British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
WW announced at this weeks' forum that he intends to recoup the cost of IA from the BASSA facilities (thanks Carribean Boy for that post). That would seem totally fair and reasonable. Where exactly is the cost of IA being recouped in Offer 2?
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: england
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bobmij
Have read your reply ,and am still unsure why you are taking that stance .Maybe it is my use of the word game that offends.How about if I rephrase it and say that WW has outwitted Bassa.
I think that you have completely mis interpreted my post.
Have read your reply ,and am still unsure why you are taking that stance .Maybe it is my use of the word game that offends.How about if I rephrase it and say that WW has outwitted Bassa.
I think that you have completely mis interpreted my post.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Student,
Thank you - that explains the financial conundrum (doesn't take much
) I was having!
Wiggy - I guess we will just have to wait and see now about the "BASSA back in the building" dilemma. Of course, we may well have more pain barriers to thrash before then, but it certainly needs to be addressed. Doing nothing, as they say, is not an option now.
Think I'll take WW's advice, and enjoy the Easter break now and try not to think about it.
Happy Easter everyone!
Thank you - that explains the financial conundrum (doesn't take much
) I was having!Wiggy - I guess we will just have to wait and see now about the "BASSA back in the building" dilemma. Of course, we may well have more pain barriers to thrash before then, but it certainly needs to be addressed. Doing nothing, as they say, is not an option now.
Think I'll take WW's advice, and enjoy the Easter break now and try not to think about it.
Happy Easter everyone!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: nowhere near here
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Quote:
BASSA come back in and pick up where they left off - how can that be beneficial to the business
That's a very good question, and I'm sure one that the non-strikers, and the pilots, many of whom I believe BASSA think "are beneath contempt", need an answer to.
BASSA come back in and pick up where they left off - how can that be beneficial to the business
That's a very good question, and I'm sure one that the non-strikers, and the pilots, many of whom I believe BASSA think "are beneath contempt", need an answer to.
Quite a good way of ensuring that the people who caused the mess are bearing most its cost, IMHO.
WW and Unite might go further and dismantle BASSA completely somehow. After the last few weeks I bet Unite are keener on that idea than even WW might be!
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a result at the moment the company can put the last offer back on the table without having to recoup any additional money. Any future IA will come out of next year's IFCE budget and will need to be recouped through further cost savings.
The longer this goes on, the clearer it becomes that BASSA are beyond the control of Unite. If a deal is done, it must be this week but I have my doubts that anything Unite and BA may come up with won't he vetoed by the BASSA hotheads.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How BA is saving £62.5m a year
FlexSRS wrote:
Back in early October, the stated objective was to save £140m. However, later that month, it became £127m by March 2011 or £62.5m per annum. It is this latter figure which is the most quoted.
The savings will be made primarily by the voluntary reduction of 1,700 crew by these means:
Worldwide – effective from 16 November
* One purser position will be removed from all Heathrow Worldwide flights (747,777,767).
* Removal of the additional main crew member on Heathrow long range routes and additional crew member routes
Eurofleet - effective from 1 December:
* The crew complements on Eurofleet flights varied to make them consistent with those currently operated at Gatwick
* The use of a single supervisor on all Eurofleet flights, either a CSD or a purser, balancing the work between these grades
Gatwick – effective from 1 December:
* One purser position replaced with a main crew member on 777 3-class aircraft at Gatwick, consistent with Heathrow.
There is a freeze on basic pay for all crew until March 2011.
There is no timetable announced for new fleet.
The following points will remain, or be incorporated into the Disruption Agreement:
• The definition of disruption remains unchanged.
• The double night will be removed for Worldwide diverted inbound services to anywhere in the UK and Europe, and a minimum of 15 hours off-duty will be achieved if the aircraft is unable to continue to its original destination.
• When disruption takes place the IFCE management team will advise Duty representatives and crew colleagues when and how the disruption agreement has been applied. A review will take place of any disruption at the next joint meeting.
Perhaps someone would be kind enough to confirm some points about the savings?
Earlier, HiFlyer mentioned that the original plan was to take 1 member off to make the savings.
As I understood it, the "1 member off" alone wouldn't be enough to make the £60-70-80m worth of savings on its own, and was also linked to a new disruption agreement and New Fleet. This was on the basis that BillF said the two options were;
(1) Everyone take a share of the pain,
or
(2) Just work a bit harder and new joiners take the pay cut,
2 being the overwhelmingly preferred (if a little myopic!) option.
