British Airways vs. BASSA (current Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PS, for your info, it's currently one aircraft back from the desert, and that one doesn't fully enter service until 2011. It was brought back as far as the UK early in order to avoid a much deeper service being required on it in the USA at VCV.
Or in BASSA-speak we've bought all the tristars and VC-10s back from the RAF and are flying them empty in circuits at LHR during the IA periods to give the illusion of a full flying programme. Whilst some crewmembers make gun shapes with their hands at them. Hmm
MrB
Or in BASSA-speak we've bought all the tristars and VC-10s back from the RAF and are flying them empty in circuits at LHR during the IA periods to give the illusion of a full flying programme. Whilst some crewmembers make gun shapes with their hands at them. Hmm
MrB
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sandhurst
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thts just what they want you to believe Chigley. In return for being forced to work to 65 the ICC will have to take a 120% pay cut
Does that mean they'll have to pay BA 20% of their wages for the privelage of working for the airline?
Does that mean they'll have to pay BA 20% of their wages for the privelage of working for the airline?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting game this fact reporting.
I was chatting recently with a crew member who told me the story that the union had sent them about an 18 year old who applied to Mixed Fleet and was "invited" to be a CSM.
"Really" says I. "Do you think that's true?"
"Yes" says very pleasant crew member, "My union says so."
"Oh" says I "They wouldn't lie then. But how could this 18 yr old apply for Mixed Fleet, when they are not recruiting externally for main crew yet?"
"Oh" says striking crew member who lost money, and staff travel "I don't know then. Why would the union say that?"
"No comment" I said.
Taken from the Mixed Fleet recruitment page today:
Keep an eye out for future opportunities to join us as Cabin Crew.
We are phasing our recruitment for Mixed Fleet and expect to be recruiting Cabin Crew later this year. Please keep an eye out for future opportunities.
Reported by BASSA Admin on 23 August 2010:
Seems like their crystal balls are working better than BA's.
I am BA cabin crew and this is my own view and not that of BA.
I was chatting recently with a crew member who told me the story that the union had sent them about an 18 year old who applied to Mixed Fleet and was "invited" to be a CSM.
"Really" says I. "Do you think that's true?"
"Yes" says very pleasant crew member, "My union says so."
"Oh" says I "They wouldn't lie then. But how could this 18 yr old apply for Mixed Fleet, when they are not recruiting externally for main crew yet?"
"Oh" says striking crew member who lost money, and staff travel "I don't know then. Why would the union say that?"
"No comment" I said.
Taken from the Mixed Fleet recruitment page today:
Cabin Crew
Keep an eye out for future opportunities to join us as Cabin Crew.
We are phasing our recruitment for Mixed Fleet and expect to be recruiting Cabin Crew later this year. Please keep an eye out for future opportunities.
We heard today from one of our own crew, whose 18-year-old daughter applied for mixed fleet crew. BA has emailed her asking her to reapply for an interview for the CSM, rather than main crew.
I am BA cabin crew and this is my own view and not that of BA.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woking
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But Miss M et al, the strike WAS a success. No one "ruined" it for you and yet still you didn't get the result you wanted.
Over 7000 crew went on strike according to BASSA.
Only 26 crew turned up at CRC for the first wave according to BASSA.
Most of the departing flights were empty according to .....
Some aircraft were just doing circuits...
The whole operation was pretty much wrecked.
That looks like a pretty successful strike to me. (Unless BASSA was lying? Surely not?)
So why did Willie not give in?
Ok, so we all know the strike did fail and BASSA were lying, but what if it had succeeded?
Suppose for a moment that all crew had walked out at Chrismas as first planned, (no court injunction, no VCC's and no strikebreaking CC).
Do you honestly believe you would have "won"?
Do you even remember what the original strike was about?
That's right, the removal of a crew member, if you had have grounded the airline you wouldn't have simply been exempt from cost savings and efficiency improvements, you would either have been 90 day'd or new fleet would be three times the size as it covered the reinstated crew.
You have no idea what victory would have looked like, other than the delusion that things would just stay the same as cabin crew got put back in the "too difficult drawer" just like in previous years.
