British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)

[Juan Tugoh]

Non-striking crew and volunteer crew have done nothing but prolonging this dispute. If you hadn't reported for duty, or agreed to train to become cabin crew, our management would have been forced to negotiate because there wouldn't have been any crew available.

This maybe so, but it is irrelevant. IF the judge had ruled differently things would be different, IF BASSA had negotiated things would have been different, IF the unions hadn't been so power mad and stupid in the seventies the laws would be different.

BASSA and UNITE have to play the cards they have not keep wishing they had been dealt four aces. BA did use volunteer CC but they were only able to do so because BASSA couldn't run a legal ballot, and so BA had time to train the volunteers. Had they done that the "12 Days of Christmas" would have happened and we would be dealing with the fall-out from that.

BA have done what they can to minimise the impact of this ill considered industrial action and it seems are relatively comfortable with how things have progressed so far. They are training more volunteer CC, so any further IA will cause even less disruption. BASSA seem to have made no preparation other than to order some healthy eating for Bedfont. If nothing else this shows a lack of leadership and foresight from BASSA. If they "press the nuclear button" and go for an all out strike do you think that BA are not ready for this? do you think that they will not have an answer to it? BASSA have at every stage of this sorry saga been out-thought and out-manouevered by BA, what evidence is there that BASSA have suddenly become master strategists?

Much is made of the high percentage that voted in favour of the strike, the trouble is that faced with the reality of losing ST and money, this support has not been matched in reality; this strike has been poorly supported at best. You can dress it up as much as you like, saying that Bedfont was well attended etc, but BA continued to operate and as the strike went on operated more services.

This strike is now a busted flush; BASSA are merely prolonging the misery of its' own members. They have no clear idea of what they want, they have a decreasing level of support from their own members and UNITE now want this to go away to minimise the impact on the general election.

The longer this goes on the more damage BASSA is doing to itself and the more CC are dragged into suspensions etc for acting like petulant children. This needs to stop now for the benefit of the CC.

[BentleyH]

MissM

So you believe the best way forward is to 'force' negotiations with strike action. All other groups in BA managed to negotiate deals without any force. What does that say about the way your union operates and represents you? I think its about time you stop trying to blame other people in the company. Everyone has the right to choose to go to work, especially if they don't AGREE with YOUR strike ballot. WE all have that right. And I'm afraid you have no right to impose your views on me if I want to go to work to keep the airline flying.

[M.Mouse]

In what way was BA's original proposal fair?

As a reminder of the ORIGINAL offer from the negotiations prior to the june 2009 deadline the essence was:

So given that we have all had to negotiate the savings required my answer to your question would be 'In every way'.

[Hotel Mode]

As a reminder of the ORIGINAL offer from the negotiations prior to the june 2009 deadline the essence was:

Reduced crew numbers
New disruption agreement
Reduced nightstops on certain routes
NO New Fleet

So given that we have all had to negotiate the savings required my answer to your question would be 'In every way'.

I bet if they were asked now, most crew would jump at that offer. Its significantly better than anything BASSA will achieve now.

This year of BASSA jumping up and down screaming has made crew substantially worse off than if they'd just accepted the first offer. That offer in itself could have been better had BASSA bothered to engage prior June 30th 09 too.

Anyone brave enough to put the June 30th offer back up on BASSA forum so they can see what theyve lost?

[MissM]

Do I trust BA? Yes I do, they have been straight all the way. There isn't a single thing that BA has done to date that has come as a surprise. The writing’s been on the wall and it’s a shame we failed to read it. Sadly now, we have all lost out on a very fair and reasonable deal. Let’s hope we'll have the opportunity to ballot on what’s left before we lose that too

How can you possibly know they have been straight all the way? Because WW said BA has great cabin crew? Because BF has asked for your opinions? Or because BF was floating about the CRC and talking to crew during the strike?

Someone pointed out earlier about what WW did previously. He's been a pilot and a union rep and has a better understanding about our job than any of our previous CEO's. It doesn't really have to mean anything. Many people can have a change of heart when they get power.

Trust BA on this and you will put an end to your career.

Juan Toguh

This maybe so, but it is irrelevant. IF the judge had ruled differently things would be different, IF BASSA had negotiated things would have been different, IF the unions hadn't been so power mad and stupid in the seventies the laws would be different.

