British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)

[midman]

Originally Posted by bacabincrew

A number of people may be under the impression that the 'imposition' is just about one crew member less on board and aircraft - on certain routes it is in fact 3 crew members less (as I am sure some of you know)

There are maybe 4 or 5 routes (out of 150) that have had the second crewmember taken off, as those few routes were long haul with demanding leisure passengers on board, eg Mauritius, (I know LGW do these routes all the time with the reduced complement, but that's not my point here).

But which routes have had a third crewmember taken off them?

[Chuchinchow]

Thursday, 6 May 2010

Thursday, 6 May 2010 is the date set for local authority elections in England & Wales.

It may, in all probability, be the date of a General Election throughout the United Kingdom.

What effect will the ongoing, running sore that will the BASSA vs BA dispute have on Labour's chances at the polls? How many Labour-held seats will be lost to other political parties?

How many extra votes will the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats gain as a result of the voting public's (alleged) dissatisfaction at the BA cabin crew strike, and the inconvenience this is causing, not only in this country but around the world?

Discuss.

The sooner Len McLoosekey, Lizanne Homalone and all the other strike leaders realise the elemental damage they are causing to the lives of all BA employees the better we - every single member of the cabin crew - will be.


These are my views - and the unspoken opinions of thousands of other BA staff.

[HiFlyer14]

The truth in all of this are that the Cabin Crew are scared, genuinely scared for their futures, they see this imposition as the thin end of the wedge, we all know that BA needs to cut costs, we all want to play a part in that, we all love working for BA, however we simply have no trust in the actions of our management (both IFCE and above) - New Fleet is seen by many as a 'Trojan Horse' much as Openskies was perceived to be.

Yes I agree the Union may have handled things better - however in my opinion the biggest failing in all of this is the way that BA have communicated the need for change to their employees - that is the massive failure through all of this. We have a constantly changing Head of IFCE/Cabin Services - call it what you like - and because of that constant change there is no consistency in the messages we are given. If I where on the Board of BA I wold be asking how can we alienate such a massive part of our workforce in what is perceived by most to be the most important customer facing role in the company.

BAcabincrew - I totally agree. And that is why change is required. Change to the way in which we conduct Employee Relations within our company. Change from being told "do it this way" from BA. Then "No, stop. Ignore that - do it that way" from BASSA. Damned if we do, damned if we don't.

I know you don't support the Professional Cabin Crew Council but that is exactly what we are advocating: A Sea Change to Employee Relations.
The reason why BA cabin crew are scared is because BASSA have instilled that fear in them. "New Fleet is the beginning of the end, you'll be sat at home no work, "etc. But it doesn't have to be like that. There were measures to stop that:
A monthly travel payment set at 2008/9 rates (profit year)
A negotiated route transfer deal (A/B/C)

With those things in place, New Fleet doesn't have to be the big, bad monster that everyone is worried about. But those offers, along with the others I listed earlier, have gone now. Rejected by Unite. Instead Unite are asking for crew back on the aircraft. Putting crew back on the aircraft simply means New Fleet starts next month instead of next year. If working with one crew member less keeps the wolf from the door, why are Unite trying to change that?

Look mate we are all colleagues in this together, whichever side of the fence we are on. We all want the same things - doing a job we love, with the best T&Cs we can possibly achieve. The difference between Unite and the Professional Cabin Crew Council will be the way we go about achieving those things. Unite think that downing tools every time the company need change is the answer. The PCCC believes that negotiating and collaborating to achieve a solution that benefits all of us is a better way forward. For everybody: the crew, the company and the customer.

Rocket science, it is not. Ask your learned professors.

See you on a jump seat one day soon I hope.

[Finnster]

to cut to the chase bassa are out of control, unite can not reign them in , as a previous poster said a union does not act on behalf of its members it acts on behalf of the union , membership dues are everything.

[Finnster]

mr bunker good post bit of humour works a treat

[bacabincrew]

HiFlyer14

Fair play to you and no hard feelings if we fail to disagree xx

By the way if I could give you one tip or piece of advice - you should on a weekly basis be posting by how many your membership is increasing - that way showing that you are gaining support, no mickey taking intended just a genuine piece of advice because if you do get momentum you may well increase your numbers

[Finnster]

skinnydip will have a look at said caravan saturday sounds like its at the same level as the underpants sign last weekend!

