British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
It's all very well to say that BASSA members should have gone with the result of the majority vote. I certainly agree that if members don't agree with BASSA, then resign. But BASSA also have a part to play. And that includes keeping their membership up-to-speed with what is going on, and that includes all serious proposals by the company, whether the individual reps agree with the proposals or not, and WHEN they are put on the table. If that mutual understanding is not abided by on either side then it should not just be members who resign from the union, but the reps who broke a code of honour to their membership.
It's all very well to say that BASSA members should have gone with the result of the majority vote. I certainly agree that if members don't agree with BASSA, then resign. But BASSA also have a part to play. And that includes keeping their membership up-to-speed with what is going on, and that includes all serious proposals by the company, whether the individual reps agree with the proposals or not, and WHEN they are put on the table. If that mutual understanding is not abided by on either side then it should not just be members who resign from the union, but the reps who broke a code of honour to their membership.
Last edited by Bridchen; 18th Jun 2010 at 20:02. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
4 Posts
Mr Bunker.
With such rigid views there can be no satisfactory solution for all. Rigidly there can be a solution but with a large portion of front line staff feeling resentment and loathing and that isn't a good point to start rebuilding BA back into viability.
This dispute will remain ongoing.
With such rigid views there can be no satisfactory solution for all. Rigidly there can be a solution but with a large portion of front line staff feeling resentment and loathing and that isn't a good point to start rebuilding BA back into viability.
This dispute will remain ongoing.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC, just to add on a bit, I know this is hear-say (albeit from a reliable source) about this incident but I've been ignored a few times by people I'd normally have a pleasant chat with in CRC so I can speak first-hand about the indifferent treatment non-strikers are being subjected to.
I also have to say that if I got into a briefing room and was completely ignored by another crew member, I'd be tempted to immediately speak to the flight crew and express my concerns.
How can you effectively execute the fire-fighting drill or medical action plan if one element of the 'team' won't communicate with the others?!
I also have to say that if I got into a briefing room and was completely ignored by another crew member, I'd be tempted to immediately speak to the flight crew and express my concerns.
How can you effectively execute the fire-fighting drill or medical action plan if one element of the 'team' won't communicate with the others?!
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would accept last year's deal if included full reinstatement of ST with my original DOJ.
Doesn't this, however, make you wonder whether the strikes were needed?
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Bunker.
With such rigid views there can be no satisfactory solution for all. Rigidly there can be a solution but with a large portion of front line staff feeling resentment and loathing and that isn't a good point to start rebuilding BA back into viability.
This dispute will remain ongoing.
With such rigid views there can be no satisfactory solution for all. Rigidly there can be a solution but with a large portion of front line staff feeling resentment and loathing and that isn't a good point to start rebuilding BA back into viability.
This dispute will remain ongoing.
But that's not what Unite are asking for is it?
In fact the wiping clean of all the disciplinees' slates during this dispute is one of the 3 pillars of the next ballot according to the letter from the JGS at Unite that dropped onto the mat recently (for which, thanks, my wife's not in the union anymore - as an aside Unite might want to sort that before the ballot papers are sent out).
So it's not that I, or BA for that matter, are being rigid. Unite aren't asking for an independent assessment. They're asking for it all to be swept under the carpet, whether or not some of those crew do have a case to answer. That can't be acceptable to the majority of staff who work in BA as it shows that the disciplinary procedure in the airline is not a reliable and inviolate system, more a politically expedient tool that can be made to mean whatever it needs to be and that cannot be just.
MrB
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly, Eddy!
The strikes were not needed. In fact even the pre-Easter proposal would have at least been something to work on, if we had been told about it, and BASSA and Unite hadn't taken it upon themselves to effectively toss it over their shoulders by announcing stike dates. The muscle of the strike was in the threat of it. Once WW had proved that he could keep flights going, the mystery of the outcome was over. It was a debacle. It cost crew wages, ST and bargaining power.
The strikes were not needed. In fact even the pre-Easter proposal would have at least been something to work on, if we had been told about it, and BASSA and Unite hadn't taken it upon themselves to effectively toss it over their shoulders by announcing stike dates. The muscle of the strike was in the threat of it. Once WW had proved that he could keep flights going, the mystery of the outcome was over. It was a debacle. It cost crew wages, ST and bargaining power.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, no, no
PC767
The disciplinary procedure has been agree with all unions.
BASSA is part of Unite. For BA to permit any disciplinary actions relating to BASSA members be dealt with by an independant authority suggests
a) that the company is unable to deal with these matters in an equable manner, hence they are immediately discredited
b) that any Unite member can expect to get treated in the same way.