Remember that UNITE and BASSA have agreed to new fleet, why then are they persuing the court case in October?
IF, and it's a big IF, they win then where are the replacement crew coming from?
How then will IFCE make it's cost savings target?
That's right, from new fleet, paid for by you.
But hey, forget all that, just start over with another strike ballot. That'll sort it.
Over 7000 crew went on strike according to BASSA.
Only 26 crew turned up at CRC for the first wave according to BASSA.
Most of the departing flights were empty according to .....
Some aircraft were just doing circuits...
The whole operation was pretty much wrecked.
That looks like a pretty successful strike to me. (Unless BASSA was lying? Surely not?)
So why did Willie not give in?
Ok, so we all know the strike did fail and BASSA were lying, but what if it had succeeded?
Suppose for a moment that all crew had walked out at Chrismas as first planned, (no court injunction, no VCC's and no strikebreaking CC).
Do you honestly believe you would have "won"?
Do you even remember what the original strike was about?
That's right, the removal of a crew member, if you had have grounded the airline you wouldn't have simply been exempt from cost savings and efficiency improvements, you would either have been 90 day'd or new fleet would be three times the size as it covered the reinstated crew.
You have no idea what victory would have looked like, other than the delusion that things would just stay the same as cabin crew got put back in the "too difficult drawer" just like in previous years.
Remember that UNITE and BASSA have agreed to new fleet, why then are they persuing the court case in October?
IF, and it's a big IF, they win then where are the replacement crew coming from?
How then will IFCE make it's cost savings target?
That's right, from new fleet, paid for by you.
But hey, forget all that, just start over with another strike ballot. That'll sort it.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine BASSA would be happy to tell people that, t6.
Unfortunately the court proceedings report that prior to this very long time BASSA/CC89 spent even more time squabbling and refusing to speak to each other. Then it's a matter of public record that what they came up with was ludicrously light on savings, couched in nonsensical restrictions and temporary. As to the demand for watertight agreements, I suggest you pop over to BASSA forum and see the email reply BF sent to one of your fellow die-hards. By 'watertight agreement' I suspect you mean a final say over which routes transfer to newfleet and when. In essence you are demanding control of how the business is run. That's not something your union is entitled to, and it's not something you're going to get any more. Those days ended when Mike Street jumped.
Originally Posted by MissM
BASSA has tried to negotiate with BA for a very long time. Obviously it's difficult for some of you to believe it because BA claims otherwise. BASSA wants a watertight agreement with BA which is something they are refusing to offer us.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
BASSA has tried to negotiate with BA for a very long time. Obviously it's difficult for some of you to believe it because BA claims otherwise
Miss M it is difficult for me to believe. Could you just run through it one more time for me please? The bit that I have the most trouble with is when you say that BASSA has tried to negotiate with BA for a long time. I got the message from BASSA that after a show of hands at the race track there would be NO NEGOTIATION with BA - were they lying to us and secretly "trying to negotiate with BA" behind the members backs?
I also got the message that BASSA would not sit in the same room to negotiate with other parties to the dispute. Please Miss M help me to understand how that is "trying to negotiate".
The other message I got from BASSA was the one last year where they said they had written to BA to state that they would not enter into any meetings with BA about anything other than health and safety matters. Is that where they have "been trying to negotiate"
Thanks for your patience Miss M, I must sound a bit thick, but could you clear one other little detail up for me? What was the reason again for the strikes in the first place?
Miss M it is difficult for me to believe. Could you just run through it one more time for me please? The bit that I have the most trouble with is when you say that BASSA has tried to negotiate with BA for a long time. I got the message from BASSA that after a show of hands at the race track there would be NO NEGOTIATION with BA - were they lying to us and secretly "trying to negotiate with BA" behind the members backs?
I also got the message that BASSA would not sit in the same room to negotiate with other parties to the dispute. Please Miss M help me to understand how that is "trying to negotiate".
The other message I got from BASSA was the one last year where they said they had written to BA to state that they would not enter into any meetings with BA about anything other than health and safety matters. Is that where they have "been trying to negotiate"
Thanks for your patience Miss M, I must sound a bit thick, but could you clear one other little detail up for me? What was the reason again for the strikes in the first place?
