British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: nowhere near here
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:
I volunteered - and was trained - to act as cabin crew. How do you think that might help in the current situation with the ash cloud?
is that a joke ?
I volunteered - and was trained - to act as cabin crew. How do you think that might help in the current situation with the ash cloud?
is that a joke ?
Yes.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBunker
There's nothing really to argue about your posts. Your first point is accurate. There's a good example of it when BASSA suggested different crewing levels on Eurofleet, for instance pursers being replaced with main crew, nobody really had an issue with it. BA did this in their imposition in December last year and many were complaining about it. Many, and sometimes myself included, think that anything that is suggested by BA always has something suspicious over it but anything suggested by BASSA never has. I know that their proposal last year was heavily exagarated in terms of how much it was worth, for instance claiming that changing our diversion agreement would save £60 million, and I have never thought that PWC has been corrupted by BA as suggested by BASSA.
As for your second point, I agree. BASSA tried to bluff BA last year as they have done before with our previous CEOs and they thought WW would give in. Any sign of a possible strike or dispute with the cabin crew and they backed down. Some crew who voted for a strike were hoping for that BA would back down. We had a strong mandate on both ballots but most knew not all of them would stand by their vote. Crew chose to cross the picket line for many different reasons but many were, as I mentioned earlier, probably hoping for that it would never have to go that far as actually taking the stand on the line as it's a huge decision to take, whether to strike or go to work.
We all know, including the very extreme BASSA militants, that sooner or later we would have to accept an agreement and at least trust that BA will keep their word. We only need to go back a few years and see that they haven't recently and this spin has been going on and on for a long time. If BA is determined about wanting this to work they also need to do their fair share. When managers within the company are awarded with shares worth a huge amount of money is not exactly improving my faith in management or giving the impression that WW wants to modernise this company and bringing costs down to market rate. It's beyond me the amount of money they are wasting on this dispute and throwing away revenue, worth some £10 million, on staff travel when this company is apparently "fighting for its survival".
Nurjio
Thanks! No, I can take it. After all that's what a discussion forum is all about
It can't be easy to discuss something if everybody agrees!
Litebulbs
Never been a rep before and I'm not really sure if I want to be one or see myself as one. I do think that BASSA needs some more main crew reps because there are far way too few of them!
There's nothing really to argue about your posts. Your first point is accurate. There's a good example of it when BASSA suggested different crewing levels on Eurofleet, for instance pursers being replaced with main crew, nobody really had an issue with it. BA did this in their imposition in December last year and many were complaining about it. Many, and sometimes myself included, think that anything that is suggested by BA always has something suspicious over it but anything suggested by BASSA never has. I know that their proposal last year was heavily exagarated in terms of how much it was worth, for instance claiming that changing our diversion agreement would save £60 million, and I have never thought that PWC has been corrupted by BA as suggested by BASSA.
As for your second point, I agree. BASSA tried to bluff BA last year as they have done before with our previous CEOs and they thought WW would give in. Any sign of a possible strike or dispute with the cabin crew and they backed down. Some crew who voted for a strike were hoping for that BA would back down. We had a strong mandate on both ballots but most knew not all of them would stand by their vote. Crew chose to cross the picket line for many different reasons but many were, as I mentioned earlier, probably hoping for that it would never have to go that far as actually taking the stand on the line as it's a huge decision to take, whether to strike or go to work.
We all know, including the very extreme BASSA militants, that sooner or later we would have to accept an agreement and at least trust that BA will keep their word. We only need to go back a few years and see that they haven't recently and this spin has been going on and on for a long time. If BA is determined about wanting this to work they also need to do their fair share. When managers within the company are awarded with shares worth a huge amount of money is not exactly improving my faith in management or giving the impression that WW wants to modernise this company and bringing costs down to market rate. It's beyond me the amount of money they are wasting on this dispute and throwing away revenue, worth some £10 million, on staff travel when this company is apparently "fighting for its survival".
