British Airways vs. BASSA (current Airline Staff Only)
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
Hiflyer14.
Having just read the 13 page thread on ESS, I believe only one person was rude and Mr Francis point the error of the individuals ways to them. Mr Francis later claimed somebody else was being personal, patronising, rude and unprofessional, when all that had happened is that the poster had used actual legislation to re-enforce his point.
And as for the legal action blah, blah, blah. There is the possibility of a legal challenge, one which would alter the statute books in the UK for the benefit of every worker. Now you want to represent thousands of workers, but with such a closed mind you will not represent me. I also find the blah, blah, blah to be patronising. We live in a Western democracy, where people have expectations of fundamental rights, ie, don't punish me for something I'm legally entitled to do. This is not North Korea or similar, and if you and the PCCC don't want to be thought of as a Kim puppet then open your minds to fair representation and not just what trhe company want you to do. Legal action blah, blah, blah! how bloody insulting to people who have fought for your legal rights.
Having just read the 13 page thread on ESS, I believe only one person was rude and Mr Francis point the error of the individuals ways to them. Mr Francis later claimed somebody else was being personal, patronising, rude and unprofessional, when all that had happened is that the poster had used actual legislation to re-enforce his point.
And as for the legal action blah, blah, blah. There is the possibility of a legal challenge, one which would alter the statute books in the UK for the benefit of every worker. Now you want to represent thousands of workers, but with such a closed mind you will not represent me. I also find the blah, blah, blah to be patronising. We live in a Western democracy, where people have expectations of fundamental rights, ie, don't punish me for something I'm legally entitled to do. This is not North Korea or similar, and if you and the PCCC don't want to be thought of as a Kim puppet then open your minds to fair representation and not just what trhe company want you to do. Legal action blah, blah, blah! how bloody insulting to people who have fought for your legal rights.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
Midman.
The issue is that Mr Francis stated often, and on his recent web chat, that 'old fleet' will not be starved of work and left to die.
Clearly the BASSAists do not believe that, nor it seems do the antiBASSAist such as yourself. So if those who support BA reckon I'll have a quick and financially imprudent death, and those who don't support BA also believe this, what the hell should I believe?
Why should I trust that it will take 10 years for Mixed Fleet to be operating 40% of the routes.
The issue is that Mr Francis stated often, and on his recent web chat, that 'old fleet' will not be starved of work and left to die.
Clearly the BASSAists do not believe that, nor it seems do the antiBASSAist such as yourself. So if those who support BA reckon I'll have a quick and financially imprudent death, and those who don't support BA also believe this, what the hell should I believe?
Why should I trust that it will take 10 years for Mixed Fleet to be operating 40% of the routes.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
Desk Jockey.
Why are you pleased that a person can be punished for undertaking a legal process. Are you 100% certain that you will always be in agreement with your employer, that you will never have to consider industrial action to preserve your lifestyle/work.
Are you confident that once the precedent has been set and accepted, it will not be used against any other workers. Do you not feel that managers could ask for alot more than they require knowing that should you object, legally, they can take any perk they like away from you.
Listen, I didn't strike, but should those who did, not have staff travel reinstated , I would be forever worried when the next dispute (in any department) comes along, and it will.
Why are you pleased that a person can be punished for undertaking a legal process. Are you 100% certain that you will always be in agreement with your employer, that you will never have to consider industrial action to preserve your lifestyle/work.
Are you confident that once the precedent has been set and accepted, it will not be used against any other workers. Do you not feel that managers could ask for alot more than they require knowing that should you object, legally, they can take any perk they like away from you.
Listen, I didn't strike, but should those who did, not have staff travel reinstated , I would be forever worried when the next dispute (in any department) comes along, and it will.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would construe your last statement as being bullied into accepting something against my better judgement.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Dubai
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
UK Employment Law
Maybe, going on some of the posts above, the legal position on striking needs to be re-iterated:
If you strike you are in breach of your contract with your employer and thus you can be dismissed.
UK labour law allows a 12 week "protection" period, under an official and monitored, properly conducted, union ballot, where if your employer dismisses you during that period you can claim unfair dismissal and compensation, but no right to be re-employed.
