British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)

[The Blu Riband]

Peterlike

Reading your posts it is obvious you're not happy with Bassa, but are looking for others to decide for you.
You should read what BA are offering (look on the ESS main page; and read your msgs carefully) and I'm sure you'll quickly understand that BA have been clear and consistent throughout this sorry saga.
It's a fair deal. Staff travel will not be reinstated, nor will those suspended.
You'll also realise that the union cannot achieve the kind of guarantees they are looking for.

Bassa caused the imposition. Bassa have failed to negotiate. Bassa have gone on strike. Bassa have created the terrible friction that now exists. Bassa have no clear aims or means of resolution.

The majority of crew (Bassa members) are working, not striking.

[Wobbler]

Litebulbs,

The sad thing is, it will be a few years down the line, when "we told you so" will hit home.

You could very well be right as I think New Fleet is a dead cert now. However BASSA only have themselves to blame. As has been pointed out before, New Fleet was off the table last summer and share options were on the table. If BASSA had engaged there would now be no one losing staff travel, no lost pay, no New Fleet, share options available, no strikes. How many crew in hindsight would go for that now?

This is all about a personal vendetta. Unite didn't want the strike. I have heard that Len McClusky was stitched up over the initial announcements of strike dates. He was on side for the deferral of the announcement so the proposal could be put to the crew, but the BASSA leadership wouldn't let Unite do that and insisted that strike dates be announced - knowing the offer would be withdrawn.

The Blu Riband

Staff travel will not be reinstated, nor will those suspended.

I think that you'll find that those suspended could well be reinstated. They will go through the disciplinary process where a whole range of sanctions could be applied if indeed there is a case to answer. In fact I have heard that one person originally suspended over the Facebook saga has already been reinstated.

[Clarified]

Morning peterlike

Having read your last post I assume you are thinking about your position in terms of staying in the union or leaving etc. this week?
(Please correct me if I am wrong).
If this is so, then it is quite right to look at where we have come from and where this is going.
I think we all agree on how we have got here, many posters over the months have objectively discussed this.
This week I believe we are at a crossroads in this dispute. I think that within the next few days we will either see an end to this dispute, or the beginning of the end which will be longer and far more painful (my view).
Over the months I have listened/watched twists and turns as you have. I have spoken and emailed people in our company to understand finer points of the proposal.
I totally understand the need for change and support it. My big concern has been future career structure for our younger crew and maintaining their earnings.
I believe the company has addressed this, further more there are big opportunities for crew in our business, managing on the new fleet.
If this doesn't appeal then you don't have to do it!
I think this is very fair.

I firmly believe that if all members of Unite were given a chance to vote on the proposal the majority would accept it in a blink.

It's all pretty much still there on the table, so what's the problem?

If the company is faced with more strikes then I think it will continue to build it's schedule and negate the effects of strike action. (All ready evident over the previous actions).

It would be very sad indeed, if in a few months from now we hear the words 'if only.'




My views on a previous post, they do not represent my employer or any other party.

[The Blu Riband]

I think that you'll find that those suspended could well be reinstated. They will go through the disciplinary process where a whole range of sanctions could be applied if indeed there is a case to answer. In fact I have heard that one person originally suspended over the Facebook saga has already been reinstated.

That is totally fair and right.
The disciplinary process must be done in a fair and normal manner.

The point is that Willie won't simply waive the process aside as part of any settlement deal. No-one would want anyone punished for some trivial issue on Facebook.

Nor should BA be vindictive, or try and get retribution, in any way.

[flyingsoldier1993]

Why I am not striking and why I have left the Union

A pro strike friend warned me recently that I will be out of a job very soon if I don't fight now.
As far as my job is concerned, Don't worry about me yet!
I am sure I will be fine.
My dad had a saying, it went like this:
"Nothing is ever eaten as hot as it is cooked"
I am sure that in this case it is also true.
There are employment laws in Europe and every company (including BA) will have to adhere to them.

A company doing well can't simply dispense of it's employees or turn existing ones into low cost employees at will.
After all we are living in the 21st century.

As for a company not doing well, I suppose it is only logical that they will try to bring in some cost savings to survive.
And a fight for survival it is for most airlines right now, including BA. Something we really can not argue over.

Eventually when things will turn around and BA will make loads of money again (if they ever will) we can fight to have changes reversed.

That I will consider an honorable fight worth striking for.

We are now entering a phase where even Unite are probably wishing to distance themselves from BASSA due to their idiotic, militant and stubborn behavior.

It's ugly and I don't know where it will end, but I know for sure the vast majority of cabin crew now are begging for the last offer to be put back on the table.
Let alone all the even better offers we had throughout last year.
All of which were refused by our trusted and very very well paid BASSA reps without ever allowing us to vote on them.
Is Willy Walsh going for the kill now?

I don't know but I wouldn't put it past him.

Our wise BASSA leaders have gambled and failed us miserably.

Listening to some of their often vile, dumb and outrages propaganda is at times shocking and deeply offensive to my intelligence.