Nurjio
Thanks! No, I can take it. After all that's what a discussion forum is all about
It can't be easy to discuss something if everybody agrees! Litebulbs
Never been a rep before and I'm not really sure if I want to be one or see myself as one. I do think that BASSA needs some more main crew reps because there are far way too few of them!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks MissM,
I think, bar one or two philosophical perspectives, we broadly agree with one another. Your last sentence to me is a fair one and I suspect it comes down to what you think BA is ultimately trying to achieve. I personally would like (ever the optimist) to believe that it's about shaping the airline for a fitter, more profitable future so that if resistance is encountered, and money spent doing so, the rewards going forward are much greater than that initial spend. However, I fully appreciate how, if a member of one of the communities without an agreement on this, it might seem like an attempt to break the unions. I think the problem here is a chronological one. The phrase "fight for survival" is one that's been hung on to now for a year. I think it's reasonable to suggest that 12 months or so ago, we were in a fight for survival. Now it's a phrase that's brought out to question the spend the CEO is willing to make to push through strategic structural change in the business going forward. I think that, in fairness, those are two separate (in time) issues but one must cast an eye on the notion that WW is speculating to accumulate in terms of reshaping productivity and efficiency. The costs of the Unite strike are a part of that speculation.
What you or I will likely never know truly is the amount by which the parties are apart in their negotiations. Each sends their own set of figures out to make their case, and I'm sure each is presented in the best light possible for the party doing so. One thing I do know for certain is that I don't wish to spend my remaining years in BA in a constantly combative relationship with my employer and how we all go from here to avoid that is, I reckon, the biggest question once this is all behind us.
MrB
I think, bar one or two philosophical perspectives, we broadly agree with one another. Your last sentence to me is a fair one and I suspect it comes down to what you think BA is ultimately trying to achieve. I personally would like (ever the optimist) to believe that it's about shaping the airline for a fitter, more profitable future so that if resistance is encountered, and money spent doing so, the rewards going forward are much greater than that initial spend. However, I fully appreciate how, if a member of one of the communities without an agreement on this, it might seem like an attempt to break the unions. I think the problem here is a chronological one. The phrase "fight for survival" is one that's been hung on to now for a year. I think it's reasonable to suggest that 12 months or so ago, we were in a fight for survival. Now it's a phrase that's brought out to question the spend the CEO is willing to make to push through strategic structural change in the business going forward. I think that, in fairness, those are two separate (in time) issues but one must cast an eye on the notion that WW is speculating to accumulate in terms of reshaping productivity and efficiency. The costs of the Unite strike are a part of that speculation.
What you or I will likely never know truly is the amount by which the parties are apart in their negotiations. Each sends their own set of figures out to make their case, and I'm sure each is presented in the best light possible for the party doing so. One thing I do know for certain is that I don't wish to spend my remaining years in BA in a constantly combative relationship with my employer and how we all go from here to avoid that is, I reckon, the biggest question once this is all behind us.
MrB
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing I do know for certain is that I don't wish to spend my remaining years in BA in a constantly combative relationship with my employer and how we all go from here to avoid that is, I reckon, the biggest question once this is all behind us.
Any crew member who cannot move on from this, however the solution looks, cannot be allowed to compromise flight safety.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sunny East Sussex
Age: 49
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M,
Thank you for your recent input on this thread. You have, for me advocated well the stance of the average CC striker.
Just out of interest, if hypothetically, the PCCC achieved recognition within BA with a similar membership size to unite, would you consider joining it?
Thank you for your recent input on this thread. You have, for me advocated well the stance of the average CC striker.
Just out of interest, if hypothetically, the PCCC achieved recognition within BA with a similar membership size to unite, would you consider joining it?
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
You state that BA hasn't kept it's word (on agreements, presumably) recently.
What are your examples? I'm struggling to think of anything significant and I've been around for nearly 30 years.