Thats it...no more no less.
Your employer can legally sack you for being on strike - it just comes down to if its during the protection period he would have to pay compensation.....
Also, with the upcoming public sector cuts, anyone who beleives there will be any relaxation in labour law is living on Mars. We're not ruled by Labour now....
If you strike you are in breach of your contract with your employer and thus you can be dismissed.
UK labour law allows a 12 week "protection" period, under an official and monitored, properly conducted, union ballot, where if your employer dismisses you during that period you can claim unfair dismissal and compensation, but no right to be re-employed.
Thats it...no more no less.
Your employer can legally sack you for being on strike - it just comes down to if its during the protection period he would have to pay compensation.....
Also, with the upcoming public sector cuts, anyone who beleives there will be any relaxation in labour law is living on Mars. We're not ruled by Labour now....
Last edited by harrypic; 29th Jun 2010 at 23:24.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
Thats not disputed Harrypic.
But it doesn't mean that it is right morally or legally.
The moral argument I'll leave, we could go on, and on, and on and never agree, but legally UK law is incompatible with EU law, which ultimately binds UK law. In essence the wider view of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. That is where the challenge I allude to will lie.
Hotel Mode.
Should I accept, with a majority backing, Mr Walsh's offer, does that guarentee that I will not be left short of work and rapidly approaching a redeployment policy. Neither your cohorts nor the BASSA opposition believe so.
But it doesn't mean that it is right morally or legally.
The moral argument I'll leave, we could go on, and on, and on and never agree, but legally UK law is incompatible with EU law, which ultimately binds UK law. In essence the wider view of Article 11 of the European Convention on Human Rights. That is where the challenge I allude to will lie.
Hotel Mode.
Should I accept, with a majority backing, Mr Walsh's offer, does that guarentee that I will not be left short of work and rapidly approaching a redeployment policy. Neither your cohorts nor the BASSA opposition believe so.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767
The precedent for removing staff travel from people who have withdrawn their goodwill from the company was established way before this current dispute. Admittedly, it was returned fairly soon after normal service resumed.
In any job there is a balance point. Do the rewards outweigh the grunge factors. Provided the job is reward positive (and it doesn't have to be financial rewards) then most folk will stick with it. However, once the grunge factors are in the majority, then the commonsense thing to do is quit. The dilemma that an awful lot of cabin crew face is that the grunge factors, by all accounts are greater than the rewards. I hear of crew who feel they have a management that does not respect them, that they are constantly apologising to customers for shortfalls in service, that they have had changes imposed on them, that they are fearful that the company will reduce their variable pay or that new fleet will starve them of profitable routes. The list goes on and on. The problem is that BA cabin crew know damned well that they cannot walk into another cabin crew job with ease and expect to earn as much as they currently do. Moreover, there seem to be an awful lot of crew who have never worked outside of BA, so don't have a broad skills base that can be applied to say a clerical or sales role. So the prospects outside of BA are bleak for these folk. They are doing a very creditable King Canute act. The job is changing and not in a direction to their liking, but rather than try and shape the future they are desperate to maintain the status quo. It really is sad to see a bunch of individuals who are on the whole well meaning fail to comprehend that change is inevitable and that the only way to make sure that the outcome has any positive elements is to influence those steering the change. Show a truly viable alternative and most people will thank you for it. Stonewall and they will either bypass you or run you over. Time for cabin crew to make up their minds.
The precedent for removing staff travel from people who have withdrawn their goodwill from the company was established way before this current dispute. Admittedly, it was returned fairly soon after normal service resumed.