BA would effectively be saying 'we are not able to manage our workforce' How do you thnk that would go down ?
Moreover, there is recourse to an independant third party anyway. Anyone who is unhappy with their treatment on discipline matters can appeal to an industrial tribunal. Introducing this independance at the disciplinary stage would rob the individual of the ability to appeal to an industrial tribunal - not really in the individual's interest then is it ?
I think this suggestion is yet another attempt by BASSA to divert attention from the fact that a number of staff, some of whom are reps, have behaved in a debatable manner and have found themselves on final written warnings or sacked.
The disciplinary procedure has been agree with all unions.
BASSA is part of Unite. For BA to permit any disciplinary actions relating to BASSA members be dealt with by an independant authority suggests
a) that the company is unable to deal with these matters in an equable manner, hence they are immediately discredited
b) that any Unite member can expect to get treated in the same way.
BA would effectively be saying 'we are not able to manage our workforce' How do you thnk that would go down ?
Moreover, there is recourse to an independant third party anyway. Anyone who is unhappy with their treatment on discipline matters can appeal to an industrial tribunal. Introducing this independance at the disciplinary stage would rob the individual of the ability to appeal to an industrial tribunal - not really in the individual's interest then is it ?
I think this suggestion is yet another attempt by BASSA to divert attention from the fact that a number of staff, some of whom are reps, have behaved in a debatable manner and have found themselves on final written warnings or sacked.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrB
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBunker
I agree that we can never know every person's reason(s) for striking or not striking. I just think that crew would vote more sensibly. If they are willing to strike, they should vote yes. If they are not, they should vote no. This is why the last ballots have been very strong in numbers and it does indicate that there is a sense of disagreement amongst the crew. Something is wrong when the majority vote for industrial action but the support for the actual strike is not as strong. They should go hand in hand.
That observation is present during non-striking times. Many crew will say what the majority wants to hear. Although, it is becoming easier to spot striking and non-striking crew onboard.
Bridchen
A union has said responsibility, which I believe BASSA have been fairly good at. They also spin with the truth as BA. Every proposal which is put forward to BASSA does not need to be presented to us members.We have given our faith to our representatives and trust them in negotiations. If they find a proposal is lacking and is not good enough, they can turn it down without consulting us members.
If the open top bus has to take me to the Jobcentre, I will go there with my head high because I know I would have lost my job in a good fight which I believed in.
Eddy
The strikes were not needed. They were never needed. They never should have taken place.
I agree that we can never know every person's reason(s) for striking or not striking. I just think that crew would vote more sensibly. If they are willing to strike, they should vote yes. If they are not, they should vote no. This is why the last ballots have been very strong in numbers and it does indicate that there is a sense of disagreement amongst the crew. Something is wrong when the majority vote for industrial action but the support for the actual strike is not as strong. They should go hand in hand.
That observation is present during non-striking times. Many crew will say what the majority wants to hear. Although, it is becoming easier to spot striking and non-striking crew onboard.
Bridchen
A union has said responsibility, which I believe BASSA have been fairly good at. They also spin with the truth as BA. Every proposal which is put forward to BASSA does not need to be presented to us members.We have given our faith to our representatives and trust them in negotiations. If they find a proposal is lacking and is not good enough, they can turn it down without consulting us members.
If the open top bus has to take me to the Jobcentre, I will go there with my head high because I know I would have lost my job in a good fight which I believed in.
Eddy
The strikes were not needed. They were never needed. They never should have taken place.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MrBunker
I agree that we can never know every person's reason(s) for striking or not striking. I just think that crew would vote more sensibly. If they are willing to strike, they should vote yes. If they are not, they should vote no. This is why the last ballots have been very strong in numbers and it does indicate that there is a sense of disagreement amongst the crew. Something is wrong when the majority vote for industrial action but the support for the actual strike is not as strong. They should go hand in hand.
That observation is present during non-striking times. Many crew will say what the majority wants to hear. Although, it is becoming easier to spot striking and non-striking crew onboard.
I agree that we can never know every person's reason(s) for striking or not striking. I just think that crew would vote more sensibly. If they are willing to strike, they should vote yes. If they are not, they should vote no. This is why the last ballots have been very strong in numbers and it does indicate that there is a sense of disagreement amongst the crew. Something is wrong when the majority vote for industrial action but the support for the actual strike is not as strong. They should go hand in hand.