Irrelevant? I don't find it irrelevant that crew are coming to work and their actions are undermining our cause. If they hadn't come to work maybe this would have been over. Instead they, and the rest of the strikebreaking staff, went to work and kept the airline flying which resulted in no negotiations taking place. It's mockery. It's black legging.

If they "press the nuclear button" and go for an all out strike do you think that BA are not ready for this? do you think that they will not have an answer to it?

I'm pretty confident BA is ready for it and has an answer to it.

You can dress it up as much as you like, saying that Bedfont was well attended etc, but BA continued to operate and as the strike went on operated more services

Everybody has a different opinion. There are crew who claim that T5 was full of passengers on the first day of the strike. Media reported something else. The only reason why BA continued to operate is because of strikebreakers.

• Reduced crew numbers
• New disruption agreement
• Reduced nightstops on certain routes
• NO New Fleet

It looks like a very good deal and I would have accepted it if there were no leap holes. No New Fleet? Do you really think their little Project Columbus, dated 2008, would have been thrown out the window just like that? I pretty much doubt it.

[Tiramisu]

How can you possibly know they have been straight all the way? Because WW said BA has great cabin crew? Because BF has asked for your opinions? Or because BF was floating about the CRC and talking to crew during the strike?

Trust BA on this and you will put an end to your career.

Miss M,
This isn't about personalities. If you think some of us made our decisions based on BF being in CRC and talking to the crew during the strike, your thought process is flawed as it would have been a little late as we were all at work by then.

Have you looked back at BA's original offer, please don't tell me it wasn't good enough.
Bill Francis asking us our opinions and what we wanted on the offer was more than BASSA did for a whole year!

I trust BA Miss M, because they offered me the best deal protecting all my term and conditions only for BASSA to throw it all away.

I also don't need BF or WW telling me BA has great crew. As a CSD, I know this first hand as I fly with many brilliant and exceptional crew. I recognise and appreciate them by completing BRAVOs and I have lost count of how many I have done in the last year!

I'm BA cabin crew and the above are my personal opinions.

[Right Engine]

MissM,

If you learnt to ballot on what has happened rather than what might, you might, as a Union, be taken seriously. Instead you are victims of your own fear-mongering. The April offer was serious and you blew it, BASSA. You are now victims of your own cynicism and you can harp on about volunteers and strike breakers until you are blue in the face. You collectively manufactured your own destruction and it's time to look in the mirror.

[M.Mouse]

It looks like a very good deal and I would have accepted it if there were no leap holes. No New Fleet? Do you really think their little Project Columbus, dated 2008, would have been thrown out the window just like that? I pretty much doubt it.

One can never say never when looking to future changes but in the same way as my working life has changed every few years for the past 21 years in BA what are you asking? That your job description never ever changes? That you won't ever have to work any harder (pilots generally are flying double the hours flown 20 years ago)? That BA won't ever introduce New Fleet (they introduced mid-fleet, they introduced completely new Ts & Cs at LGW which, funny old thing, BASSA agreed to)?

As nobody else has really fully answered the question what are you on strike for and what would be your bottom line for settlement of the dispute? It is a question that I am often asked in conversation with outsiders and it is difficult to answer when nobody from the Unite/BASSA supporting side will clearly give a frank response.

[MissM]

Tiramisu

I have looked at the original proposal and I probably would have accepted it compared to what we might be offered today. Reduced cabin crew is really not an issue. Neither is a new disruption agreement. Reduced nightstops would have a financial impact. No New Fleet is something I, and I know many other do as well, have an issue with because frankly I don't have the amount of faith in our management as you do. There's no way after years of planning on Project Columbus they would throw it in the bin.

Has BA really offered you the best deal protecting your terms and conditions? Would it be temporary or permanent? We all know how much they seem to value agreements and to offer a "reasonable" MTP, transfer rights for New Fleet and the carrots of a bonus and an extra staff ticket is nothing but ripoff? Accept it and you could say goodbye to your career as CSD.

BASSA is anything but flawless. I have never said they are perfect and sometimes they are living in the world of Flintstones. As I have to put my trust in either them or BA I don't really have much of a choice.

[The Blu Riband]

The only reason why BA continued to operate is because of strikebreakers

Quite so, and despite the name calling and attempted intimidation the likelihood is that if there is another strike the numbers of crew turning up for work will continue to grow.