From the various figures put out by both sides, does anyone have a rough idea of just how much exactly the "1 member off" saves? I can't imagine it's anywhere near the full amount.
Earlier, HiFlyer mentioned that the original plan was to take 1 member off to make the savings.
As I understood it, the "1 member off" alone wouldn't be enough to make the £60-70-80m worth of savings on its own, and was also linked to a new disruption agreement and New Fleet. This was on the basis that BillF said the two options were;
(1) Everyone take a share of the pain,
or
(2) Just work a bit harder and new joiners take the pay cut,
2 being the overwhelmingly preferred (if a little myopic!) option.
From the various figures put out by both sides, does anyone have a rough idea of just how much exactly the "1 member off" saves? I can't imagine it's anywhere near the full amount.
The savings will be made primarily by the voluntary reduction of 1,700 crew by these means:
- All who requested voluntary redundancy - just over 1,000 - were granted VR and have already gone.
- All who requested part-time working, which includes a new 33 per cent contract, will be granted this by March 2011. The offer will be on existing fleets, terms and conditions. There were 5,594 crew who registered interest in PTW.
Worldwide – effective from 16 November
* One purser position will be removed from all Heathrow Worldwide flights (747,777,767).
* Removal of the additional main crew member on Heathrow long range routes and additional crew member routes
Eurofleet - effective from 1 December:
* The crew complements on Eurofleet flights varied to make them consistent with those currently operated at Gatwick
* The use of a single supervisor on all Eurofleet flights, either a CSD or a purser, balancing the work between these grades
Gatwick – effective from 1 December:
* One purser position replaced with a main crew member on 777 3-class aircraft at Gatwick, consistent with Heathrow.
There is a freeze on basic pay for all crew until March 2011.
There is no timetable announced for new fleet.
Also, has the new disruption agreement been imposed along with the 1 member off?
• The definition of disruption remains unchanged.
• The double night will be removed for Worldwide diverted inbound services to anywhere in the UK and Europe, and a minimum of 15 hours off-duty will be achieved if the aircraft is unable to continue to its original destination.
• When disruption takes place the IFCE management team will advise Duty representatives and crew colleagues when and how the disruption agreement has been applied. A review will take place of any disruption at the next joint meeting.
Controversial, moi?
Caribbean Boy
Thanks for injecting a few more facts into the debate.
It is only when you see lines like:
you realise how absurd and ridiculously expensive some of the CC agreements are.
That one in particular is not something, in my experience, many would object to losing when in reality 99% of the crew want to go home ASAP after a diversion anyway!
Thanks for injecting a few more facts into the debate.
It is only when you see lines like:
• The double night will be removed for Worldwide diverted inbound services to anywhere in the UK and Europe, and a minimum of 15 hours off-duty will be achieved if the aircraft is unable to continue to its original destination.
That one in particular is not something, in my experience, many would object to losing when in reality 99% of the crew want to go home ASAP after a diversion anyway!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M Mouse
Quote:
[I]That one in particular is not something, in my experience, many would object to losing when in reality 99% of the crew want to go home ASAP after a diversion anyway!
[/I]
How right you are M Mouse. Of all the years I've spent on WW, not ONCE did I have to divert anyway. It hardly ever happens so why make a fuss over something that might occur in extreme cases? Also, yes, crew would rather go home. I really don't get why this is such an issue?
[I]That one in particular is not something, in my experience, many would object to losing when in reality 99% of the crew want to go home ASAP after a diversion anyway!
[/I]
How right you are M Mouse. Of all the years I've spent on WW, not ONCE did I have to divert anyway. It hardly ever happens so why make a fuss over something that might occur in extreme cases? Also, yes, crew would rather go home. I really don't get why this is such an issue?
Get Smart
It does matter when a year or so ago, because of the two night rule and refusal of alleviation by BASSA, a couple of 747 had to dump their pax after diversion to Singapore. The aircraft were flown home after min rest empty by F/C only. Even more absurd, same thing in Prestwick, dumped pax and aircraft flown empty to Lhr!.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: motorway services
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some say the PIK diversions were the final straw for Willie Walsh. He was allegedly incensed by BASSA's lack of co-operation.