I believe that it's been said by some World Wide crews that WW unilaterally made some crews involved in snow disruption this year, take the sort of allieviation on crewing levels/hours/rest that the unions may have given when relations with the Company were better. That may well have happened, but under the circumstances (customers faced with horrendous disruption, a union being completely unsympathetic to their plight and seemingly unwilling to discuss, in any meaningful way, changing the disruption agreement) I'm not sure I blame the man.
I remember Martin Bridger stating he was committed to Mid Fleet and then disbanding it some months later, which I was a bit miffed about.
I seem to remember that there might have been some "different interpretation" of transfer/seniority rules at LGW re franchise airlines' crews joining mainline.
I know that BASSA claim that BA went back on the "Money Back Guarantee" payment agreement (Bridger era). They say it was supposed to be indefinite, but BA only ran it for 3 years. Well I'm sure I remember the agreement being for 3 years, only to be extended if significant numbers of people were worse off under the new allowance system by year 3. By year 3, very few people were worse off, the vast majority were better off. I was better off in year 1, 2 and 3. So no break of agreement there in my book.
In fact in my career, from memory, BA have not broken any important agreement it had with me about anything significant ie. pay, hours, transfers, promotion, job security........
I do remember BASSA misleading me on a number of important issues though:
New Entrant starter pay (1997) would be the "thin end of the wedge" (sound familiar) that would lead to the company being able to easily get rid of all old contracts in ten years (Because we'd be a minority and all the New Contract crew wouldn't support you in a dispute about it). Happened? Nope.
Mid Fleet would be "the thin end of the wedge" that would threaten the agreements of the existing fleets. Happened? Nope (see above).
Consolidation of some allowances into basic would allow the company to cheat you out of your pay, by making you work much harder for no reward and you'll earn less. Happened? Nope. BA introduced the "Money Back Guarantee" to reassure crew this wouldn't happen, which kind of took the wind out of BASSA's sails, so they tried to make a big thing about the minority of people who triggered a payment over the 3 years, but the fact is most people were (albeit only slightly, in most cases) better off (and did not work appreciably harder).
So getting back to my question, what are all these agreements that BA have gone back on? I'm sure there must be some examples, if only through error, different interpretation of the meaning (perhaps letter of the law, rather than spirit of the law) desperation etc, but really, anything resembling the seriousness of what BASSA claim BA would do with New Fleet, namely "Starving crews of work"?
You state that BA hasn't kept it's word (on agreements, presumably) recently.
What are your examples? I'm struggling to think of anything significant and I've been around for nearly 30 years.
I believe that it's been said by some World Wide crews that WW unilaterally made some crews involved in snow disruption this year, take the sort of allieviation on crewing levels/hours/rest that the unions may have given when relations with the Company were better. That may well have happened, but under the circumstances (customers faced with horrendous disruption, a union being completely unsympathetic to their plight and seemingly unwilling to discuss, in any meaningful way, changing the disruption agreement) I'm not sure I blame the man.
I remember Martin Bridger stating he was committed to Mid Fleet and then disbanding it some months later, which I was a bit miffed about.
I seem to remember that there might have been some "different interpretation" of transfer/seniority rules at LGW re franchise airlines' crews joining mainline.
I know that BASSA claim that BA went back on the "Money Back Guarantee" payment agreement (Bridger era). They say it was supposed to be indefinite, but BA only ran it for 3 years. Well I'm sure I remember the agreement being for 3 years, only to be extended if significant numbers of people were worse off under the new allowance system by year 3. By year 3, very few people were worse off, the vast majority were better off. I was better off in year 1, 2 and 3. So no break of agreement there in my book.
In fact in my career, from memory, BA have not broken any important agreement it had with me about anything significant ie. pay, hours, transfers, promotion, job security........
I do remember BASSA misleading me on a number of important issues though:
New Entrant starter pay (1997) would be the "thin end of the wedge" (sound familiar) that would lead to the company being able to easily get rid of all old contracts in ten years (Because we'd be a minority and all the New Contract crew wouldn't support you in a dispute about it). Happened? Nope.
