cases are part of an exceptional circumstance. I have not stated a change in procedure should be permanent.
To negate these exceptional times back to normality and to rebuild trust for the benefit of all, I believe an independent solution is necessary. This is not BASSA wanting to change the rules to suit themselves, the outcome may confirm BA's initial assessment.
It is about settling a bitter and damaging dispute and rebuilding trust and cooperation.
I repeat for the final time, this is an exceptional case, subject to the most bitter dispute in BA's history and generally in recent times.
To negate these exceptional times back to normality and to rebuild trust for the benefit of all, I believe an independent solution is necessary. This is not BASSA wanting to change the rules to suit themselves, the outcome may confirm BA's initial assessment.
It is about settling a bitter and damaging dispute and rebuilding trust and cooperation.
I repeat for the final time, this is an exceptional case, subject to the most bitter dispute in BA's history and generally in recent times.
But the letter from Unite doesn't really ask for an independent assessment of the disciplinaries according to those procedures agreed between BA and themselves does it? It refers, as ever, in emotive language to "vindictive, disproportionate and unnecessary. Unite is therefore seeking the withdrawal of all disciplinary measures administered etc etc". So, I'm afraid it is rather BASSA looking to change the rules to suit themselves.
Hardly independent. More like, go away and leave us alone. This is not a request for ACAS to ensure the agreed procedures are being adhered to. As Eddy notes, a number of cases have been innocent and, indeed, even the CEO (much maligned as he is by so many on the Unite battlefront) has noted a number have had no case to answer and others have merely had "administrative" penalties applied. I'm not suggesting that's a pleasant thing but it's not the end of that person's particular career world. Also, appeals are available but, certainly for me, I'm not hearing much about any of those taking place.
I don't know Tiramisu but I do know Eddy and as he's spoken to her regarding today's observations in the CRC I've no reason to doubt his, and thus her, integrity in this matter and would ask you to think who exactly is bringing the bitterness and damage to this dispute. Exceptional case it may be but that doesn't mean the rules need to be flexed in order to resolve it. If anything I'd expect a more rigid application of the rules so that in the aftermath of all this terrible fiasco the review of actions will show that all applicable guides and regulations were adhered to. By both parties.
Tiramisu, on a personal note, sorry to hear about today's events in the CRC, some people very dear to me have been personally on the receiving end of some pretty underwhelming behaviour from her crews in recent times. What I do know is that BA are currently not remotely prepared to countenance such behaviour.
And finally, Eddy, on a lighter note (and, clearly, I'm avoiding football like the plague being on here at this time) it'd be a pleasure to buy you a pint when we fly next/am in the Arora. Hope you're well.
ATB
MrB
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm also really interested to know what happened in the CRC. The fact that this allegedly involved a BASSA rep confirms to me that resigning my membership from this so called voice of crew, was absolutely the right thing to do. I was sick of being represented by people who deliberately mislead, and their arrogance in the face of letting down so many people is shocking. But for someone in the position of negotiating on behalf of crew, and to be advising them, to act in view of other crew in anything other than as an example of how to behave properly, should be a wake up call to others. Crew who are dumb enough to go along with this, will no doubt be trotting off with their P45s soon enough. How many crew have to be suspended for intimidating behaviour before it sinks in to just STOP IT and get on with the job - the reason they are supposed to be in CRC in the first place.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
Eddy.
Does the concept of a union not resisting unpopular, though maybe necessary change, for the benefit and protection of its members, providing no opposition to an unrepentant management, and allowing roughshot imposition of changes not set a dangerous precedent.
To my mind both Walsh and BASSA have dragged us into this mess in equal measure, but of the potential for precedents to be established I believe independent conclusion of disciplinary action to be the better of unchallenged and detrimental changes to contracts.
It is through both sides failing to compromise that we arrive where we are, it will take compromise to return to normality. That has to be the only fair solution.
Does the concept of a union not resisting unpopular, though maybe necessary change, for the benefit and protection of its members, providing no opposition to an unrepentant management, and allowing roughshot imposition of changes not set a dangerous precedent.