I wonder if BASSA foresaw the consequences of their actions as they smugly refused to invoke the disruption agreement?
I wonder if BASSA foresaw the consequences of their actions as they smugly refused to invoke the disruption agreement?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in a house
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bacabincrew
why should I be arsed what Easyjet, Virgin, Thomson, Monarch pay?
If you can find me an equivalent airline to benchmark against in the UK then the data becomes valid.
If you can find me an equivalent airline to benchmark against in the UK then the data becomes valid.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I work as an HR consultant (also for airlines, albeit not BA) and would like to try and explain how these labor conflicts generally work.
First, there is the point of renumeration. To put it simply if
"you can easily switch employer and maintain or improve on your current remuneration including benefits"
than you are in a market where labor still dictates the working conditions. This is mostly in very knowledge intensive industries with scarce resources of an adequate level. You can expect generous renumeration and wages and benefits will not differ greatly amongst competitors. Industrial Action in these sectors is unheard of.
However, if you are in an industry where labor is easy to come by, easily trained and there is little competition for said labor amongst the employers, than you have little leverage. You can expect lower wages and fewer benefits.
A lot of companies that are in labor conflict about wages are formerly state owned monopolists who now face tough competition from companies established according to a different business model. That is - quite obviously - the case for BA. They need to bring their labor cost to the same level as the competition to survive. There is no alternative. These are also the sectors where IA is common, simply because the employees have no alternative. That is also why unions are necessary.
There is no simple resolution for these conflicts. Eventually BA will have to shift to a business model that is comparable to the new entries to the market like Virgin or the ME carriers. Maybe even like Easyjet and Ryanair for their short haul market. This will - like with all these companies - lead to vigorous labor conflict. Not surprisingly, since the workers are fighting for the preservation of what they had deemed irrevocable.
A lot of sectors who feel as safe as a BA CC felt 10 years ago will face the same problems in the future. Think of IT consultants for one. It is the ugly side of capitalism where we (the consumer) want everything cheap.
I pass no judgement here, just try to insert some perspective from the management point of view to help the discussion. If deemed unwanted, feel free to delete.
First, there is the point of renumeration. To put it simply if
"you can easily switch employer and maintain or improve on your current remuneration including benefits"
than you are in a market where labor still dictates the working conditions. This is mostly in very knowledge intensive industries with scarce resources of an adequate level. You can expect generous renumeration and wages and benefits will not differ greatly amongst competitors. Industrial Action in these sectors is unheard of.
However, if you are in an industry where labor is easy to come by, easily trained and there is little competition for said labor amongst the employers, than you have little leverage. You can expect lower wages and fewer benefits.
A lot of companies that are in labor conflict about wages are formerly state owned monopolists who now face tough competition from companies established according to a different business model. That is - quite obviously - the case for BA. They need to bring their labor cost to the same level as the competition to survive. There is no alternative. These are also the sectors where IA is common, simply because the employees have no alternative. That is also why unions are necessary.
There is no simple resolution for these conflicts. Eventually BA will have to shift to a business model that is comparable to the new entries to the market like Virgin or the ME carriers. Maybe even like Easyjet and Ryanair for their short haul market. This will - like with all these companies - lead to vigorous labor conflict. Not surprisingly, since the workers are fighting for the preservation of what they had deemed irrevocable.
A lot of sectors who feel as safe as a BA CC felt 10 years ago will face the same problems in the future. Think of IT consultants for one. It is the ugly side of capitalism where we (the consumer) want everything cheap.
I pass no judgement here, just try to insert some perspective from the management point of view to help the discussion. If deemed unwanted, feel free to delete.
Last edited by henkybaby; 2nd Apr 2010 at 19:23.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The double night will be removed for Worldwide diverted inbound services to anywhere in the UK and Europe, and a minimum of 15 hours off-duty will be achieved if the aircraft is unable to continue to its original destination.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: england
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and i guess its all these old legacy agreements from god knows how long ago that are one of the issues , my personal feeling is the rest of the airline has moved on and certain sections of cc have not.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: England
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Utopia.
Welcome back Henkbaby!!
Your post was very enlightening.
Across the UK we are seeing a decline in union membership, in the private sector it is only one in seven now.
Why are unions becoming less and less attractive?
