British Airways vs. BASSA (current Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Therefore.....if BA move lucrative routes to Mixed Fleet, those who have signed will be OK, and those who haven't.....will lose more and more money.......
Feel sorry for them......NOT!!!
Feel sorry for them......NOT!!!
(Views above are my own, not those of my employer)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Dorset
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
64K......
Yes, I understand the concerns of those staying in the Union in order to vote Yes for accepting the proposal, or No to further strike action.
However.....I really believe all non strikers should leave the Union ASAP.
The Union ballot for accepting or rejecting the proposal is open for 2 weeks.....
The new ballot for strike action (if they decide not to accept the proposal), will come maybe a week later.....
Therefore there must be a window of opportunity for Bill Francis to open the proposal again for non union members to sign before the strike ballot (if it happens) gets sent out.
If they leave now, they would be in a position to sign as and when the window of opportunity arises.
The LT recognise those who worked through the strike, and I believe want them all to be able to sign if they want to. At the moment though, it is illegal for them to offer the deal to Union members on an individual basis.
Therefore......leave now, and be ready.
Yes, I understand the concerns of those staying in the Union in order to vote Yes for accepting the proposal, or No to further strike action.
However.....I really believe all non strikers should leave the Union ASAP.
The Union ballot for accepting or rejecting the proposal is open for 2 weeks.....
The new ballot for strike action (if they decide not to accept the proposal), will come maybe a week later.....
Therefore there must be a window of opportunity for Bill Francis to open the proposal again for non union members to sign before the strike ballot (if it happens) gets sent out.
If they leave now, they would be in a position to sign as and when the window of opportunity arises.
The LT recognise those who worked through the strike, and I believe want them all to be able to sign if they want to. At the moment though, it is illegal for them to offer the deal to Union members on an individual basis.
Therefore......leave now, and be ready.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The thing is that neither BA or the union have any idea who is or is not in the union. So just sign it if you want to. Job done. Say you left last week. Who's to say you didn't. The union is in complete disaray.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the uncertainties is that nobody knows how long the current offer to non-union members will be available. It might be for weeks or a lot longer!
I think that anyone who thinks that the new contract offer is better than their current one should sign it. Remember: the writing is one the wall for WW and EF.
I think that anyone who thinks that the new contract offer is better than their current one should sign it. Remember: the writing is one the wall for WW and EF.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good point. So, for instance if like many, you went on strike the first time hoping it would be sorted out quickly then went into work as recognised striking wasn't having any positive effect, it seems a wise thing if you want to accept the proposal but still belong to the union, is ensure you pay subs via your bank. If you see what I mean 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Dorset
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hampshire Hostie....
Why do people want to stay in these existing Unions? Do they really think the Union would help them if they were unfortunate enough to have a grievance with BA.
The reps arn't even around to help those who striked at the moment.....
Do you think they would help someone who they knew walked through the picket line?
I doubt it!
Why do people want to stay in these existing Unions? Do they really think the Union would help them if they were unfortunate enough to have a grievance with BA.
The reps arn't even around to help those who striked at the moment.....
Do you think they would help someone who they knew walked through the picket line?
I doubt it!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look you lot. I think you will find that the only reason BF has said it is only open to non union members is because he is not actively allowed to encourage, through an offer, people to leave the union.
He wants lots of us to sign it to send the union a message and he wants union members to press for a vote and that has already happened.
If they vote YES we will all get the offer.
If they vote NO they will then go on strike and he can then sack them.
If you are in the union but you don't strike I am sure you will be treated as though you accepted the offer because you chose not to strike. So don't worry. However if you are worrird just sign it anyway because as I said just because you union subs are going through does not mean you might not have left last week. It is only your word against theirs and as I said the union has no idea and BA is only saying you need to have left to cover themselves legaly.
He wants lots of us to sign it to send the union a message and he wants union members to press for a vote and that has already happened.
If they vote YES we will all get the offer.
If they vote NO they will then go on strike and he can then sack them.
If you are in the union but you don't strike I am sure you will be treated as though you accepted the offer because you chose not to strike. So don't worry. However if you are worrird just sign it anyway because as I said just because you union subs are going through does not mean you might not have left last week. It is only your word against theirs and as I said the union has no idea and BA is only saying you need to have left to cover themselves legaly.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Hampshire
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some probably stay as many have been members for years and have felt well represented until recently. Old habits die hard sometimes and perhaps some see loyalty as important. It's a big decision too.
Yes, no reps around. Isn't that because the office is shut and they aren't being de-rostered?
And, no I doubt that any help would be forthcoming too although not sure if they would know who crossed the picket line.
Any ideas on redeployment and pension?
Yes, no reps around. Isn't that because the office is shut and they aren't being de-rostered?
And, no I doubt that any help would be forthcoming too although not sure if they would know who crossed the picket line.
Any ideas on redeployment and pension?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: London
Age: 71
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I find some of the posts hilarious on this forum.