That observation is present during non-striking times. Many crew will say what the majority wants to hear. Although, it is becoming easier to spot striking and non-striking crew onboard.
MrB
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bridchen
A union has said responsibility, which I believe BASSA have been fairly good at. They also spin with the truth as BA. Every proposal which is put forward to BASSA does not need to be presented to us members.We have given our faith to our representatives and trust them in negotiations. If they find a proposal is lacking and is not good enough, they can turn it down without consulting us members.
If the open top bus has to take me to the Jobcentre, I will go there with my head high because I know I would have lost my job in a good fight which I believed in.
Eddy
The strikes were not needed. They were never needed. They never should have taken place.
A union has said responsibility, which I believe BASSA have been fairly good at. They also spin with the truth as BA. Every proposal which is put forward to BASSA does not need to be presented to us members.We have given our faith to our representatives and trust them in negotiations. If they find a proposal is lacking and is not good enough, they can turn it down without consulting us members.
If the open top bus has to take me to the Jobcentre, I will go there with my head high because I know I would have lost my job in a good fight which I believed in.
Eddy
The strikes were not needed. They were never needed. They never should have taken place.
MissM - I'm almost lost for words. The same proposal that BASSA, according to your logic, rejected as they found it lacking, is now on reflection, a proposal you would wish to accept, if your ST was reinstated with DOJ. Your ST would have been intact with DOJ at the time of the proposal, so then why aren't you asking what the union found so lacking about it? And to outright turn it down, instead of ironing out the details.
Yes, indeed, the strikes never needed to take place, therefore, why are you so willing to ride the open-top bus?
Last edited by Bridchen; 18th Jun 2010 at 21:28. Reason: spellng
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
4 Posts
Mr Bunker.
Ironically I am a member of BASSA and I haven't yet received such a letter as your wife's. I am however overseas with a notoriously slow postal system.
Now, whilst negotiations were taking place, the concept of ACAS acting independently to review the suspensions was suggested and seemingly agreed to by both parties. The talks broke up over other issues and therefore no agreement was reached. This is based on press reports of the time. If Unite/BASSA are now sending out letters suggesting that a wipe clean policy must be adopted, then I can only agree that they have erred. And should the issue become ballotable then I could not support it. The only system should be fair, wipe cleans are not fair, inparticular if a third party is involved.
Colonel White. I'm a reasonable person and I do not trust BA to be fair and impartial at this time. I want to rebuild trust with my employer and feel the independent and binding solution is the best way to handle this aspect of the dispute. I want it over with no lingering doubts.
Eddy, why would you feel the need to express concerns that someone feels they do not need to engage in polite conversation with you. It isn't compulsary, and is exasperated by unproved tales of crew being off-loaded for failing to shake a captain's hand. I also feel that crucial CRM will not suffer, oh, people may nolonger have a drink down route together, but when my life depends on it I wouldn't care if the aircraft was piloted by Attila the Hun and Hilter. I would provide clear concise communication and likewise, facing an inferno onboard I wouldn't dismiss an 'opposition' crew member with a BCF in there hand.
Ironically I am a member of BASSA and I haven't yet received such a letter as your wife's. I am however overseas with a notoriously slow postal system.
Now, whilst negotiations were taking place, the concept of ACAS acting independently to review the suspensions was suggested and seemingly agreed to by both parties. The talks broke up over other issues and therefore no agreement was reached. This is based on press reports of the time. If Unite/BASSA are now sending out letters suggesting that a wipe clean policy must be adopted, then I can only agree that they have erred. And should the issue become ballotable then I could not support it. The only system should be fair, wipe cleans are not fair, inparticular if a third party is involved.
Colonel White. I'm a reasonable person and I do not trust BA to be fair and impartial at this time. I want to rebuild trust with my employer and feel the independent and binding solution is the best way to handle this aspect of the dispute. I want it over with no lingering doubts.
Eddy, why would you feel the need to express concerns that someone feels they do not need to engage in polite conversation with you. It isn't compulsary, and is exasperated by unproved tales of crew being off-loaded for failing to shake a captain's hand. I also feel that crucial CRM will not suffer, oh, people may nolonger have a drink down route together, but when my life depends on it I wouldn't care if the aircraft was piloted by Attila the Hun and Hilter. I would provide clear concise communication and likewise, facing an inferno onboard I wouldn't dismiss an 'opposition' crew member with a BCF in there hand.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gotta echo the question above.......
Do you ever feel the need, MissM, to express your anger that a good deal has been offered but, for some reason, not accepted by your elected peers?