As you rightly say, it's a tough world in which companies have to change and fight for survival.
In my view, unions should be adapting at just as quicker pace, if not actually being ahead of the game.
Putting members interests first today means, asking an employer, what can I do for you?
Very different from the 1970's!
In the USA some unions have adopted this model, the companies have been more successful as a result with happy employees and no strife.
Unions and their members could really benefit from such an approach over here. Sure some would really not be like such a radical approach however the prize for the unions is attracting new membership from a more conservative/liberal demography.
I firmly believe that companies would welcome representatives that worked along side their managers and planned the future together.
As you indicate companies have a responsibility to adapt and change in a ruthless world, unions can still be a part of that world, working harmoniously for the greater good.
That's something we would all like to see.
How would it be achieved? CHANGE.
Maybe a radical approach like I am suggesting may get me back to joining a union?
There is no simple resolution for these conflicts. Eventually BA will have to shift to a business model that is comparable to the new entries to the market like Virgin or the ME carriers. Maybe even like Easyjet and Ryanair for their short haul market. This will - like with all these companies - lead to vigorous labor conflict. Not surprisingly, since the workers are fighting for the preservation of what they had deemed irrevocable.
Across the UK we are seeing a decline in union membership, in the private sector it is only one in seven now.
Why are unions becoming less and less attractive?
As you rightly say, it's a tough world in which companies have to change and fight for survival.
In my view, unions should be adapting at just as quicker pace, if not actually being ahead of the game.
Putting members interests first today means, asking an employer, what can I do for you?
Very different from the 1970's!
In the USA some unions have adopted this model, the companies have been more successful as a result with happy employees and no strife.
Unions and their members could really benefit from such an approach over here. Sure some would really not be like such a radical approach however the prize for the unions is attracting new membership from a more conservative/liberal demography.
I firmly believe that companies would welcome representatives that worked along side their managers and planned the future together.
As you indicate companies have a responsibility to adapt and change in a ruthless world, unions can still be a part of that world, working harmoniously for the greater good.
That's something we would all like to see.
How would it be achieved? CHANGE.
Maybe a radical approach like I am suggesting may get me back to joining a union?
Last edited by Clarified; 3rd Apr 2010 at 07:44.
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M.Mouse
That one in particular is not something, in my experience, many would object to losing when in reality 99% of the crew want to go home ASAP after a diversion anyway!
Not once did I get anyone agreeing with me.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the disruption agreement causes disruption!
cessnapete/winstonsmith
I wholeheartedly agree with you. What I'm saying is that diverstions don't happen very often (granted they probably happen often enough to cause pain for BA), but as far as crew are concerned, giving this agreement up for a more sensible one shouldn't be an issue. Afterall, it's not as if it happens on a regular basis. I've never had a diversion payment or 2 unwanted local nights so if this agreement is changed, I wouldn't even miss it!! Therefore, I don't see why it's a problem for crew? As far as I'm concerned, the newly proposed disruption agreement is perfectable acceptable and in line with industry scheme - or perhaps as mentioned above, still overly fair as 15 hours could be reduced to the same as F/D.
The current agreement is outdated, unnecessary, expensive. No wonder its called a 'disruption' agreement because that's exactly what it does. The pax/BA are severely inconveninced while the crew collect 2 local nights and a diversion payment!!
One thing that used to happen frequently before LGW became single fleet, was LHR who were called out to operate a flight from LGW triggering 2 LOCAL NIGHTS at the Arora hotel upon returning to back to LGW from a trip. I could never understand that? Why? It's 45 mins down the road. I know that was nothing to do with the disruption agreement, but yet another example of crew agreements that I felt was a total waste of time and money.
I wholeheartedly agree with you. What I'm saying is that diverstions don't happen very often (granted they probably happen often enough to cause pain for BA), but as far as crew are concerned, giving this agreement up for a more sensible one shouldn't be an issue. Afterall, it's not as if it happens on a regular basis. I've never had a diversion payment or 2 unwanted local nights so if this agreement is changed, I wouldn't even miss it!! Therefore, I don't see why it's a problem for crew? As far as I'm concerned, the newly proposed disruption agreement is perfectable acceptable and in line with industry scheme - or perhaps as mentioned above, still overly fair as 15 hours could be reduced to the same as F/D.