The reason crew and volunteers are operating is that - at the end of the day - they feel that the reasons for working outweigh the reasons for striking.

MissM and other militants do not trust BA.
They cannot accept the need for change.
They accept rumour rather than facts, and are paranoid with regard to anyone outside their group. eg You are either with us, or against us.

Sadly they have instinctively resorted to threats and intimidation because they know that they cannot win by logical discussion. And they continue to feel vulnerable because even with the deal currently on offer they are aware that they will remain the highest paid cabin crew in the UK by far.
Some of the more junior crew cannot even believe the salaries that csd's are earning. At least at LGW crew have realised that Bassa will continue to use them as cannon fodder to support these inflated egos and salaries.

Unite have a responsibilty to all their members - as do Bassa.
But clearly Bassa are only interested in preserving the status quo for their own interests. Apparently whole shifts of engineers and groundstaff have recently left Unite in protest.

MissM
Without intelligent negotiation this is not going to end well for cabin crew.
Everybody outside the Bassa ranks has realised that for months.
You should be demanding that your reps settle this now.
Blaming others will not make the solution any easier but will further alienate those who would support you if you demands were fair and reasonable.

[MissM]

One can never say never when looking to future changes but in the same way as my working life has changed every few years for the past 21 years in BA what are you asking? That your job description never ever changes? That you won't ever have to work any harder (pilots generally are flying double the hours flown 20 years ago)? That BA won't ever introduce New Fleet (they introduced mid-fleet, they introduced completely new Ts & Cs at LGW which, funny old thing, BASSA agreed to)?

I don't have a problem with working any harder. WW crew are almost flying as much as allowed. Full-time crew are probably around 850 hours a year and it's amazing how BA manages to roster part-time crew. We do our fair share except when they are punishing us striking crew by giving us awful rosters (Thank you BA for giving 24 hour days on 15 of 21 days).

BA introduced Mid Fleet but they couldn't manage a third fleet back then. What makes them think they can do it this time? LGW SF was (unfortunately) introduced but it was the crew down there who voted for it, not BASSA.

[MissM]

The Blu Riband

If I wanted to intimate anyone I would have used a different nickname.

I accept the need for a change. I have never stated otherwise.

I have very little trust in our management because there is always something up their sleeve. They promise you something and do the opposite. It's always the same old saga. WW has already imposed a change to our working conditions, what's stopping him from imposing other things in the future?

Old contract CSD's were recruited under those terms and conditions. Same for us who were recruited before 1997 to the pre-97 contract and same for those recruited in 1997 and after.

Crew down at LGW apparently decided not to strike for different reasons. It's a shame because they also need to see the ongoing issues and how it might affect them.

[Tiramisu]

I have looked at the original proposal and I probably would have accepted it compared to what we might be offered today. Reduced cabin crew is really not an issue. Neither is a new disruption agreement. Reduced nightstops would have a financial impact. No New Fleet is something I, and I know many other do as well, have an issue with because frankly I don't have the amount of faith in our management as you do. There's no way after years of planning on Project Columbus they would throw it in the bin.

Miss M,
I think we both agree on what you've mentioned above including Columbus. This is Columbus though, isn't it? So why isn't/wasn't it negotiated to lessen the impact on us?
The reason I have more faith in our management is so far they haven't let me down, not yet anyway. I've also had the opportunity to talk with WW at length on two occasions now (not during the strike), on a one to one basis and he's reasonable and fair. I admitted to WW that I was well paid and his reply to me was that he understood that most of us have based our lifestyles on our earnings and he did not want to change that. I can only go by what he says and take him at his word.

Has BA really offered you the best deal protecting your terms and conditions? Would it be temporary or permanent? We all know how much they seem to value agreements and to offer a "reasonable" MTP, transfer rights for New Fleet and the carrots of a bonus and an extra staff ticket is nothing but ripoff? Accept it and you could say goodbye to your career as CSD.

I genuinely believe BA were/are offering us the best deal in the current economic climate and better than some of our colleagues have in BA and in the industry. Naturally, I would want it in writing and that includes the MTP, fair transfer or work etc, etc.
As for as my career in BA, I'm actually prepared to accept change and see what it brings me. For that reason, I'm prepared to put my trust in BA at the moment as I want it to succeed.

I'm BA cabin crew and the above are my personal views and not those of BA.