In any job there is a balance point. Do the rewards outweigh the grunge factors. Provided the job is reward positive (and it doesn't have to be financial rewards) then most folk will stick with it. However, once the grunge factors are in the majority, then the commonsense thing to do is quit. The dilemma that an awful lot of cabin crew face is that the grunge factors, by all accounts are greater than the rewards. I hear of crew who feel they have a management that does not respect them, that they are constantly apologising to customers for shortfalls in service, that they have had changes imposed on them, that they are fearful that the company will reduce their variable pay or that new fleet will starve them of profitable routes. The list goes on and on. The problem is that BA cabin crew know damned well that they cannot walk into another cabin crew job with ease and expect to earn as much as they currently do. Moreover, there seem to be an awful lot of crew who have never worked outside of BA, so don't have a broad skills base that can be applied to say a clerical or sales role. So the prospects outside of BA are bleak for these folk. They are doing a very creditable King Canute act. The job is changing and not in a direction to their liking, but rather than try and shape the future they are desperate to maintain the status quo. It really is sad to see a bunch of individuals who are on the whole well meaning fail to comprehend that change is inevitable and that the only way to make sure that the outcome has any positive elements is to influence those steering the change. Show a truly viable alternative and most people will thank you for it. Stonewall and they will either bypass you or run you over. Time for cabin crew to make up their minds.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
All law is questionable, thats why we have lawyers, and why I'm in training for a new career.
Again, I won't disagree, it will take time, but that doesn't make it impossible nor invalid.
Again, I won't disagree, it will take time, but that doesn't make it impossible nor invalid.
Last edited by PC767; 29th Jun 2010 at 23:36. Reason: Late hour and a nightcap!
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Dubai
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767
Agree absolutely.....in the meantime theres a good offer on the table that many many UK workers would bite their arm off for...
Good negotiators pick their battles - no point fighting a battle you can't win - save your resources for future, more important battles than the CSD having to work trolleys....
Good negotiators pick their battles - no point fighting a battle you can't win - save your resources for future, more important battles than the CSD having to work trolleys....
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 13 Likes
on
6 Posts
Col White, sir.
I will not argue against your points. However I will say that for many of the reasons you mention, BA cabin crew are trying to hold onto the best deal they can. It would appear from Mr Francis web chat today (are you privy to this?), and from Unite HQ that should staff travel be re-issued crew would accept Mr Walsh's proposal. But what that means is that Mr Walsh has a new fleet, has unchallenged imposition and cost savings on his old fleet, lets not forget that, alot will have changed for cabin crew.
I will not argue against your points. However I will say that for many of the reasons you mention, BA cabin crew are trying to hold onto the best deal they can. It would appear from Mr Francis web chat today (are you privy to this?), and from Unite HQ that should staff travel be re-issued crew would accept Mr Walsh's proposal. But what that means is that Mr Walsh has a new fleet, has unchallenged imposition and cost savings on his old fleet, lets not forget that, alot will have changed for cabin crew.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin crew costs. Sorry, but just because it is written on a CAA web site, or any other web site for that matter, doesn't mean I have to believe it. And I err on the don't quite believe it side of things. Where do the CAA get there figures from? direct from airlines? Virgin in particular is a private company and not a PLC, it doesn't need, nor I believe, to publish its costs.
The Virgin costs do include all cash allowances. Virgin accounts, despite being a private company, are all posted on the Companies House website, where all accounts for every UK company and LLP are published. The detailed data breakdown that is provided to the CAA is audited by KPMG, their auditor, and includes all employee costs irrespective of how they are paid, and is prepared in accordance with accounting standards.
No big conspiracy there at the CAA - they have all the real data they need.
Their note is: Expenditure Total expenditure for the salaries and allowances of all employees. Included are gross salary (before deduction of income tax, pension social welfare and voluntary payments), overtime pay, sales commissions, flying pay and subsistence allowances, (such as cost of living allowances, station and overseas allowances) and all crew hourly flight allowances (i.e. those in excess of travel and incidental expenses).
The following are excluded:- Employers National Insurance Contributions, all payroll based employer cost such as life and permanent health insurance, agency staff not on the payroll, and expenses for travelling, moving, training, uniform’s etc.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
REHEAT
Thank you for confirming exactly what the CAA statistics cover although Ava Hannah will probably still see it as a conspiracy bwteen BA & the CAA. All sorts of data are compiled by the CAA from totally autonomous sources. PSMs, FTKs, No of Flights and salaroies for market analysis and information such as actual pax/tonnes carried from eurocontrol.
Ava, please accept the figures are right and from an independent body.