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
If every other department had minded their own business and every single crew member who actually voted for industrial action had went on strike, we never would have been here today. BA would have been grounded completely and undoubtedly we would have reached a good agreement with our management.
Just for one moment take a step back and look at what you have said. Now look at the logic of that statement. Can't you see that if every union took that view BA (or any other company) would simply collapse.
Do you see life as 'the strongest takes it all'? As has been pointed out many times, BASSA clearly did not go to the negotiating table. And from your own posting, clearly you believe that 'might is right'. Not much hope for the rest of the world, then.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can't believe the insensitivity of BASSA
Just read the article about wearing yellow for the meeting on Sep 6th. Words almost fail me. It is one thing to show sympathy for the relatives of the departed and to honour those who lost their lives in a truly horrific accident. Leave aside the fact that the aircraft concerned was actually operated by a charter subsidiary of BA whose origins date back to the BEA days. It is perhaps a nice thought some 25 years after that event for crew to pay respects to an event that changed the onboard safety for all.
What is totally inexcusable is to hijack this issue as a way of also showing support for those members of staff who have been sacked by the company for a variety of gross misconduct charges as well as those who have been suspended. This is nothing short of emotional blackmail. If those staff who have been dismissed feel that they have been unfairly trested, there is a legal process that can be followed, whereby if the compamy is found to be at fault, the individuals can be compensated. The fact that the BASSA branch secretary went down this route and was effectively laughed out of court suggest that certainly in his case, the company had done nothing wrong and that the individual concerned was the entirely responsible for his predicament. What on earth will BASSA think of next ? Asking members to turn up for future meetings wearing something red to commemorate those who died in 9/11, and to show solidarity for Duncan and his tomato crop as well as the Red Army Faction and Al Qaeda ? Those on the BASSA committee should be thoroughly ashamed of their actions. I predict that if the rump of their supporters in the SWP, SP, Morning Star and Daily Mirror get wind of this BASSA will be as welcome as a skunk in a lift, A faster way to lose what support they may have is hard to imagine.
Perhaps Miss M as the current spokesperson for BASSA might care to comment on this ? Does she believe this proposal to be in the best possible taste ?
What is totally inexcusable is to hijack this issue as a way of also showing support for those members of staff who have been sacked by the company for a variety of gross misconduct charges as well as those who have been suspended. This is nothing short of emotional blackmail. If those staff who have been dismissed feel that they have been unfairly trested, there is a legal process that can be followed, whereby if the compamy is found to be at fault, the individuals can be compensated. The fact that the BASSA branch secretary went down this route and was effectively laughed out of court suggest that certainly in his case, the company had done nothing wrong and that the individual concerned was the entirely responsible for his predicament. What on earth will BASSA think of next ? Asking members to turn up for future meetings wearing something red to commemorate those who died in 9/11, and to show solidarity for Duncan and his tomato crop as well as the Red Army Faction and Al Qaeda ? Those on the BASSA committee should be thoroughly ashamed of their actions. I predict that if the rump of their supporters in the SWP, SP, Morning Star and Daily Mirror get wind of this BASSA will be as welcome as a skunk in a lift, A faster way to lose what support they may have is hard to imagine.
Perhaps Miss M as the current spokesperson for BASSA might care to comment on this ? Does she believe this proposal to be in the best possible taste ?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What is a 'Watertight Agreement' ?
I've been puzzled by those who support BASSA banging on about wanting a 'watertight agreement'. I'm not sure what they believe one to be. Do they want something that is contractual ? You see, even a contract can be broken. If BA goes down the toilet tomorrow, no bit of paper saying that they guarantee me a job for life is worth a plugged nickel. If BA have to downsize their workforce and offer the minimum redundancy pay, there is sweet FA I can do about it, union or no union. Any nicely crafted contract that said I would be paid squillions until I hit 70 would not be worth the paper it was written on. Oh sure, I could sue for breach of contract. Wouldn't get me much, if anything. I'd take a number and stand in line with the rest of the creditors. The other snag with a contractual deal is that a lot of the variable pay bits that currently attract lower tax rates might just get deemed to be taxable. So crew could wind up worse off.