Shame as there is some good posts where knowledge can be obtained.
As I read through the many posts, I always seem to come across a post which
says "Ba can the strikers legally if they were able to overturn a strike through a court decision".
I think you will find, legally Ba cannot.
If Ba can prove the next strike is illegal, all strikers will still be protected.
Its the Union, who has to pay.
Monetary or through some other means.
Whats interesting is why would Ba, notify cabin crew or the Union, that its possible that there members might not be protected if a possible strike happens in the future.
Apparently Ba are losing millions, recruiting a new fleet.
Why not just allow a possible strike to happen, take them to court , win the case, fire the staff and sue the Union for lost money owed.
Recruit Temps until they are able to grow there new fleet to the amount they need.
Don't forget, according to the Daily Mail, there are 25,000 people waiting to sign up.
So why warn the union and possible strikers?
Anybody know how to play poker?
Shame as there is some good posts where knowledge can be obtained.
As I read through the many posts, I always seem to come across a post which
says "Ba can the strikers legally if they were able to overturn a strike through a court decision".
I think you will find, legally Ba cannot.
If Ba can prove the next strike is illegal, all strikers will still be protected.
Its the Union, who has to pay.
Monetary or through some other means.
Whats interesting is why would Ba, notify cabin crew or the Union, that its possible that there members might not be protected if a possible strike happens in the future.
Apparently Ba are losing millions, recruiting a new fleet.
Why not just allow a possible strike to happen, take them to court , win the case, fire the staff and sue the Union for lost money owed.
Recruit Temps until they are able to grow there new fleet to the amount they need.
Don't forget, according to the Daily Mail, there are 25,000 people waiting to sign up.
So why warn the union and possible strikers?
Anybody know how to play poker?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shah100
I think you will find the legal position to be as follows.
The union once it has established it has a mandate from the majority of members who cast a vote can call as many strike dates as it likes, provided it gives 7 days notice. Any member going on strike is protected from unfair dimissal for a period of 12 weeks from the date of the ballot The union can call strike dates beyond the 12 week period, however, any member who walks out can be summarily dismissed.
In order to maintain protection for its members the union would need to call a further ballot and provided it received a mandate from the majority ofmembers who casta vote, it could then call further strike dates. Again, provided these dates fall within a 12 week period from the date of the ballot, all strikers would be protected from being sacked for taking strike action.
There are a number of caveats. Firstly, only those who were balloted can participate in any industrial action and be protected. Any staff who were not balloted who then walked off the job on nominated strike dates would be deemed to have taken secondary action and be liable to summary dismissal.Secondly, and crucial to the proposed strike ballot, the union can only ballot on an issue once. There can be no linkage between ballots .
The point that Tony McCarthy was making in his letter to Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson was that BA consider the staff travel and disciplinary matters to have arisen from the first dispute and hence the two are linked. This means that any strike dates announced would be considered to part of the original dispute which commenced in Feb. Thus any staff who walked out (assuming that Unite were able to get a majority of the votes cast) could be summarily dismissed.
For BA to stand a good chance of rebuffing any claims for unfair dismissal, it needs to demonstrate due diligence. By providing an unequivocal warning to Unite in this manner, it can show that it has done so. To be honest, I thnk the BA legal team are preety hot on their stuff. I can't see Unite having much of a leg to stand on if the pay deal is rejected. The Unite leadership must be praying that enough people vote to accept the BA offer. Then the union can exit with a degree of honour intact. If the crew reject the offer, Unite are in a real mess. Logic says that they should then ballot for further industrial acion. Even if they get the support for it, they don't have to announce strike dates. They could let it run, make a show of negotiating and then issue a further ballot that is unrelated, e.g. imposition of New Fleet. By then we would be up to November with the opportunity for Xmas strikes. It would depend on how many crew were still part of Unite then. I suspect that many commuters will not be able to sustain paying full fare for flights for very long coing on top of a potential 12% loss of earnings due to strike action and may have had to leave the airline.
I think you will find the legal position to be as follows.
The union once it has established it has a mandate from the majority of members who cast a vote can call as many strike dates as it likes, provided it gives 7 days notice. Any member going on strike is protected from unfair dimissal for a period of 12 weeks from the date of the ballot The union can call strike dates beyond the 12 week period, however, any member who walks out can be summarily dismissed.
In order to maintain protection for its members the union would need to call a further ballot and provided it received a mandate from the majority ofmembers who casta vote, it could then call further strike dates. Again, provided these dates fall within a 12 week period from the date of the ballot, all strikers would be protected from being sacked for taking strike action.
There are a number of caveats. Firstly, only those who were balloted can participate in any industrial action and be protected. Any staff who were not balloted who then walked off the job on nominated strike dates would be deemed to have taken secondary action and be liable to summary dismissal.Secondly, and crucial to the proposed strike ballot, the union can only ballot on an issue once. There can be no linkage between ballots .
