British Airways vs. BASSA (current Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
although as far as I know that in itself is not illegal or unlawful
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
http://www.onebrickcourt.com/files/c...ghes_44994.pdf
please read above, the real original remit of the APG, and as stated above , here LONG before this dispute and BA employees NOT outside agency.
Another thing anyway, what is wrong with such a tactic.
How else do you catch a rat, than employe a rat catcher?
PLEASE NOTE: the above does NOT imply any BA crew OR any other BA employees are rats. Also many innocent mice have been caught over the years as they seemed to be acting in a manner resembling a rat at the time of the observation.
please read above, the real original remit of the APG, and as stated above , here LONG before this dispute and BA employees NOT outside agency.
Another thing anyway, what is wrong with such a tactic.
How else do you catch a rat, than employe a rat catcher?
PLEASE NOTE: the above does NOT imply any BA crew OR any other BA employees are rats. Also many innocent mice have been caught over the years as they seemed to be acting in a manner resembling a rat at the time of the observation.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Typical BASSA scare tactics, invoke a bogeyman. Make it a shadowy bit of the company and suggest it has Big Brother powers. They really ought to look at the remit of Asset Protection. It's available to serving BA staff and isn't hidden. The document is selective with the facts. It fails to point out that the first ballot was thrown out because of voting irregularities. BASSA allowed people leaving BA to participate. The CEO said he had had enough of BASSA at the agm. This was after the strike action. The disciplinary processes have been adhered to. If the union feels this is not the case they can go to a tribunal. The article is yet another piece of hogwash. Freedom of speech also means that it is possible to hold an opposing view without fear of recrimination - something that seems to be absent from the union front.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Age: 58
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Freedom of speech (as applaudable as it is) unfortunatley means we have to listen/read this hogwash!!!
Fortunatley most of us can see it for what it is, however there will always be others that follow the pied piper! Or admire the 'kings new clothes'.
Fortunatley most of us can see it for what it is, however there will always be others that follow the pied piper! Or admire the 'kings new clothes'.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that this sort of newsletter is aimed more for internal consumption, to rally the troops so to speak. Who else would see it? The press won't publish, the public don't care, the other Unite members in BA know it's selective with the truth. The only people who'll read it are likely to be cabin crew.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juan Tugoh
Without knowing all the details and not wishing to comment on the particular case, if true it could be construed that it brought the company into disrepute and was Gross Misconduct and therefore a sackable (though not criminal) act.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
R2D2-LHR
Not that it really matters who WW has lunch with but I particulary like the bit on the lack of pro-union coverage, is that because, and I will go out on a limb here,that there wasn't and isn't any?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colonel White
The disciplinary processes have been adhered to.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Numberfifteentplease are you suggesting that there are individuals who have multiple accusations leveled at them and that BA is rolling these up into a single disciplinary proceeding?
Alternatively are you saying that the sheer number of grievances raised by staff about colleague's conduct is so high that the company is not able to process these in a timely manner.
Alternatively are you saying that the sheer number of grievances raised by staff about colleague's conduct is so high that the company is not able to process these in a timely manner.
Last edited by Colonel White; 30th Sep 2010 at 16:19.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Striking crew have raised grievances en masse over loss of staff travel and deductions of pay. Given that many hundreds of these are identical, right down to using the same letter of complaint, BA are dealing with them en masse using a test case of a small number of individuals. BASSA are up in arms about this, presumably because they wish to tie up BAs resources indefinitely. I suppose the question that needs to be asked is would a court or employment tribunal accept that this was a reasonable way to deal with a large number of identical grievances? I have a hunch they would.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ColonelWhite
BA have been swamped with so many grievances that they are not meeting their own laid down guidelines, timelines and procedures - they have even stopped acknowledging grievances that have been raised and rather than manage these grievances on an individual basis they have attempted to lump a number of them all in together and have a 'test case' hearing. This has neither been agreed by the individuals nor the NSP.
An individual grievance is exactly what it say's it is - not a collective one, the fact that a number of people have the same grievance is somewhat irrelevant as individuals have been affected in different ways and the hardships subsequently suffered may impact some more than others.