The current agreement is outdated, unnecessary, expensive. No wonder its called a 'disruption' agreement because that's exactly what it does. The pax/BA are severely inconveninced while the crew collect 2 local nights and a diversion payment!!
One thing that used to happen frequently before LGW became single fleet, was LHR who were called out to operate a flight from LGW triggering 2 LOCAL NIGHTS at the Arora hotel upon returning to back to LGW from a trip. I could never understand that? Why? It's 45 mins down the road. I know that was nothing to do with the disruption agreement, but yet another example of crew agreements that I felt was a total waste of time and money.
Last edited by Get Smart; 3rd Apr 2010 at 08:52.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I keep saying that you have to experience the difference between negotiation and consultation, to see what happens. What you are left with then is the power of your contract and a legal challenge in the courts and a self funded one at that.
When Henky speaks of bringing costs in line with competition, then allow real competition. If BA want to pay what other companies pay at other airports, then allow real competition at LHR. Allow Easy and Ryan in. Allow parity with all LH carriers in how much presence is allowed. Then the staff will have ease of movement between employers and BA will just be another carrier, as it is at say at LGW.
I don't think BA will want that though. They want both sides, low labour costs and fortress LHR, the Golden Runways!
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 86
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The latest from Bassa reps
A MESSAGE FROM YOUR REPS
Firstly apologies that we are currently not covering the office.
BA are refusing derostering and we have been trying to cover it with reps
on days off. This is now proving impossible. Most reps are now flying, or
trying to grab a couple of days off after the hectic last few days. As a
result the only cover we can offer for at least the next few days are the
emergency mobile nos. for EF and WW. We would ask that you restrict calls
to urgent, or emergency only, as these phones are being covered by reps
who are on days off, MBT or leave. Hopefully things will return to a
degree of normality soon, but in the meantime those of you visiting the
office for help or advise will experience a little taste of life without
BASSA should BA succeed in their ambition of neutralising us.
Turning to the issue of strike breakers we would like to
fully endorse the views of Duncan, our branch secretary. Whilst we accept
that bullying and intimidation forced some of our newer crew into work,
that is not an excuse for our senior crew. What has saddened us is that
some of these individuals have requested our help recently over roster and
sickness issues. We have had our help and guidance thrown back in our face
by these very same crew who have ignored the strike call and gone into
work. We have also been shocked by 2 other instances that we know of. In
one a senior crew member on EF went to work on OT during the dispute, and
one other main crew sold back her leave so she could work over the 3 and 4
days. In a workforce of 12000 there will always be pariahs!!
In another verified more lighthearted story we had a stwdss selected from
standby on EF who, on arriving at the ops desk, was not recognised. That
is until she removed her dark glasses - and wig!! She must have been
really proud in what she was doing. We wonder if she took it off during
the service, and then popped it back on whilst changing into civvies on
arrival back in LHR. The saddest thing is in all of this when Mr. Walsh
and Mr. Francis move on they will have left a legacy of destroyed CRM.
Crew against crew, cabin crew against pilots, and even pilots against
pilots. Perhaps it looks good on their CV. Probably it doesn't!
Many crew have been asking us if there is any truth in the rumour that the
strike breakers will be first on to any New Fleet. Obviously with no
meetings this is currently just a rumour. "Honest" Bill is on record as
saying no one will be forced onto New Fleet. With his track record since
arriving as head of IFCE, expect postings in weeks!
All we will say is whilst we remain as reps, no one who stayed with us and
obeyed the Unite call to strike will ever be forced onto any New Fleet!
Turning to your concerns on the issues of pay deductions and staff travel,
we are still waiting for a formal response from the legal side of Unite,
as to what challenge they will mount. In the meantime it is worth
forwarding your payslip with the claim form so any strike pay can be
actioned. Duncan gave the address and details in his message.
If you are unsure how many days pay BA have deducted, divide your basic
pay figure at the bottom of your payslip by 365. Then divide this figure
into your loss of earning total shown on the payslip, and it will give you
the days deducted. For part-time crew BA have decided for the purposes of
removing money they will treat you as full-time crew! So for 50% crew
double your basic salary and then use the same formulae, and for 75% crew
divide the basic by 3, then multiply by 4, and again use the same
formulae. This is not about the wrongs of taking salary when you are on
days off, MBT, leave etc, or part time being treated as full time. The
lawyers will deal with those points. This is just to establish how many
days you have had deducted so you can submit your claim form.