I honestly have to tell you.
Seeing how some of the union membership let themselves get beaten into a complete frenzy without questioning anything their union tells them.
Or without obtaining information from sources other than BASSA,
the meetings and picket lines are beginning to remind me of some very ugly historical events under dictatorships.
And we are not even going to mention the things being said on the crew forum or the BASSA forum itself.
BASSA should realize that not all of their membership are that narrow minded.

Will I put my job or my staff travel on the line for their ignorance?
No, I surely won't and by the looks of it more than 60% of BA's cabin crew won't either.
BASSA should have chosen their battle more wisely.

Many years ago at my previous airline when the going got really tough the cabin crew population there had pay cuts and cost savings forced upon them 3 times in 2 years.
Amounting to 28%, then 12%, the another 8%, that included having 2 and even 3 people taken of most of our aircrafts.
Almost 25% of our cabin crew was made redundant involuntary.

There was no talk of strike, just an understanding that savings had to be made and quickly, in order to ensure that we would all have an airline to work for a few years down the line.

What can I say?
The airline in question still exists, against all expectations.
And if things will get better you can bet that their cabin crew union will fight a tough and honorable battle to get back what they gave up.
There is a time and a place for everything.
Just ensure it's the appropriate one!

That's what I have build my decisions on.

And one more thing, during the last strike I worked a very long trip on a 747.
We were understaffed and worked every single one of the 4 legs with either a completely full or nearly full load with 12 crew members.
Except for Duty Free we provided a regular service with hot meals and no corners cut.
The cabin crew and flight deck crew that I had the pleasure to work with were a credit to BA and their profession.
Nobody moaning, hating their job, simple professionalism where it was needed.
I heard no complaints what so ever, even though we all fully expected not to get paid extra for all the missing crew members and the resulting extra work.
We had an amazing team spirit and everybody displayed a great "can do" attitude.

[demomonkey]

Hi Peterlike

I believe that to find someone who could answer ALL of your questions would be very well placed, easily traceable and inbreach of multiple confidentially agreements. I therefore doubt you will find such a person/post.

But I would ask you. Does it matter if 53 of the 55 Reps are suspended, on strike or holidaying with Peter Mandelson on Cliff Richard's yacht? BTW - I have it on good authority that it is not the later!

The odds are that whatever happens those Reps are probably going to fair better than the majority. Either they will be re-instated after a visit to the Headmaster's Office or will be dismissed and immediately employed by BASSA/Unite as token examples of how the Union protects it's own.

However the question should be, what's going to happen to the normal crew member, purser or CSD. The Union could not afford to employ them all if the worst happened.

I would like to ask why is BASSA publicly admitting that new entrants are going through Cranebank yet BA aren't saying anything about this. WW has a plan and it doesn't take a genius to see where he is going. Why isn't this of greater concern to BASSA? WW hasn't bluffed yet. So I see the question of the 53 as a complete distraction when set against this background.

I think BASSA are playing fast with people's livelihoods. And what for? Will WW resign or be pushed out? I doubt it. Will WW come running back to the table with the Original Offer plus ST re-instatement. There seems to be no sign of that at the moment.

I think BASSA are negligent not to keep the membership properly informed about all the offers to-date, to be consistent about the reasons for the dispute or to be clear about what their goal is.

BASSA long since ceased to be the workers representative and has been hijacked by the awkward squad to purse the personal agendas of the few.

If you are going to lose your ST, be suspended or be sacked (God forbid) over this dispute at least be honest with yourself now so that you don't feel bitter when it happens. I hope you find the information you need to make your decision and don't let anyone intimidate or sway you especially on anonymous public forums!

[Abbey Road]

peterlike,

SO how does that work, anyone who was sick over the period was considered a striker and would suffer the consequences. And taking leave in such a short time would be pretty impossible and not be agreed to as it woulld be "all hands to the pump"

Can someone please try and speak the truth in this site

Yes, people who called in sick over the strike would initially be treated as strikers. BA decided this because of the propensity of cabin crew to pull a sickie whenever they don't want to do something - this pattern sickness is well known. However, after the event, if those claiming illness could prove, to BA's satisfaction, that their illness was genuine, then they would be back 'on the wagon' with their staff travel and job intact etc, etc. (Interestingly, those that strike and return to work are more likely to be able to keep their job, than those who lie about being ill, and are then found out.)

Calling in sick would have been resorted to by those who didn't have the courage to back up their conviction to vote 'Yes', for a strike, in an attempt to buy time while they worked on getting a convincing medical explanation for their absence. In the long run it is highly likely that people who weren't genuinely ill will get found out, and pay the consequences.

Your comment about "Can someone please try and speak the truth in this site" is somewhat unwelcome. You can absorb the information you find here, and then take it out in to the big wide world and ask questions. Ask serious questions of the union reps, and you're colleagues. You have to test the waters and make your decisions. The truth is out there, in abundance (but none of it is coming from Unite or BASSA ......). But don't blame those that post here, for your uncomfortable situation.

[The Blu Riband]

Flyingsoldier1993

Top post.

Many crew are as brave as you, but few could express it so well.

And rest assured that I'm sure BA pilots would back crew in

an honorable fight worth striking for

Good luck.