Mid Fleet would be "the thin end of the wedge" that would threaten the agreements of the existing fleets. Happened? Nope (see above).
Consolidation of some allowances into basic would allow the company to cheat you out of your pay, by making you work much harder for no reward and you'll earn less. Happened? Nope. BA introduced the "Money Back Guarantee" to reassure crew this wouldn't happen, which kind of took the wind out of BASSA's sails, so they tried to make a big thing about the minority of people who triggered a payment over the 3 years, but the fact is most people were (albeit only slightly, in most cases) better off (and did not work appreciably harder).
So getting back to my question, what are all these agreements that BA have gone back on? I'm sure there must be some examples, if only through error, different interpretation of the meaning (perhaps letter of the law, rather than spirit of the law) desperation etc, but really, anything resembling the seriousness of what BASSA claim BA would do with New Fleet, namely "Starving crews of work"?
Last edited by Beagle9; 16th Apr 2010 at 05:59.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Variable Pay
I cannot understand why crew are so against moving variable pay into basic pay or a monthly travel payment. The argument is that you are paid more for the harder you work and you would miss out on busy months, however in reality the opposite is true. You end up being paid more for when you are not working, ie when you are sick on leave standby or a course you wages do not drop and for those of you who have been off long term sick will understand how beneficial this is.
The other major advantage is that with a more stable wage packet home budgets are easier, mortgage assessment and applications are far more straight forward.
The other major advantage is that with a more stable wage packet home budgets are easier, mortgage assessment and applications are far more straight forward.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: the edge of reason
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Part of the job of management in any large organisation is to ensure that the money going out is less than the money coming in, if this is not the case then change is required. This is clearly the case with BA.
It has been posted on this forum countless times that nearly all BA's workers have accepted some form of deal to reduce the outgoings, at some pain to many. Conspicuous by their absence is Cabin Crew.....why?
Everybody now knows that they are the best paid cabin crew in the UK, they enjoy the most favourable terms and conditions of any and they have a history of being the most secure, when did BA cabin crew last suffer compulsory redundancies?
One would think that a sensible, forward looking trade union would be interested in taking steps to maintain such luxurious employment conditions......well, they may be, but BASSA isn't!
As a result BA and their cabin crew are in the middle of a bitter and damaging dispute over who controls that part of the airline.....again, this is common knowledge. This has nothing to do with imposition, nothing to do with pay, nothing to do with reduced crew levels, it is a pi**ing contest!
So who will win or lose? The main losers are the cabin crew themselves. During this dispute we have heard of examples of intimidation and unfair treatment being dished out by the managers of the airline, many of these are anecdotal and probably embellished by time and effect, some may even be true!! But one expects a company management to play hardball when faced with a strike, so no surprise there!
Less edifying is the role of BASSA! The lies, vitriol and rabble rousing that this organisation has indulged in has been disgraceful. It shows BA cabin crew in a very poor light, even though many of them may well disagree with the attitude taken by their union, and that is the most distressing point about this whole affair. BASSA has lied to its own members, been disengenuous, intimidatory and completely dishonourable to the very people on whom they rely for their financial support.
Post dispute, I hope many BASSA members take a long, hard look at the individuals who put them in their present position, ask them some searching questions about how they conducted this dispute, and then sack them!
It has been posted on this forum countless times that nearly all BA's workers have accepted some form of deal to reduce the outgoings, at some pain to many. Conspicuous by their absence is Cabin Crew.....why?
Everybody now knows that they are the best paid cabin crew in the UK, they enjoy the most favourable terms and conditions of any and they have a history of being the most secure, when did BA cabin crew last suffer compulsory redundancies?
One would think that a sensible, forward looking trade union would be interested in taking steps to maintain such luxurious employment conditions......well, they may be, but BASSA isn't!