I would love to be able to assume that, in the event of an emergency, all colleagues would pull together.
But I'd also have assumed, some months ago, that none of my colleagues would stoop low enough to engage in (forgive me for bringing this up again) the act of dropping rude, insulting, threatening notes in the dropfiles of their work mates.
Bottom line is that this dispute has revealed the true colours of many, many people.
In most cases, the true colours shown are as one would have expected - maturity, civility and decency - but in a small number of cases we've seen immaturity, a lack of acceptance and a seeming inability to interact with those with differing opinions.
I know that having a chat isn't compulsary but having a chat is certainly an important element in building the team on a plane. This job, like few others, relies on each crew member's ability to get on with absolute strangers.
Being unable to even engage in idle chit-chat doesn't bode well for the ability of the team to gel in times of need.
But you misunderstand my point : I won't go to the skipper if someone doesn't have a natter with me. I'll go to the skipper if someone flat-out refuses to communicate with me. That, in my eyes, would represent a major safety risk.
Do you ever feel the need, MissM, to express your anger that a good deal has been offered but, for some reason, not accepted by your elected peers?
Originally Posted by PC767
Eddy, why would you feel the need to express concerns that someone feels they do not need to engage in polite conversation with you. It isn't compulsary, and is exasperated by unproved tales of crew being off-loaded for failing to shake a captain's hand. I also feel that crucial CRM will not suffer, oh, people may nolonger have a drink down route together, but when my life depends on it I wouldn't care if the aircraft was piloted by Attila the Hun and Hilter. I would provide clear concise communication and likewise, facing an inferno onboard I wouldn't dismiss an 'opposition' crew member with a BCF in there hand.
But I'd also have assumed, some months ago, that none of my colleagues would stoop low enough to engage in (forgive me for bringing this up again) the act of dropping rude, insulting, threatening notes in the dropfiles of their work mates.
Bottom line is that this dispute has revealed the true colours of many, many people.
In most cases, the true colours shown are as one would have expected - maturity, civility and decency - but in a small number of cases we've seen immaturity, a lack of acceptance and a seeming inability to interact with those with differing opinions.
I know that having a chat isn't compulsary but having a chat is certainly an important element in building the team on a plane. This job, like few others, relies on each crew member's ability to get on with absolute strangers.
Being unable to even engage in idle chit-chat doesn't bode well for the ability of the team to gel in times of need.
But you misunderstand my point : I won't go to the skipper if someone doesn't have a natter with me. I'll go to the skipper if someone flat-out refuses to communicate with me. That, in my eyes, would represent a major safety risk.
Last edited by Eddy; 18th Jun 2010 at 21:54.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bridchen
Your previous post was deleted but you said that maybe the open top bus could take me to the Jobcentre from Bedfont, hence my reply. Do you think I enjoy going on strike?
I think I have mentioned at a previous occasion that I would have accepted last year's proposal. Why was it not put forward to us members? I don't have a good answer. Last summer there were a lot of things happening. I felt we received many mixed messages from both sides. BA had caused us a lot of unnecessary worry for a long time with regards to Project Columbus. I think the sole reason is because BASSA did not want to discuss crewing levels or even a new fleet, presumingly because of what BA were planning behind closed doors.
Your previous post was deleted but you said that maybe the open top bus could take me to the Jobcentre from Bedfont, hence my reply. Do you think I enjoy going on strike?
I think I have mentioned at a previous occasion that I would have accepted last year's proposal. Why was it not put forward to us members? I don't have a good answer. Last summer there were a lot of things happening. I felt we received many mixed messages from both sides. BA had caused us a lot of unnecessary worry for a long time with regards to Project Columbus. I think the sole reason is because BASSA did not want to discuss crewing levels or even a new fleet, presumingly because of what BA were planning behind closed doors.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing is, BA can dismiss and do not have to re engage. Once you are gone, you are gone. They may have to compensate, however.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
4 Posts
Colonel White.
I've just re-read your post and noted that it starts, no no no.
Does this represent BA's negotiating position?
There has to be a downside to a compromise, and the best agreements and solutions are based upon a compromise. Whilst the response to the downside is no no no, we'll get nowhere other than worse off. And I'm happy to apply that to BASSA as well. With opinions such as yours representing BA and irresponsible positions such as the infamous watersideworks representing the unions, the only way is down. And my fear is that these positions are replicated at both the top of the union and the top of BA.
I've just re-read your post and noted that it starts, no no no.
Does this represent BA's negotiating position?