You will be aware of the additional funds of 700K raised by the Executive
Counsel. Our view and confirmed by your feedback is that these funds
should be used asap to help those amongst us suffering hardship following
BAs salary deductions. Ideas are being floated as to what form this could
take, but we hope to have some positive news within days.
So finally a big thank you to all of you. We are only as strong as our
membership - and so right now we feel very very strong! All of us feel
proud to represent such wonderful people.
Happy Easter and, for a few days anyway, go in peace.
Your Reps
Doesn't sound like all is well in the Bassa camp then?
Firstly apologies that we are currently not covering the office.
BA are refusing derostering and we have been trying to cover it with reps
on days off. This is now proving impossible. Most reps are now flying, or
trying to grab a couple of days off after the hectic last few days. As a
result the only cover we can offer for at least the next few days are the
emergency mobile nos. for EF and WW. We would ask that you restrict calls
to urgent, or emergency only, as these phones are being covered by reps
who are on days off, MBT or leave. Hopefully things will return to a
degree of normality soon, but in the meantime those of you visiting the
office for help or advise will experience a little taste of life without
BASSA should BA succeed in their ambition of neutralising us.
Turning to the issue of strike breakers we would like to
fully endorse the views of Duncan, our branch secretary. Whilst we accept
that bullying and intimidation forced some of our newer crew into work,
that is not an excuse for our senior crew. What has saddened us is that
some of these individuals have requested our help recently over roster and
sickness issues. We have had our help and guidance thrown back in our face
by these very same crew who have ignored the strike call and gone into
work. We have also been shocked by 2 other instances that we know of. In
one a senior crew member on EF went to work on OT during the dispute, and
one other main crew sold back her leave so she could work over the 3 and 4
days. In a workforce of 12000 there will always be pariahs!!
In another verified more lighthearted story we had a stwdss selected from
standby on EF who, on arriving at the ops desk, was not recognised. That
is until she removed her dark glasses - and wig!! She must have been
really proud in what she was doing. We wonder if she took it off during
the service, and then popped it back on whilst changing into civvies on
arrival back in LHR. The saddest thing is in all of this when Mr. Walsh
and Mr. Francis move on they will have left a legacy of destroyed CRM.
Crew against crew, cabin crew against pilots, and even pilots against
pilots. Perhaps it looks good on their CV. Probably it doesn't!
Many crew have been asking us if there is any truth in the rumour that the
strike breakers will be first on to any New Fleet. Obviously with no
meetings this is currently just a rumour. "Honest" Bill is on record as
saying no one will be forced onto New Fleet. With his track record since
arriving as head of IFCE, expect postings in weeks!
All we will say is whilst we remain as reps, no one who stayed with us and
obeyed the Unite call to strike will ever be forced onto any New Fleet!
Turning to your concerns on the issues of pay deductions and staff travel,
we are still waiting for a formal response from the legal side of Unite,
as to what challenge they will mount. In the meantime it is worth
forwarding your payslip with the claim form so any strike pay can be
actioned. Duncan gave the address and details in his message.
If you are unsure how many days pay BA have deducted, divide your basic
pay figure at the bottom of your payslip by 365. Then divide this figure
into your loss of earning total shown on the payslip, and it will give you
the days deducted. For part-time crew BA have decided for the purposes of
removing money they will treat you as full-time crew! So for 50% crew
double your basic salary and then use the same formulae, and for 75% crew
divide the basic by 3, then multiply by 4, and again use the same
formulae. This is not about the wrongs of taking salary when you are on
days off, MBT, leave etc, or part time being treated as full time. The
lawyers will deal with those points. This is just to establish how many
days you have had deducted so you can submit your claim form.
You will be aware of the additional funds of 700K raised by the Executive
Counsel. Our view and confirmed by your feedback is that these funds
should be used asap to help those amongst us suffering hardship following
BAs salary deductions. Ideas are being floated as to what form this could
take, but we hope to have some positive news within days.
So finally a big thank you to all of you. We are only as strong as our
membership - and so right now we feel very very strong! All of us feel
proud to represent such wonderful people.
Happy Easter and, for a few days anyway, go in peace.
Your Reps
Doesn't sound like all is well in the Bassa camp then?