As a result BA and their cabin crew are in the middle of a bitter and damaging dispute over who controls that part of the airline.....again, this is common knowledge. This has nothing to do with imposition, nothing to do with pay, nothing to do with reduced crew levels, it is a pi**ing contest!
So who will win or lose? The main losers are the cabin crew themselves. During this dispute we have heard of examples of intimidation and unfair treatment being dished out by the managers of the airline, many of these are anecdotal and probably embellished by time and effect, some may even be true!! But one expects a company management to play hardball when faced with a strike, so no surprise there!
Less edifying is the role of BASSA! The lies, vitriol and rabble rousing that this organisation has indulged in has been disgraceful. It shows BA cabin crew in a very poor light, even though many of them may well disagree with the attitude taken by their union, and that is the most distressing point about this whole affair. BASSA has lied to its own members, been disengenuous, intimidatory and completely dishonourable to the very people on whom they rely for their financial support.
Post dispute, I hope many BASSA members take a long, hard look at the individuals who put them in their present position, ask them some searching questions about how they conducted this dispute, and then sack them!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: england
Age: 60
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anything,
I am all for a monthly travel payment.
My sticking point is that I would be giving up contractual variable pay for non-contractual MTP.
If BA are willing to make the MTP contractual I would be very happy to accept.
I am all for a monthly travel payment.
My sticking point is that I would be giving up contractual variable pay for non-contractual MTP.
If BA are willing to make the MTP contractual I would be very happy to accept.
Controversial, moi?
MissM wrote (a couple of pages back) in answer to my request for her to expand on her statement that BA had broken various agreements:
I have looked back through this thread and I cannot find where you have previously posted the answers, not surprising given the size of the thread. Can you explain in more detail the 2007 agreement which you mention which caused problems in 2008?
I have already answered it several times. Take for instance our signed agreement back in 2007 which we had issues with in 2008 because BA failed to honor(sic) it.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My sticking point is that I would be giving up contractual variable pay for non-contractual MTP.
If BA are willing to make the MTP contractual I would be very happy to accept.
If BA are willing to make the MTP contractual I would be very happy to accept.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: uk
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ex Temp who has returned to BA during IA
I am an ex temp who has returned to BA to help out over the IA.
I want to support our company but im starting to feel very lonely whilst down route due to us now being used on 'regular' flights with both strikers and non strikers.
Whilst noone has been directly nasty to me I have started to feel very uncomfortable when going out to dinner etc as the topic of conversation eventually leads to the issues going on at present. Everyone knows why we were asked to come back and untimately in their eyes I am the very reason they are fighting to stops us ;taking their jobs away'.
Added to the fact that the current crew are on completely diff allowances, its isn't nice to have this info written over briefing sheets etc.
I really don't agree on any of the issues of striking cc but feel very isolated when I want to socialize but im put in the situation of having to ;go along' with the conversations. I find it maybe easier to not go out with the cc at all, and do my own thing, something that really isn't me!
I really don't know where to go from here and seriously thining of whether this is worth the hassel!!!
I want to support our company but im starting to feel very lonely whilst down route due to us now being used on 'regular' flights with both strikers and non strikers.
Whilst noone has been directly nasty to me I have started to feel very uncomfortable when going out to dinner etc as the topic of conversation eventually leads to the issues going on at present. Everyone knows why we were asked to come back and untimately in their eyes I am the very reason they are fighting to stops us ;taking their jobs away'.
Added to the fact that the current crew are on completely diff allowances, its isn't nice to have this info written over briefing sheets etc.
I really don't agree on any of the issues of striking cc but feel very isolated when I want to socialize but im put in the situation of having to ;go along' with the conversations. I find it maybe easier to not go out with the cc at all, and do my own thing, something that really isn't me!
I really don't know where to go from here and seriously thining of whether this is worth the hassel!!!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am an ex temp who has returned to BA to help out over the IA.