[ottergirl]

Irrelevant? I don't find it irrelevant that crew are coming to work and their actions are undermining our cause. If they hadn't come to work maybe this would have been over. Instead they, and the rest of the strikebreaking staff, went to work and kept the airline flying which resulted in no negotiations taking place. It's mockery. It's black legging.

This statement would be relevant if BA CC was a closed shop but it isn't. Around a quarter of the crew community do not belong to a union at all and a further 10% joined the break-away union CC89 because they wanted to be in a less militant union. Bassa failed to consider this in their calculations, assuming that there would be enough union memebers prepared to strike to force an early resolution.

Fair enough, we all make mistakes but its how we recover from them that marks us out. To continue making the same mistake, letting a few crew lose pay and benefits fighting a lost cause would be grossly irresponsible.

[The Blu Riband]

A introduced Mid Fleet but they couldn't manage a third fleet back then

Bassa made it unworkable; the crew were very happy with the actual system it was the union that denied the fleet any decent routes.

We do our fair share except when they are punishing us striking crew by giving us awful rosters

You took yourself off the roster so BA had to give out what was left over.

the crew down there who voted for it

The only choice they had was that presented to them by Bassa; not much of a choice

Old contract CSD's were recruited under those terms and conditions. Same for us who were recruited before 1997 to the pre-97 contract and same for those recruited in 1997 and after.

Are you saying they cannot be changed?
Is it right that csd's earning 65,000 should give up the same as someone at lgw earning 20,000?

[Tiramisu]

Fair enough, we all make mistakes but its how we recover from them that marks us out. To continue making the same mistake, letting a few crew lose pay and benefits fighting a lost cause would be grossly irresponsible.

That fault lies entirely with the TUs.
Which is why BASSA cannot and should not go ahead with another strike. They simply need to settle this ongoing dispute for all our sakes.
Cabin Crew are being used in a reckless fight unnecessarily.

[Hand Solo]

I have very little trust in our management because there is always something up their sleeve. They promise you something and do the opposite. It's always the same old saga. WW has already imposed a change to our working conditions, what's stopping him from imposing other things in the future?

But can you not see that if you'll never trust anything management say you can never have a negotiated solution because you simply don't believe BA will honour it? And if you won't negotiate a solution you leave BA no option but yo impose a solution and crush your union with it, which is exactly what you are complaining about. The problem starts and ends with BASSAs attitude.

[MissM]

Tiramisu

Why was Columbus brought up in the first place? BA has caused us a lot of unnecessary worry over this for almost two years. They would have gone through with it either way, with or without negotiations. Even if we had accepted their original proposal last year I do think they would have gone ahead with this new fleet. There always seems to be a secret agenda hidden somewhere.

Are you saying that during your career with BA you have never been let down by them?

WW could appear as reasonable and fair. It doesn't necessary mean that he is nor that you have to believe what he says. He sometimes contradicts himself. Take for example when he said he cannot accept crew to take a pay cut yet asked us to work free for up to a month.

I am also prepared to accept changes. As long as they are reasonable, fair and agreed through proper and serious negotiations without any secret agendas. I want BA to succeed too but I will not allow management to destroy my career because they have set their mind to it. WW is not in BA for life but many of us can see ourselves in the company for many more years to come.

[Finnster]

miss m nobody was asked to work for no pay for a MONTH.

[MissM]

The Blu Riband

Bassa made it unworkable; the crew were very happy with the actual system it was the union that denied the fleet any decent routes.

Crew were happy because they were working to agreements negotiated by BASSA.

You took yourself off the roster so BA had to give out what was left over.

Only in March when I went on strike. Not in May.

The only choice they had was that presented to them by Bassa; not much of a choice

A union is only as strong it can be depending on its members and the support down at LGW has been weak for a very long time. BASSA negotiated, presented the deal and members voted for it. Nobody forced them.

Are you saying they cannot be changed?
Is it right that csd's earning 65,000 should give up the same as someone at lgw earning 20,000?

Our salaries? Our terms and conditions? They can be changed as long as it's done through negotiations. I think you will find that we are working harder than before and have lost crew members from our aircraft. On WW we have lost anything between 1 to 3 crew members and had 2 senior positions swapped to main crew positions.

LGW is a different story. When you apply to a base, you agree to certain terms and conditions. Crew at LGW agreed to it when they signed the dotted line on their contract.