To my mind both Walsh and BASSA have dragged us into this mess in equal measure, but of the potential for precedents to be established I believe independent conclusion of disciplinary action to be the better of unchallenged and detrimental changes to contracts.
It is through both sides failing to compromise that we arrive where we are, it will take compromise to return to normality. That has to be the only fair solution.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBunker
I would have been happy to work to current crewing levels if they had been negotiated, not imposed.
You can disagree as much as you like. I still stand by my opinion that many are doing exactly what I have described. Look at the turnout of our previous two ballots, which have been in majority on both occassions. The numbers for industrial action have been high. Some of them crossed the picket line and only voted for industrial action to give the union a strong negotiation mandate. If we believe BA, the majority of crew reported for duty which includes a huge number of those who voted for industrial action. They are the ones I am referring to. Surely they can not have been pleasant with the changes to their terms and conditions because otherwise they would have voted against industrial action or not voted at all. The ones who went to work and do not mind with the changes to our terms and conditions are in minority of everyone who went to work.
Eddy
I wish it would end today but it will end for me when BASSA say that they have reached an agreement with BA.
I would accept last year's deal if included full reinstatement of ST with my original DOJ.
The Blu Riband
It's saddening to read that you don't think that I'm not debating, reasoning or listening but instead repeating, telling lies and insulting everyone who disagrees. I have tried my very best to answer and please everyone since the first day I joined this forum. I have never insulted anyone deliberately. I have used a particular nicknames for strikebreaking crew and said that it's a cowardly behaviour to go to work during the strike but it has never been aimed at anyone individually. I spend a lot of time, both home and downroute, visiting this forum because I think it is important that we at least try to explain what we are doing and for what reasons. This kind of discussion is not available at any of the other forums as they represent one way communication. If your opinion differs, it's not welcome. This sort of attitude does not serve us well.
BASSA have offered savings worth almost £63 million pounds.The pay cut, or loan as some wish to put it, represents a small part of it.
Do I respect the right of BA staff to not strike or to support the non-strikers?
Everyone who is part of our union should have supported the majority. Everyone who failed, for whatever reasons, should resign their membership from the union. I accept that there are different opinions and those not part of a union did not even have to make that decision. I am extremely disappointed with everyone who voted for industrial action but crossed the picket line. If they had no intention of going on strike, they should have voted against it. I still think they should have supported the majority even if they had voted against industrial action, but at least they would have acted according to their vote.
Moving on to your other questions. I communicate through many different forums and not only the BASSA forum, I read ESS, I listen to what other people are saying, I seem to be capable of developing discussion and I like to think that my manner is kind. I don't always believe and agree what BASSA are saying and sometimes I do wonder what on earth they are doing. They have made a numerous amount of mistakes in the past but I still have a believe that they are wanting the best for us members.
Chuchinchow
I don't know if you read my reply to you yesterday. Unless you change your patronising attitude towards me, as presented in your post including your wife's situation, I'm not sure if I want to debate with you.
I would have been happy to work to current crewing levels if they had been negotiated, not imposed.
You can disagree as much as you like. I still stand by my opinion that many are doing exactly what I have described. Look at the turnout of our previous two ballots, which have been in majority on both occassions. The numbers for industrial action have been high. Some of them crossed the picket line and only voted for industrial action to give the union a strong negotiation mandate. If we believe BA, the majority of crew reported for duty which includes a huge number of those who voted for industrial action. They are the ones I am referring to. Surely they can not have been pleasant with the changes to their terms and conditions because otherwise they would have voted against industrial action or not voted at all. The ones who went to work and do not mind with the changes to our terms and conditions are in minority of everyone who went to work.
Eddy
I wish it would end today but it will end for me when BASSA say that they have reached an agreement with BA.
I would accept last year's deal if included full reinstatement of ST with my original DOJ.