I want to support our company but im starting to feel very lonely whilst down route due to us now being used on 'regular' flights with both strikers and non strikers.
I really don't know where to go from here and seriously thining of whether this is worth the hassel!!!
I want to support our company but im starting to feel very lonely whilst down route due to us now being used on 'regular' flights with both strikers and non strikers.
I really don't know where to go from here and seriously thining of whether this is worth the hassel!!!
Firstly, welcome to BA.
I am so sorry you are having such a hard time at work being isolated through no fault of your own.
The way I see it, you saw an opportunity for a job and you applied for it. No one should make you being temp crew or VCC crew, feel the way you do. Unfortunately during an Industrial dispute, anyone who feels threatened about their jobs, react the way some of our cabin crew have been reacting. The simple fact is that none of us are indispensable and WW has proved this.
I have been in BA for over 26 years and do not belong to BASSA or Amicus yet the way I have been treated by some of my colleagues, is appalling. I also know of current crew who came to work who've been left out on nightstops when it's been revealed that they came to work. You are not alone.
I did raise the issue you mentioned with BF about Temp Crew being identified on the briefing sheets and I know steps are being taken to rectify this issue. Maybe, it might be an idea to say you've been on unpaid leave, not the best suggestion but might be a way of avoiding any unpleasantness.
I know it's hard but there are many of us going what you are going through, please don't give up and feel free to PM me if there's anything I can do to help.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PTC,
I'm sorry that you feel that way at the moment, but it's great that you've posted and that you're making people aware of your concerns, and that you don't just let it happen. If necessary, see a manager and explain that you feel this way down route. They need to see that this is the way people are feeling down route, and need to continue to do their utmost to minimise such concerns.
On the flight itself, either see the CSD, if you feel he/she is onside and supportive of you, which they should be for everyone, OR see the captain or the other pilot(s) and explain how you feel. It's imperative that no-one should feel excluded, yet there are some people who would like to see a few others ostrasized and that must not happen.
For your sake, and for the sake of others who have similar concerns but aren't able to post on pprune, please raise these issues with your management and the senior members of your crew.
I'm sorry that you feel that way at the moment, but it's great that you've posted and that you're making people aware of your concerns, and that you don't just let it happen. If necessary, see a manager and explain that you feel this way down route. They need to see that this is the way people are feeling down route, and need to continue to do their utmost to minimise such concerns.
On the flight itself, either see the CSD, if you feel he/she is onside and supportive of you, which they should be for everyone, OR see the captain or the other pilot(s) and explain how you feel. It's imperative that no-one should feel excluded, yet there are some people who would like to see a few others ostrasized and that must not happen.
For your sake, and for the sake of others who have similar concerns but aren't able to post on pprune, please raise these issues with your management and the senior members of your crew.
ptc
Sadly this may be the "BA way" for a while, and I know some of us (and I include me) may need to grow a thicker skin for a while.
My view on this is that obviously people are free to discuss whatever they want off duty, but we all need to be aware that here are differences of opinion between crewmembers. If in conversation it becomes apparent that the temperature is rising it's probably time to change the subject under discussion - and that applies to all participants, whatever side of the argument they are on.
If you run into genuinely serious problems with your colleagues on a trip you'd be best advised in the first instance to talk to the Senior Manager on the trip...and with all due respect I don't necessarily mean the CSD/SCCM.
(midman we crossed - yep, agreed)
My view on this is that obviously people are free to discuss whatever they want off duty, but we all need to be aware that here are differences of opinion between crewmembers. If in conversation it becomes apparent that the temperature is rising it's probably time to change the subject under discussion - and that applies to all participants, whatever side of the argument they are on.
If you run into genuinely serious problems with your colleagues on a trip you'd be best advised in the first instance to talk to the Senior Manager on the trip...and with all due respect I don't necessarily mean the CSD/SCCM.
(midman we crossed - yep, agreed)
MissM,
Your post of a few pages ago (I think it might have been 1782) was rather illuminating.