Now accepting that a contractual deal/agreement is not watertight leaves us with not a lot of other options. In fact precisely zero other options. Ooops forgot the old Mafia contract one - you know, dissappoint me and you'll end up sleeping with the fishes or find a horse's head on your pillow. I'm a reasonable man....
Now accepting that a contractual deal/agreement is not watertight leaves us with not a lot of other options. In fact precisely zero other options. Ooops forgot the old Mafia contract one - you know, dissappoint me and you'll end up sleeping with the fishes or find a horse's head on your pillow. I'm a reasonable man....
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Two quick points because I cannot stay long, law essay deadline fast approaching.
The investors presentation suggests that the new fleet will take 10 years to grow to 40% of the flying operation. This is based on the fleet starting with 500 crew. BA are currently recruiting for 1250 crew to commence mixed fleet. On what basis should I now consider the original information to still be reliable and relevant? The increase in initial staff would suggest an acceleration of mix fleet and the share of work undertaken. What ever the reason may be the original investors presentation should now be considered void and replaced.
Secondly, and this is without question open to challenge because I do not have BA's proposal to hand, but if I recall towards the end of the latest agreement which, included the top up payment, it was written; this agreement does not alter or add to your existing contract of employment. To me that implies that the top up payment is not contractual. Also, whilst industrial action will lead to loss of payment for days not worked, the suggestion that industrial action will lead to a permanent loss of the top up payment also implies that it is not contractual. I.e. the same argument BA currently have for the loss of staff travel.
The investors presentation suggests that the new fleet will take 10 years to grow to 40% of the flying operation. This is based on the fleet starting with 500 crew. BA are currently recruiting for 1250 crew to commence mixed fleet. On what basis should I now consider the original information to still be reliable and relevant? The increase in initial staff would suggest an acceleration of mix fleet and the share of work undertaken. What ever the reason may be the original investors presentation should now be considered void and replaced.
Secondly, and this is without question open to challenge because I do not have BA's proposal to hand, but if I recall towards the end of the latest agreement which, included the top up payment, it was written; this agreement does not alter or add to your existing contract of employment. To me that implies that the top up payment is not contractual. Also, whilst industrial action will lead to loss of payment for days not worked, the suggestion that industrial action will lead to a permanent loss of the top up payment also implies that it is not contractual. I.e. the same argument BA currently have for the loss of staff travel.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi all,
Bill Francis just stated on a web chat to crew, which the first routes for the first 3 months will be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from webchat.
Question
Hi Bill
Can you confirm or deny these Mixed Fleet rumours please?
a) They will not have fixed days off or fixed rosters at all
b) All European nightstops will be split duties
Also the company must know now what the initial routes will be. Do you know when this will be communicated?
Many thanks
Reply
Happy to deny (a). Mixed fleet will have a published roster and they will have planned days off!!!
Happy to deny (b). Mixed Fleet can do split duties but we are not planning all nightstops like this.
The first three months planned for Mixed Fleet looks like Prague, St Petersburg, Pisa, Denver, Budapest, Nairobi. These keep changing as we review customer demand and aircraft types. I also expect routes to move back and forth between all Fleets as now, dependant on the seasonal demand.
When we publish Mixed Fleet rosters in October the list will be finally fixed. Hopefully you can see that the rumours of all the high earning routes moving to Mixed Fleet are just that, rumours.
Thanks
Bill
End quote.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not as scary as many BASSA supporters would have us all think. For now anyway. Hope they all bother to read this new webchat that is taking place because alot of rumours are being dispelled.
Bill Francis just stated on a web chat to crew, which the first routes for the first 3 months will be.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote from webchat.
Question
Hi Bill
Can you confirm or deny these Mixed Fleet rumours please?
a) They will not have fixed days off or fixed rosters at all
b) All European nightstops will be split duties
Also the company must know now what the initial routes will be. Do you know when this will be communicated?
Many thanks
Reply
Happy to deny (a). Mixed fleet will have a published roster and they will have planned days off!!!