The Blu Riband
It's saddening to read that you don't think that I'm not debating, reasoning or listening but instead repeating, telling lies and insulting everyone who disagrees. I have tried my very best to answer and please everyone since the first day I joined this forum. I have never insulted anyone deliberately. I have used a particular nicknames for strikebreaking crew and said that it's a cowardly behaviour to go to work during the strike but it has never been aimed at anyone individually. I spend a lot of time, both home and downroute, visiting this forum because I think it is important that we at least try to explain what we are doing and for what reasons. This kind of discussion is not available at any of the other forums as they represent one way communication. If your opinion differs, it's not welcome. This sort of attitude does not serve us well.
BASSA have offered savings worth almost £63 million pounds.The pay cut, or loan as some wish to put it, represents a small part of it.
Do I respect the right of BA staff to not strike or to support the non-strikers?
Everyone who is part of our union should have supported the majority. Everyone who failed, for whatever reasons, should resign their membership from the union. I accept that there are different opinions and those not part of a union did not even have to make that decision. I am extremely disappointed with everyone who voted for industrial action but crossed the picket line. If they had no intention of going on strike, they should have voted against it. I still think they should have supported the majority even if they had voted against industrial action, but at least they would have acted according to their vote.
Moving on to your other questions. I communicate through many different forums and not only the BASSA forum, I read ESS, I listen to what other people are saying, I seem to be capable of developing discussion and I like to think that my manner is kind. I don't always believe and agree what BASSA are saying and sometimes I do wonder what on earth they are doing. They have made a numerous amount of mistakes in the past but I still have a believe that they are wanting the best for us members.
Chuchinchow
I don't know if you read my reply to you yesterday. Unless you change your patronising attitude towards me, as presented in your post including your wife's situation, I'm not sure if I want to debate with you.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 14 Likes
on
7 Posts
Caribbean Boy.
If the outcome of an independent assessment is binding to all, and every suspension and sacking was deemed responsible and necessary then any suggestion of mistrust would have to be forgotten. If the policy and decision of BA is shown to be robust by an indepentent party then that can only benefit all.
If the outcome of an independent assessment is binding to all, and every suspension and sacking was deemed responsible and necessary then any suggestion of mistrust would have to be forgotten. If the policy and decision of BA is shown to be robust by an indepentent party then that can only benefit all.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBunker
I would have been happy to work to current crewing levels if they had been negotiated, not imposed.
You can disagree as much as you like. I still stand by my opinion that many are doing exactly what I have described. Look at the turnout of our previous two ballots, which have been in majority on both occassions. The numbers for industrial action have been high. Some of them crossed the picket line and only voted for industrial action to give the union a strong negotiation mandate. If we believe BA, the majority of crew reported for duty which includes a huge number of those who voted for industrial action. They are the ones I am referring to. Surely they can not have been pleasant with the changes to their terms and conditions because otherwise they would have voted against industrial action or not voted at all. The ones who went to work and do not mind with the changes to our terms and conditions are in minority of everyone who went to work.
I would have been happy to work to current crewing levels if they had been negotiated, not imposed.
You can disagree as much as you like. I still stand by my opinion that many are doing exactly what I have described. Look at the turnout of our previous two ballots, which have been in majority on both occassions. The numbers for industrial action have been high. Some of them crossed the picket line and only voted for industrial action to give the union a strong negotiation mandate. If we believe BA, the majority of crew reported for duty which includes a huge number of those who voted for industrial action. They are the ones I am referring to. Surely they can not have been pleasant with the changes to their terms and conditions because otherwise they would have voted against industrial action or not voted at all. The ones who went to work and do not mind with the changes to our terms and conditions are in minority of everyone who went to work.
I can only offer the observations of the 2 crews I flew with during the strike, during which only one crew member expressed anything other than a disdain for the methodology and actions of unite (that crew member felt the threat of ST removal had forced them into work). I grant you, people, especially "people" people, can sometimes say what is wanted to be heard but that's merely an observation of those that I met during the strike. That's 21 out of 22 (had 2 vols on my second flight).
I do agree though, that from a point of view of support, there's a degree of opprobrium that's understandable for those who voted Yes and went to work.
Perhaps a misunderstanding of what the individual responsibilities of their voting Yes were?
MrB