With reference to BASSA's position and their offer you said
This is the very core of the matter. A union should not ever "control" the development of a new fleet. Yes, they should be involved in it's inception, structure, organisation and the establishment of agreements but never, ever have control.
Eventually BA have a management team who are prepared to fight to wrestle control of the running of the company back. The vast majority of employees see that this is the only way to survive.
Your use of language in the quote above shows that for too long CC have been allowed to believe that they should run cabin service and by implication the rest of the airline.
Until there is acceptance that this is no longer going to be the case, then the CC community cannot expect to have the kind of place at the table which will protect their interests going forward.
Your post of a few pages ago (I think it might have been 1782) was rather illuminating.
With reference to BASSA's position and their offer you said
It might be in their offer as they are willing to discuss New Fleet and have control over how it's developed
Eventually BA have a management team who are prepared to fight to wrestle control of the running of the company back. The vast majority of employees see that this is the only way to survive.
Your use of language in the quote above shows that for too long CC have been allowed to believe that they should run cabin service and by implication the rest of the airline.
Until there is acceptance that this is no longer going to be the case, then the CC community cannot expect to have the kind of place at the table which will protect their interests going forward.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by ptc
I am an ex temp who has returned to BA to help out over the IA.
Originally Posted by ptc
I want to support our company but im starting to feel very lonely whilst down route due to us now being used on 'regular' flights with both strikers and non strikers.
) and it can be a bit of a chore trying to encourage people to actually do something. As a temp you're probably full of buzz about your exciting new job and you should try and make this rub off on some of those who have lost that buzz over time and who, if encouraged enough, would bliddy love a good night out but are almost stuck in a rut!
Of course, there are certain groups within the crew community who you've next to no chance of getting out of their rooms....
Originally Posted by ptc
Whilst noone has been directly nasty to me I have started to feel very uncomfortable when going out to dinner etc as the topic of conversation eventually leads to the issues going on at present. Everyone knows why we were asked to come back and untimately in their eyes I am the very reason they are fighting to stops us ;taking their jobs away'.
But as Tiramisu said earlier, you've done NOTHING you should feel guilty about. But nor are you really in a position to have much of an opinion about what's currently going on - and again, sorry if that sounds harsh - so your best, and safest, option is to remain quiet.
Go for dinners, sit and listen, keep schtum and the topic of conversation will soon change. I hate talking about strike action and keep extremely tight-lipped when talk turns to that subject. But soon enough, and perhaps with a little effort, the topic changes.
Originally Posted by ptc
Added to the fact that the current crew are on completely diff allowances, its isn't nice to have this info written over briefing sheets etc.
I recognise that allowances etc. are a bit different in their nature that basic salaries, but for a lot of crew knowing how much they're getting for the trip is important and while you're probably able to work out your earnings fairly easily, for others it's not quite as simple.
I personally print off the allowances sheet at the start of every month so know what to expect when I go to work and I wouldn't mind at all if CSDs stopped discussing cash in the briefings - I personally don't find it entirely appropriate but most do so whatever.....
Originally Posted by ptc
I really don't agree on any of the issues of striking cc but feel very isolated when I want to socialize but im put in the situation of having to ;go along' with the conversations. I find it maybe easier to not go out with the cc at all, and do my own thing, something that really isn't me!
Originally Posted by ptc
I really don't know where to go from here and seriously thining of whether this is worth the hassel!!!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
P-T-Gamekeeper
Possibly. I guess it depends on what they have to offer. As it looks like now, no.
Beagle9
You only need to go back a few years and you will probably remember the dispute we had in 2008 when one of the main point was about BA honouring 2007's settlement deal.
M.Mouse
By my answer I meant that BA has in the past not kept their part of the deal. Same answer for you as to Beagle9. No need to go into details about it because it was one of the reasons as to why we were in another dispute with the company in 2008 and if you were here at the time you would also know about it.