Ava, please accept the figures are right and from an independent body.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767
I appreciate that crew have been seeking to get the best deal possible. Unfortunately, it would appear that their negotiators (BASSA) rejected the best offer last year and have seen the options put forward by BA management steadily decline in value. The Way Forward package was probably a better deal than the now Final option. BASSA have been working on the 'Last Minute.com' theory that suggests that if you hang in long enough you will get the deal you want but that in the meantime the offers will fluctuate. The trouble is that in the intervening period their members who walked out are suffering discomfort and in all probability will end up out of pocket even if BASSA get their deal. Moreover, BA is not standing still. The training up of VCC, although contentious, demonstrates the company's ability to minimise the effect of the current and any future cabin crew disruption. The introduction of New Fleet with little or no involvement from Unite starts to address the overall crew costs issues.
The prudent move from both BASSA and their parent union Unite would have been to settle either last year when the best deal was on the table, or to have recommended the Way Forward deal and got crew to back it. They would then have nipped in the bud the volunteer programme and been able to move on to sorting out the introduction of New Fleet. Sadly, they took a different turn and their membership are paying the price.
I wasn't privy to the webchat, but it sounds like Unite are rowing back considerably on the proposed (but now suspended) ballot issues if the sole stumbling block now is the restoration of staff travel. Kind of suggests that even if there is a 'no' vote to accepting the deal, the complaints about use of other staff as cabin crew and the disciplinaries should be dropped from any future ballot, which leaves the staff travel issue and that is inextricably linked to the previous ballot. Any walk out based on the ST issue would not have the 12 week protection and strikers would be liable to summary dismissal.
I appreciate that crew have been seeking to get the best deal possible. Unfortunately, it would appear that their negotiators (BASSA) rejected the best offer last year and have seen the options put forward by BA management steadily decline in value. The Way Forward package was probably a better deal than the now Final option. BASSA have been working on the 'Last Minute.com' theory that suggests that if you hang in long enough you will get the deal you want but that in the meantime the offers will fluctuate. The trouble is that in the intervening period their members who walked out are suffering discomfort and in all probability will end up out of pocket even if BASSA get their deal. Moreover, BA is not standing still. The training up of VCC, although contentious, demonstrates the company's ability to minimise the effect of the current and any future cabin crew disruption. The introduction of New Fleet with little or no involvement from Unite starts to address the overall crew costs issues.
The prudent move from both BASSA and their parent union Unite would have been to settle either last year when the best deal was on the table, or to have recommended the Way Forward deal and got crew to back it. They would then have nipped in the bud the volunteer programme and been able to move on to sorting out the introduction of New Fleet. Sadly, they took a different turn and their membership are paying the price.
I wasn't privy to the webchat, but it sounds like Unite are rowing back considerably on the proposed (but now suspended) ballot issues if the sole stumbling block now is the restoration of staff travel. Kind of suggests that even if there is a 'no' vote to accepting the deal, the complaints about use of other staff as cabin crew and the disciplinaries should be dropped from any future ballot, which leaves the staff travel issue and that is inextricably linked to the previous ballot. Any walk out based on the ST issue would not have the 12 week protection and strikers would be liable to summary dismissal.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC 767.
Why would BF leave any of us sitting at home on full pay and then employ more people also on full pay ( all be it lower) and be therefore paynig two sets of people.
This rubbish about starving us of work is, just that rubbish, put about by BASSA to scare gullible people to join in their war about imposition and CSD's working inflight.
Most crew are more than happy to work down and the only way BASSA could get you all out on strike was to scare you all.
Now you are all arguing over staff travel that you all would still have if BASSA had negotiated about everthing instead of holding a gun against BA in the form of strike threats and ultimately, actually, call a strike and cause you all to lose your staff travel.
Just take the deal, it is so good. BA get all their savings from New Fleet plus new crew compliments from us ( which we are already working to).
Plus just in case we do lose work which I am sure will not happen there is a guaranteed minimum. Believe it or not some crew will actually get more under this new scheme. Those on WW that get a bad month of trips will get toped up to the 2009/10 average and those on E/F that bid for the small there and backs will also find they get topped up to the average 2009/10 figure. Those of us that would have earned more than the average still will because now are allowances remain unchanged. In fact at first New Fleet dose not take any of World wides long Box routes. So on WW you will on average be doing more Box flights so you will also gain there.