[ShandyBoy]

Reply to Flyingsoldier

Very good post flyingsoldier but want to pick you up on something.

There is absolutely no way the out of date agreements will ever be reintroduced, even, if and when the company starts making money. It's these (and other) agreements that have in part gotten us into this mess, i.e. un-competitive. It would be business suicide to re-introduce such archaic business practices.

[qwertyuiop]

With ref to Abbey Roads post above.

There is no requirement for any employee to provide any proof of sickness for a short term illness. If any body at BA asks for proof of illness or a sicknote then tell them to stuff it. If they intimidate you then you will have a genuine case against BA. Dont let them bully you!

[Litebulbs]

Originally Posted by qwertyuiop

With ref to Abbey Roads post above.

There is no requirement for any employee to provide any proof of sickness for a short term illness. If any body at BA asks for proof of illness or a sicknote then tell them to stuff it. If they intimidate you then you will have a genuine case against BA. Dont let them bully you!

Absolutely agree. Mr Walsh does not make the law. If you are sick, you are sick. I am sure that all money will be returned, as it probably was just a tactic to intimidate. I was surprised more was not made of this before the action, although I imagine Unite wanted strikers not sick takers.

[Re-Heat]

There is no requirement for any employee to provide any proof of sickness for a short term illness. If any body at BA asks for proof of illness or a sicknote then tell them to stuff it. If they intimidate you then you will have a genuine case against BA. Dont let them bully you!

No, this is not quite right. The employer has no right to demand a Med3 form from a doctor until the 7 day period (including weekends) has expired, but it does indeed have a right to establish if the employee was indeed sick through reasonable means.

Equally, an employer must establish what is required to certify sickness and tell employees clearly beforehand, but the law actually states that as an employer, the decision on whether or not evidence of illness is required, and if so, what evidence is acceptable, ultimately rests with the employer.

Telling BA to stuff it, when it was over a strike period, may instead prompt further investigation that is not to one's liking.


Edit to add link to HMR&C guidance: www.hmrc.gov.uk/employers/employee_sick.htm

[MrBernoulli]

Right on the nail Re-Heat, right on the nail! Bill Francis's letter to cabin crew was clear that all declared illness over the strike period would be treated as 'pattern', and treated as such until it could be ascertained otherwise.

Telling "them [BA] to stuff it" is highly unlikely to produce a result beneficial to any cabin crew member.

[qwertyuiop]

An employee can self certificate for up to 7 days sickness. Whilst telling your boss to "stuff it" may not be the best reply, BA have no rite to demand any other proof other than your own word.

A simple headache or cold on the relevant form will sufice. BA do not have a leg to stand on if they want to argue!!!

DO NOT LET THEM BULLY YOU!

[MrBernoulli]

An employee can self certificate for up to 7 days sickness

Under normal circumstances, perhaps. A strike is not considered normal circumstances, and the company pre-notified all cabin crew of the procedure they would use to validate genuine illness.

It would be in the interests of any cabin crew member who is genuinely ill to seek out appropriate means of verifying their illness - it can barely be called a hardship! On the other hand, those claiming that it is somehow bullying have everything to lose. You pays your money and makes your choices. Not difficult to see which one loses!

[Litebulbs]

Just because there is IA, it does not mean all laws of the land are wavered. If you are sick, you are sick.

Do you think there would be a case for willingly endangering the safe operation of an aircraft, if somebody who was ill, was intimidated into coming to work?

[M.Mouse]

The last two paragraphs on this page might provide a litle illumination to those advocating that BA can go take a jump.

[henkybaby]

Pattern Sickness

Aloha!

Regarding the 7 day self certification rule; if the employee who calls in sick

is affected by a strike at work and has a direct interest in the outcome. Thus, if s/he falls ill during a strike, SSP is generally not payable;

and thus will have to provide proof of that sickness. That is the employer's prerogative.

That is the HR perspective. BA has every right to withhold SSP and dispute the illness. This will result in a hearing by Her Majesty’s Revenue & Customs. It is a lengthy process that benefits BA in this case.

Interestingly, other unions do warn their members about this and insist that proof of genuine sickness can be required.

[flapsforty]

The level of debate here is rapidly going downhill.

Which is a shame, since it has been reasonable, balanced, adult and polite over the past few weeks.

Since some of you have not seen fit to moderate your own output, we will once again have to do it for you.

Who joins whom doing what at whose party is not what we are here to discuss; just to give you an example.

Please stick to either facts or opinions.

As opposed to insinuations, half truths and unprovable statements masquerading as facts.

All remarks prefaced with "you are" "you must be" "you have" etc are personal and will cause the entire post to be deleted and your posting rights to be revoked.

Why a group of adults, employed in professions that demand a certain amount of brain power and the ability to keep a cool head under stress need to be nannied along this way is beyond me.

[wiggy]

Last night's release from BASSA contained the statement:

"It must be even more apparent to you all now that this dispute was never really about saving money or crew off aircraft"

Did the BASSA statement contain that comment, if so then what was the strike about and finally what was the wording on the ballot paper?