Flap62
A union should be allowed to protect its member and by control that includes to make sure that this new fleet is not taking any job from us.
ptc
I don't know your previous experience with the company but WW can be a lonely place and as you know it depends on both destination and crew. I recently did a BKK/SYD and never saw any of the crew downroute except when it was time for pickup as they couldn't be bothered to leave their rooms. It's been worse during the dispute as the strike itself has been a very sensitive topic to discuss and crew have generally not been in the mood of socialising and this is something that will last for some time, which is something you need to prepare yourself for. I was in JNB some days before the strike was due and the bar, which is usually very crowded with crew, was almost empty.
On the other hand, and here comes the nasty bit, you were brought back to the company for the sole purpose of breaking our strike. It makes you no different from any of the ground staff or pilot who have volunteered to act as cabin crew. Many crew, myself included, are disappointed about this behaviour. Some crew are even furious and boiling mad over it. This is something you have to put up with as you chose to come back to the company during difficult times, especially to a very unionised company as BA. The saying goes "as you lay your bed..." and this is the situation for you. I am probably one of the more relaxed ones who wouldn't intimidate, trying to engage you into some strike talk or say anything nasty but just prepare yourself for some less pleasant situations in the future just in case because there are crew up there with ZERO tolerance when it comes to strikebreaking.
Possibly. I guess it depends on what they have to offer. As it looks like now, no.
Beagle9
You only need to go back a few years and you will probably remember the dispute we had in 2008 when one of the main point was about BA honouring 2007's settlement deal.
M.Mouse
By my answer I meant that BA has in the past not kept their part of the deal. Same answer for you as to Beagle9. No need to go into details about it because it was one of the reasons as to why we were in another dispute with the company in 2008 and if you were here at the time you would also know about it.
Flap62
A union should be allowed to protect its member and by control that includes to make sure that this new fleet is not taking any job from us.
ptc
I don't know your previous experience with the company but WW can be a lonely place and as you know it depends on both destination and crew. I recently did a BKK/SYD and never saw any of the crew downroute except when it was time for pickup as they couldn't be bothered to leave their rooms. It's been worse during the dispute as the strike itself has been a very sensitive topic to discuss and crew have generally not been in the mood of socialising and this is something that will last for some time, which is something you need to prepare yourself for. I was in JNB some days before the strike was due and the bar, which is usually very crowded with crew, was almost empty.
On the other hand, and here comes the nasty bit, you were brought back to the company for the sole purpose of breaking our strike. It makes you no different from any of the ground staff or pilot who have volunteered to act as cabin crew. Many crew, myself included, are disappointed about this behaviour. Some crew are even furious and boiling mad over it. This is something you have to put up with as you chose to come back to the company during difficult times, especially to a very unionised company as BA. The saying goes "as you lay your bed..." and this is the situation for you. I am probably one of the more relaxed ones who wouldn't intimidate, trying to engage you into some strike talk or say anything nasty but just prepare yourself for some less pleasant situations in the future just in case because there are crew up there with ZERO tolerance when it comes to strikebreaking.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALL BA crew now being told not to report for work tomorrow.....
So obviously NO BA movements tomorrow at all.
Christ.... This is scary. And some people want to utilise this as a means of enhancing the industrial dispute?! Poor.
I'm in the bar at the Ibis hotel right now where I've been for the past three nights (and am booked for another four nights - not the bar specifically, though I wish!) and people are in tears about their travel plans having been disrupted.
How can ANYONE gain any sort of joy from this situation?!
So obviously NO BA movements tomorrow at all.
Christ.... This is scary. And some people want to utilise this as a means of enhancing the industrial dispute?! Poor.
I'm in the bar at the Ibis hotel right now where I've been for the past three nights (and am booked for another four nights - not the bar specifically, though I wish!) and people are in tears about their travel plans having been disrupted.
How can ANYONE gain any sort of joy from this situation?!