Happy to deny (b). Mixed Fleet can do split duties but we are not planning all nightstops like this.
The first three months planned for Mixed Fleet looks like Prague, St Petersburg, Pisa, Denver, Budapest, Nairobi. These keep changing as we review customer demand and aircraft types. I also expect routes to move back and forth between all Fleets as now, dependant on the seasonal demand.
When we publish Mixed Fleet rosters in October the list will be finally fixed. Hopefully you can see that the rumours of all the high earning routes moving to Mixed Fleet are just that, rumours.
Thanks
Bill
End quote.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So not as scary as many BASSA supporters would have us all think. For now anyway. Hope they all bother to read this new webchat that is taking place because alot of rumours are being dispelled.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see from the news that the latest BASSAmentalist tactic is to play the ditching PRA mid-flight and then blame the dozy "flight deck" for pushing the wrong button
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 107
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The emergency announcements cannot be activated from the flight deck. It should be easy enough to find out if someone's activated the PRA on purpose, as there's a security feature on the catch. I unfortunately won't be surprised if this is part of the tactics, but I'm very much hoping it was a fault with the system.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Hindhead
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Sun!!
The PRA can definitely not be activated by the pilots from the Flight Deck.
British Scareways | The Sun |News
The PRA can definitely not be activated by the pilots from the Flight Deck.
British Scareways | The Sun |News
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Strikemaster82
If I were a VCC and able to be away from my present job for weeks to train to do someone else's job, I wouldn't feel too safe that my job is secure...
Ranger07
Because we have a new fleet being set up which will take a lot of our destinations and that will affect our earnings. That's why we need a watertight agreement and a say about route transfers. I don't see this happening to our flight crew or ground staff for that matter and that's why nobody else has such a watertight agreement.
MrBunker
BA has never been in its fight for survival. We all know it was a trick played by our CEO to send us a message. Many voted for industrial action which indicates that there's something wrong yet not willing to make the sacrifices involved in going on strike but relying on the rest of us to do it for them.
I am not waiting for or as little as expecting an apology from anyone for crossing the picket line. Neither should any of them ever except to receive an apology from me for going on strike because that will never happen.
Don't you find it interesting that this is the first time ever in this company during a dispute where crew have actually been suspended or dismissed? That itself indicates what sort of management we are dealing with.
Plodding along
If everyone who voted for industrial action had gone on strike for Christmas and BA had been grounded I have no doubt that we would have reached an agreement with management. They would have been forced to negotiate because no other alternative had been available.
So, yes. I think we would have won. And, yes. The strike has been about imposition.
We have heard these rumours about 90 days notice for a very long time. I don't trust for a second that it will happen because otherwise it would have happened.
BASSA has been forced to agreed to a new fleet because BA has always been planning it. Last year, they offered a deal which meant the new fleet would work alongside us existing crew but think of the work they put in planning Project Columbus, including the unnecessary stress and worry it caused us. Do you honestly think they ever thought of giving it up? I don't. BA has been planning a new fleet for a very long time, and sooner or later, they would have pushed it through.
See some of you on the 6th. I'm thinking of putting on yellow eyeshadow!
I'll reply to the rest of you later.
If I were a VCC and able to be away from my present job for weeks to train to do someone else's job, I wouldn't feel too safe that my job is secure...
Ranger07
Because we have a new fleet being set up which will take a lot of our destinations and that will affect our earnings. That's why we need a watertight agreement and a say about route transfers. I don't see this happening to our flight crew or ground staff for that matter and that's why nobody else has such a watertight agreement.
MrBunker
BA has never been in its fight for survival. We all know it was a trick played by our CEO to send us a message. Many voted for industrial action which indicates that there's something wrong yet not willing to make the sacrifices involved in going on strike but relying on the rest of us to do it for them.
I am not waiting for or as little as expecting an apology from anyone for crossing the picket line. Neither should any of them ever except to receive an apology from me for going on strike because that will never happen.
Don't you find it interesting that this is the first time ever in this company during a dispute where crew have actually been suspended or dismissed? That itself indicates what sort of management we are dealing with.