[bacabincrew]

Midman

An additional main crew member was carried on routes from LHR to MIA, LAX, DEL, BOM, DAC & SIN

3 Crew on Rio and Buenos Aires on 777 - full details on page 30 of WW Agreement for additional crew

[winstonsmith]

Question is if you still need additional crew members on these routes - some of them before imposition used to be GIG, MIA, MRU, CPT - which are mainly leisure destinations.

1. LGW has worked with reduced crewing levels for years to leisure destinations - allowing UNITE to use this as one of the reasons to strike can be a dangerous path! BA will most likely say this too - of course it is different at LHR according to BASSA - they serve a completely different clientele.

2. BA aircraft carries less passengers than before - it makes perfect sense to have less crew.

I think it's time to be honest - one of the reasons as to why some crew mind working with less crew is simply because they have to work a bit harder without getting paid for it - and getting shorter times in the bunks. Truth hurts - I know.

[bacabincrew]

I think it's time to be honest - one of the reasons as to why some crew mind working with less crew is simply because they have to work a bit harder without getting paid for it - and getting shorter times in the bunks. Truth hurts - I know.

You quite clearly have no grasp of what it's like to fly as crew have you?

The vast majority of crew have seen no change in their workload as only the CSD's role has fundamentally changed so that blows the first part of your sentence out of the water, the bunk rest is pretty much the same as before, so that blows that part of your argument out of the water.

And according to latest traffic stats load factors we are actually carrying more passengers not less.

Remind me again how many Longhaul routes fly out of LGW?

[Finnster]

off the back off all this i think you will see more and more long haul premium flights out lgw.

[ArthurScargill]

You quite clearly have no grasp of what it's like to fly as crew have you?

The vast majority of crew have seen no change in their workload as only the CSD's role has fundamentally changed so that blows the first part of your sentence out of the water, the bunk rest is pretty much the same as before, so that blows that part of your argument out of the water.

And according to latest traffic stats load factors we are actually carrying more passengers not less.

Remind me again how many Longhaul routes fly out of LGW?

All due respect BACABINCREW but if what you say above is true, then why on earth or you risking your job ? Seems like the 'imposition' hasn't affected you at all

[bacabincrew]

All due respect BACABINCREW but if what you say above is true, then why on earth or you risking your job ? Seems like the 'imposition' hasn't affected you at all

Arthur - it hasn't and the overwhelming number of crew you speak to will tell you that, you know yourself now that this dispute is not about one off and never has been - why am I risking my job? To try to protect my future, that is the real reason every Cabin Crew member is striking, honestly, people are so worried about what will be imposed next - there is simply no trust nor faith in this current leadership team. People are just so concerned for their futures that is the biggest failure in all of this dispute.

[Stoic]

bacabincrew

It seems to lots of people that you are protecting the highly-paid CSD's past.

[HiFlyer14]

People are just so concerned for their futures that is the biggest failure in all of this dispute.

Once again I agree BAcabincrew. I too am concerned for my future.

Concerned that I could have had:
A secure monthly travel payment, fixed at a good rate.
A deal on how to transfer routes to New Fleet, beneficial to us.
A bonus paid after 3 years.
An extra staff travel ticket.
Shares
A reasonable 3 yr pay deal.

And all just for working an incy tincy wincy bit harder. But now I can't. Because UNITE decided, on our behalf, that that wasn't good enough.

And now I am even more concerned for my future because this strike is costing BA money. Money that will come back to us and that possibly means:

Downgraded hotel accomodation downroute.
More cost saving measures put in place.
New Fleet to arrive quicker than originally planned.

So yes we should all be very worried about our futures. The future that UNITE have ensured will be a lot less palatable than it would have been 6 months ago.

See - I didn't even mention the Professional Cabin Crew Council...

[Glamgirl]

Well, here's one of the countless emails sent out by bassa today:

Again, for Gatwick's Future

Tonight we are asking once again that you make a choice. We know you're
scared. We know you're frightened, but this is probably the most important
choice you will make in your entire career. Tomorrow we ask that you
withhold you're labour until the end of the industrial action. We ask this
of you in order that we can protect your future and the future of Gatwick.