An individual grievance is exactly what it say's it is - not a collective one, the fact that a number of people have the same grievance is somewhat irrelevant as individuals have been affected in different ways and the hardships subsequently suffered may impact some more than others.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In terms of the staff travel grievance, does the degree to which an individual is affected have any bearing on the outcome? The decision to remove staff travel was a corporate one and is unlikely to be revoked because of individual hardship.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BigBrutha & YellowPen
Both of these are directly related to the strike, so I can most definately see the logic in handling them as collective issues.
As for tying up BA in paperwork - my understanding of the law and the taking of BA to any industrial tribunal (for withholding pay for example) - the individual has to raise a grievance with their employer and the company grievance process has to be exhausted before anybody can take BA to an employment tribunal - that is why so many individual grievances have been filed.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that BA see the same 'logic' - however an individual has a right to raise a grievance and there is a process in place for them to do so.
As for tying up BA in paperwork - my understanding of the law and the taking of BA to any industrial tribunal (for withholding pay for example) - the individual has to raise a grievance with their employer and the company grievance process has to be exhausted before anybody can take BA to an employment tribunal - that is why so many individual grievances have been filed.
As for tying up BA in paperwork - my understanding of the law and the taking of BA to any industrial tribunal (for withholding pay for example) - the individual has to raise a grievance with their employer and the company grievance process has to be exhausted before anybody can take BA to an employment tribunal - that is why so many individual grievances have been filed.
The total receipts figure for 2007/8 includes over 10,000 multiple claims
from Airline employees (cabin crew) that have been resubmitted a
number of times during the year. Excluding these suggests that there has
been a decrease of 4% in accepted claims between 2007/8 and 2008/9.
number of times during the year. Excluding these suggests that there has
been a decrease of 4% in accepted claims between 2007/8 and 2008/9.
There has been a fall in the number of multiple claims between 2007/8
and 2008/9. If we exclude the number of airline employees resubmitted
multiple claims for 2007/8, there has been a drop of 13% in the number of
multiple claims accepted.
and 2008/9. If we exclude the number of airline employees resubmitted
multiple claims for 2007/8, there has been a drop of 13% in the number of
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: LHR
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As if by magic
BA must have been reading this forum yesterday !!!!
From: Bill Francis, Head of Inflight Customer Experience
This week we sent a letter to Unite, inviting them to meet with us to discuss your complaints about pay and staff travel following strike action. This follows some discussion with Unite about the process to be used. At National Officer level they had previously supported an approach involving lead cases, which had been selected to cover all categories of complaint. On 1 September we learned from the Regional Organisers that they did not support that approach.
We trust Unite will use this meeting to progress your complaints and will update you of the outcome as soon as possible.
We will keep you updated on developments. In the interim we will not be responding to individual enquiries on the process.
From: Bill Francis, Head of Inflight Customer Experience
This week we sent a letter to Unite, inviting them to meet with us to discuss your complaints about pay and staff travel following strike action. This follows some discussion with Unite about the process to be used. At National Officer level they had previously supported an approach involving lead cases, which had been selected to cover all categories of complaint. On 1 September we learned from the Regional Organisers that they did not support that approach.
We trust Unite will use this meeting to progress your complaints and will update you of the outcome as soon as possible.
We will keep you updated on developments. In the interim we will not be responding to individual enquiries on the process.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London, England
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is well known in UK HR circles that the filing of "minor" grievances is encouraged by certain unions. This is done to tie up management's time, to continue the "hard done by worker"/ victim mentality of the employee and to allow the union reps to go to "meetings" all day long - rather than actually do the job that they were employed for by the company.
Spurious grievances are frequently filed by BA cabin crew. For example, a steward is told by the captain to take his feet off of the bulkhead - grievance filed against the captain. I foresee a complete re-write of the whole EG policy.
Spurious grievances are frequently filed by BA cabin crew. For example, a steward is told by the captain to take his feet off of the bulkhead - grievance filed against the captain. I foresee a complete re-write of the whole EG policy.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you would find that BA has not adhered to their own internal disciplinary processes
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"army of ... low paid office workers..."
Cabin Crew perhaps??
'Low paid', yet still prepared to volunteer to work to help protect the company in times of dire financial need.
Own goal there I think, BASSA