There has to be a downside to a compromise, and the best agreements and solutions are based upon a compromise. Whilst the response to the downside is no no no, we'll get nowhere other than worse off. And I'm happy to apply that to BASSA as well. With opinions such as yours representing BA and irresponsible positions such as the infamous watersideworks representing the unions, the only way is down. And my fear is that these positions are replicated at both the top of the union and the top of BA.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Aberdeen, Scotland
Posts: 644
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing is, BA can dismiss and do not have to re engage. Once you are gone, you are gone. They may have to compensate, however.
I think Mr. Walsh is gunning for a number of the community's most militant members and, as he's shown with the unjustified sacking of one of our schedulers, he's probably more keen to get rid of people, pay compensation and fire a major warning-shot across the Bassa bow than he is to keep these people in the company.
Last edited by Eddy; 18th Jun 2010 at 22:17.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: LHR
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
So, if the dispute means that you take 42,000 other BA staff members along with you, would you still hold your head up high?
As you say, there was no need for the strike. I'm somewhat incredulous that the substantive offer (leaving aside for a moment the ST & disciplinary issues) which Unite would now accept is less than the initial offer put forward last year.
If the open top bus has to take me to the Jobcentre, I will go there with my head high because I know I would have lost my job in a good fight which I believed in.
As you say, there was no need for the strike. I'm somewhat incredulous that the substantive offer (leaving aside for a moment the ST & disciplinary issues) which Unite would now accept is less than the initial offer put forward last year.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 10 Likes
on
4 Posts
Eddy, I'd say that your comments about the crapper are unnecessary. I didn't strike but I accept the right to strike as being fundamental and I believe that strikes are legally protected whilst acting within the law. That protection runs for anywhere between 2500 to 6000 cabin crew who striked.
As for the few who are seriously militant, well yeah, it might be illegal to sack them but not impossible. After all, its illegal to drive at 40mph in a 30mph zone but people do it and when court pay the fine. Thing is they still drove at 40mph, that cannot be changed.
If Walsh really wants to resolve this dispute though, I'd suggest that sacking strikers would only escalate the bitterness and cause further action. He is a thing. BA is so big I feel that at times the CEO must be a politician as well as a businessman, sell change, inspire staff.
As for the few who are seriously militant, well yeah, it might be illegal to sack them but not impossible. After all, its illegal to drive at 40mph in a 30mph zone but people do it and when court pay the fine. Thing is they still drove at 40mph, that cannot be changed.
If Walsh really wants to resolve this dispute though, I'd suggest that sacking strikers would only escalate the bitterness and cause further action. He is a thing. BA is so big I feel that at times the CEO must be a politician as well as a businessman, sell change, inspire staff.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From MissM
Bridchen
Your previous post was deleted but you said that maybe the open top bus could take me to the Jobcentre from Bedfont, hence my reply. Do you think I enjoy going on strike?
I think I have mentioned at a previous occasion that I would have accepted last year's proposal. Why was it not put forward to us members? I don't have a good answer. Last summer there were a lot of things happening. I felt we received many mixed messages from both sides. BA had caused us a lot of unnecessary worry for a long time with regards to Project Columbus. I think the sole reason is because BASSA did not want to discuss crewing levels or even a new fleet, presumingly because of what BA were planning behind closed doors.
Bridchen
Your previous post was deleted but you said that maybe the open top bus could take me to the Jobcentre from Bedfont, hence my reply. Do you think I enjoy going on strike?
I think I have mentioned at a previous occasion that I would have accepted last year's proposal. Why was it not put forward to us members? I don't have a good answer. Last summer there were a lot of things happening. I felt we received many mixed messages from both sides. BA had caused us a lot of unnecessary worry for a long time with regards to Project Columbus. I think the sole reason is because BASSA did not want to discuss crewing levels or even a new fleet, presumingly because of what BA were planning behind closed doors.
Apart from that absurd stance, we are now reduced to a much worse contract, and the mess that BASSA's recent inability to inform its membership has caused, ie loss of ST. We will have to accept reduced terms because of BASSA allowing a strike to take place when they had all the information at their disposal that could have prevented it. That was not a mistake by BASSA, but gross negligence, and totally unforgiveable. Why do you think so many of us threw in the towel at that stage? I have no wish to wave bye bye from the bow of a sinking ship while the orchestra's playing. Not when I'm being lied to by my representatives and kept in the dark to suit whatever needs suited them that morning.
The fight now is about the reinstatement of something that shouldn't even have to be on the negotiating table. What a farce!