Plodding along
If everyone who voted for industrial action had gone on strike for Christmas and BA had been grounded I have no doubt that we would have reached an agreement with management. They would have been forced to negotiate because no other alternative had been available.
So, yes. I think we would have won. And, yes. The strike has been about imposition.
We have heard these rumours about 90 days notice for a very long time. I don't trust for a second that it will happen because otherwise it would have happened.
BASSA has been forced to agreed to a new fleet because BA has always been planning it. Last year, they offered a deal which meant the new fleet would work alongside us existing crew but think of the work they put in planning Project Columbus, including the unnecessary stress and worry it caused us. Do you honestly think they ever thought of giving it up? I don't. BA has been planning a new fleet for a very long time, and sooner or later, they would have pushed it through.
See some of you on the 6th. I'm thinking of putting on yellow eyeshadow!
I'll reply to the rest of you later.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I were a VCC and able to be away from my present job for weeks to train to do someone else's job, I wouldn't feel too safe that my job is secure...
If everyone who voted for industrial action had gone on strike for Christmas and BA had been grounded I have no doubt that we would have reached an agreement with management. They would have been forced to negotiate because no other alternative had been available.
The backlash against cabin crew from inside the company, the travelling public and the media would be so strong, you would not know what had hit you. The court injunction was a blessing in disguise.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, I'll bite.......
Miss M,
New fleet style transfers of work have not happened to other groups because their costs are in line with the market rate.
BA is most definitely in a fight for survival, and most observers would say it is fighting the battle very well. The company accounts are in the public domain and by law cannot be part of some 'trick'.
The fact that many who voted for strike action didn't go on strike suggests that your support is not as strong as you like to think. In fact you must be aware of that as you are not letting the Gatwick Bassa members vote next time around......as they were nearly all non-strikers!
............it couldn't possibly be an indication of the mis-handling of events by Bassa, could it?
You seem very sure that IF your proposed strike last Christmas had gone ahead and was 100% effective, an agreement would have been reached, and that Bassa would have won. But, Miss M, under your leadership Bassa have been wrong so many times over the last couple of years..... anyone who cares what you think must be crazy. You have cost your membership dearly.
....................See previous paragraph 
Out of pure curiosity I had a peek at the new PCCC (PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council) website earlier......very professional indeed. They hope to register 40% of crew in order to approach BA for recognition. With Bassa following your lead into oblivion the PCCC should see numbers rise very rapidly.
Miss M,
New fleet style transfers of work have not happened to other groups because their costs are in line with the market rate.
BA is most definitely in a fight for survival, and most observers would say it is fighting the battle very well. The company accounts are in the public domain and by law cannot be part of some 'trick'.
The fact that many who voted for strike action didn't go on strike suggests that your support is not as strong as you like to think. In fact you must be aware of that as you are not letting the Gatwick Bassa members vote next time around......as they were nearly all non-strikers!
this is the first time ever in this company during a dispute where crew have actually been suspended or dismissed? That itself indicates what sort of management we are dealing with
You seem very sure that IF your proposed strike last Christmas had gone ahead and was 100% effective, an agreement would have been reached, and that Bassa would have won. But, Miss M, under your leadership Bassa have been wrong so many times over the last couple of years..... anyone who cares what you think must be crazy. You have cost your membership dearly.
We have heard these rumours about 90 days notice for a very long time. I don't trust for a second that it will happen because otherwise it would have happened
Out of pure curiosity I had a peek at the new PCCC (PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council) website earlier......very professional indeed. They hope to register 40% of crew in order to approach BA for recognition. With Bassa following your lead into oblivion the PCCC should see numbers rise very rapidly.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woking
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If everyone who voted for industrial action had gone on strike for Christmas and BA had been grounded I have no doubt that we would have reached an agreement with management. They would have been forced to negotiate because no other alternative had been available.
I'll watch with interest.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tunbridge Wells
Posts: 148
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hi-jacking of the Manchester disaster to gain political points is utterly beneath contempt. I'm not is Bassa, but were I, I'd be sending this message:
Not in my name
Not in my name