The point that Tony McCarthy was making in his letter to Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson was that BA consider the staff travel and disciplinary matters to have arisen from the first dispute and hence the two are linked. This means that any strike dates announced would be considered to part of the original dispute which commenced in Feb. Thus any staff who walked out (assuming that Unite were able to get a majority of the votes cast) could be summarily dismissed.
For BA to stand a good chance of rebuffing any claims for unfair dismissal, it needs to demonstrate due diligence. By providing an unequivocal warning to Unite in this manner, it can show that it has done so. To be honest, I thnk the BA legal team are preety hot on their stuff. I can't see Unite having much of a leg to stand on if the pay deal is rejected. The Unite leadership must be praying that enough people vote to accept the BA offer. Then the union can exit with a degree of honour intact. If the crew reject the offer, Unite are in a real mess. Logic says that they should then ballot for further industrial acion. Even if they get the support for it, they don't have to announce strike dates. They could let it run, make a show of negotiating and then issue a further ballot that is unrelated, e.g. imposition of New Fleet. By then we would be up to November with the opportunity for Xmas strikes. It would depend on how many crew were still part of Unite then. I suspect that many commuters will not be able to sustain paying full fare for flights for very long coing on top of a potential 12% loss of earnings due to strike action and may have had to leave the airline.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: London
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colonel White wrote:
There's probably enough strikers to ensure that a majority of members vote to reject the offer.
Unite would be weakened quite a bit if the dispute drags into November. By that time, BA will have recruited more cabin crew, will have launched Mixed Fleet and will have quite a few wet-lease carriers who will be able to provide European flights.
As for those who lost ST: I've done some rough calculations of the annual difference between commercial and standby tickets for two round trips a month. From JNB it might be £11,000, from NCE it might be £1,800. But that's only part of the story: we all know that crew do sometimes return late to LHR, and this could be costly. A change to a ba.com flight booking is £90 plus any fare increase. Over a year, this could easily amount to hundreds of pounds - or more. Oh for the days of just being able to relist on the next flight ...
I strongly suspect that many commuters who lost ST on 14 April have realised the horrible consequence of their strike action. Sadly, I think they will keep voting to strike to get their ST back.
The Unite leadership must be praying that enough people vote to accept the BA offer.
If the crew reject the offer, Unite are in a real mess. Logic says that they should then ballot for further industrial acion. Even if they get the support for it, they don't have to announce strike dates. They could let it run, make a show of negotiating and then issue a further ballot that is unrelated, e.g. imposition of New Fleet. By then we would be up to November with the opportunity for Xmas strikes. It would depend on how many crew were still part of Unite then. I suspect that many commuters will not be able to sustain paying full fare for flights for very long coing on top of a potential 12% loss of earnings due to strike action and may have had to leave the airline.
As for those who lost ST: I've done some rough calculations of the annual difference between commercial and standby tickets for two round trips a month. From JNB it might be £11,000, from NCE it might be £1,800. But that's only part of the story: we all know that crew do sometimes return late to LHR, and this could be costly. A change to a ba.com flight booking is £90 plus any fare increase. Over a year, this could easily amount to hundreds of pounds - or more. Oh for the days of just being able to relist on the next flight ...
I strongly suspect that many commuters who lost ST on 14 April have realised the horrible consequence of their strike action. Sadly, I think they will keep voting to strike to get their ST back.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: About 3000 below Midhurst SID I reckon
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If Ba can prove the next strike is illegal, all strikers will still be protected.
Also, (and I quote) "Official industrial action organised by a trade union is 'unprotected' if the trade union has failed to hold a postal ballot in-line with the law".
Strikers are only protected if they act within legal guidelines. Guidelines I'm not even sure BASSA/Unite are advising their members. Do they even know themselves?
The union are fighting for some people to be reinstated following suspensions due to either malicious behaviour, or a misunderstanding. WHy did the union not step up and advise members not to partake in chats/websites/activity which would put them at risk of a disciplinary or, criminal prosectuion?? I'm not surprised they are fighting to get them reinstated! If they lose their jobs the union will have their backsides sued! The union I feel is only trying to protect themselves and their pockets. Nothing to do with morals IMHO.
Then there's also the 12 week strike rule. Dates striked, minus any lock out dates = possible dismissal. As long as BA can prove they have followed the rules.
If anyone paid attention a couple of months ago to the media, a statement in the FT by Willie Walsh pretty much was word for word with legal guidelines.
" We have followed reasonable steps to settle the dispute with the trade union, we are always available to talk".
So when it comes to the 12 week rule, it's documented in a public statement, unchallenged, that BA have done their best to to resolve the dispute, and uphold the law. Clever. P45 anyone?
Six
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Protection from unfair dismissal
Any member going on strike is protected from unfair dimissal for a period of 12 weeks
I do not believe that BA will do this for many reasons. I just think that people need to know what the "protected period" means and what protection you actually have. It is more important to the union in that for 12 weeks they cannot be sued for costs incurred by the company during the strike.