Our dispute is legitimate and protected under law. Please believe us that
we have tried every conceivable alternative to industrial action, however
we are left with no other choice.

We ask you to do this to in order to fight for Gatwick transfer rights,
Gatwick's Pursers and career progression and our Gatwick flying
agreements.

It's important to remember that this base has contributed to cost savings when single fleet was introduced. We've given more than enough and are currently the most profitable part of British Airways. To take anything more from us is nothing more than day light robbery. It's time to say enough.

Be brave and take courage from those that went before you last weekend. If
you decided to break the strike last weekend, it's not too late to make
the right decision this time. All it takes is a little bit of courage.

Join us tomorrow at the Gatwick support centre located at the Marriott
Courtyard Hotel - South terminal. The picket line will be manned from
07:30 and you will be overwhelmed with the support you receive. Parking is free.
Be strong, Be brave. You'll never have another chance to fight for your
future.

Don't forget that Unite will be pay all supporters GBP30 strike pay per
day.

GATWICK BASSA and Amicus Team - United

My bold. The highlighted paragraph doesn't explain, however, why the union offered a pay cut. In my opinion, highly contradictory.

In regards to media: The individuals who are pro-strike who've spoken (without approval from BA) to the press have painted BA in a bad light. It should be pretty self-explanatory that the company would not approve of such behaviour. As far as I'm concerned, there has been no bullying from management. There have been emails/letters which spell out clearly the consequences of strike action. Just because some people don't agree with it or don't want to hear it, doesn't mean it's bullying. Plenty of people do feel bullied by the union though, and feel harassed by the union due to countless emails and text messages every day.

As I've said before, I will be wearing my uniform with pride tomorrow when I park in the car park and go to work. I expect to see a majority of my colleagues there. Interestingly enough, nobody from the union seem to be able to confirm/deny whether the majority of reps were/are on annual leave and/or long-term sick.

Gg

Ps. Latest text from bassa: "LGW STRIKERS MOVE 2 TOP OF TRANSFER LIST. HOWS THAT 4 A HEADLINE? Union agreements. Union crew. Stand brave 4 your rights! Support yr LGW colleagues."

Seriously.

These are my opinions and not those of my employer

[midman]

Originally Posted by bacabincrew

the overwhelming number of crew you speak to will tell you that, you know yourself now that this dispute is not about one off and never has been - why am I risking my job? To try to protect my future, that is the real reason every Cabin Crew member is striking, honestly, people are so worried about what will be imposed next - there is simply no trust nor faith in this current leadership team. People are just so concerned for their futures that is the biggest failure in all of this dispute.

But you've just defeated your own argument. You earlier posted all sorts of imposed changes which you suggested were your reasons for the strike. But, as we all suspected, the real reason you are striking is your fear for the 'thick end of the wedge', ie issues which might not arise.

You fear the company will impose further change, but are driving WW to do exactly that in order to cover the costs of industrial action, which is designed to stop those imposed changes? Surely a circular argument?

Further, can you confirm how many cabin crew were on the 777 to GIG and GRU before October 16th last year, and how many after the imposed change?

[bacabincrew]

It seems to lots of people that you are protecting the highly-paid CSD's past.

And that is where the water has become muddied with the vitriol spilt about CSD's etc - it genuinely isnt about that - the 2000 crew who went on strike las week didn't do so to protect CSD's (you should know that crew are far too shallow for that!) - this is about their future's and nothing to do with the CSD's

[Mkat]

bacabincrew

I don't understand this obsession with "imposition". The whole point about the crew complement change is that BA could change it without agreement because it is not a term of your individual contract of employment (as confirmed by the High Court). All key terms of your employment are contractual and therefore can't change without your agreement (or your union's). There was a risk in relation to new fleet, but guarantees have been offered by BA to deal with those concerns (single payment, route transfers etc) as already discussed many times on this thread. So I just don't get why you believe there will be other unilateral changes? Isn't the best way to deal with this to accept the deal on offer and get to a lower cost base so the company can make some money? That in my view is the best possible guarantee you will ever get of no deterioration to your tsandcs.

[Stoic]

2000

So 2000 cabin crew were on strike last week. How many more do you think will strike this weekend? Are there not over 12,000 cabin crew altogether?