Bill Francis dose not want to force any of us on to New Fleet. He wants a totally new fleet working to new rules and he does not want anyone like you working on it. He will make huge savings from future new crew. It will take years for New Fleet to grow, that is of course if you all accept the offer. If you don't, and you strike, new fleet will just get bigger faster because he will sack you and replace you with New Fleet crew faster.
The choice is yours. Please see sence and ask your union to accept this really good offer.
He is going to give back staff travel without seniority if you accept and I am sure eventually he may reinstate it completely over time. If you strike again you can be sure you will never get it back. Please all come to your senses. It is BASSA you should all be cross with because they have taken you all down a senseless path to losing your staff travel when they could have negotiated this from the start.
Why would BF leave any of us sitting at home on full pay and then employ more people also on full pay ( all be it lower) and be therefore paynig two sets of people.
This rubbish about starving us of work is, just that rubbish, put about by BASSA to scare gullible people to join in their war about imposition and CSD's working inflight.
Most crew are more than happy to work down and the only way BASSA could get you all out on strike was to scare you all.
Now you are all arguing over staff travel that you all would still have if BASSA had negotiated about everthing instead of holding a gun against BA in the form of strike threats and ultimately, actually, call a strike and cause you all to lose your staff travel.
Just take the deal, it is so good. BA get all their savings from New Fleet plus new crew compliments from us ( which we are already working to).
Plus just in case we do lose work which I am sure will not happen there is a guaranteed minimum. Believe it or not some crew will actually get more under this new scheme. Those on WW that get a bad month of trips will get toped up to the 2009/10 average and those on E/F that bid for the small there and backs will also find they get topped up to the average 2009/10 figure. Those of us that would have earned more than the average still will because now are allowances remain unchanged. In fact at first New Fleet dose not take any of World wides long Box routes. So on WW you will on average be doing more Box flights so you will also gain there.
Bill Francis dose not want to force any of us on to New Fleet. He wants a totally new fleet working to new rules and he does not want anyone like you working on it. He will make huge savings from future new crew. It will take years for New Fleet to grow, that is of course if you all accept the offer. If you don't, and you strike, new fleet will just get bigger faster because he will sack you and replace you with New Fleet crew faster.
The choice is yours. Please see sence and ask your union to accept this really good offer.
He is going to give back staff travel without seniority if you accept and I am sure eventually he may reinstate it completely over time. If you strike again you can be sure you will never get it back. Please all come to your senses. It is BASSA you should all be cross with because they have taken you all down a senseless path to losing your staff travel when they could have negotiated this from the start.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Colonel White,
Actually as I have mentioned in my above post this is actually a really good offer. It is good for BA because it saves them a fortune with New Fleet and it is good for current crew because our allowances remain the same but with safe guards that they will not go below last years average.
It's a fantastic offer and it is a direct result of crew emailing Bill directly with their worries and nothing to do with the strike. Bill confirmed this in his web chat. He also confirmed that it will take years for New Fleet to grow because it can only grow as we decrease and that is 1% per year currently, plus any part time offers ( which is how they get the initial intake onto New Fleet in November, there are thousands of crew waiting to take part time offers.) or as the schedual increases.
You can be sure that they (BASSA) will eventually realise it is a good offer and then try and take credit for it. They always do.
Actually as I have mentioned in my above post this is actually a really good offer. It is good for BA because it saves them a fortune with New Fleet and it is good for current crew because our allowances remain the same but with safe guards that they will not go below last years average.
It's a fantastic offer and it is a direct result of crew emailing Bill directly with their worries and nothing to do with the strike. Bill confirmed this in his web chat. He also confirmed that it will take years for New Fleet to grow because it can only grow as we decrease and that is 1% per year currently, plus any part time offers ( which is how they get the initial intake onto New Fleet in November, there are thousands of crew waiting to take part time offers.) or as the schedual increases.
You can be sure that they (BASSA) will eventually realise it is a good offer and then try and take credit for it. They always do.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some seasonal jobs during school. Don't try to make me appear as I have no contact with the 'outside' world because I do.
My point was that many people within BASSA have taken their Union at face value and accepted (blindly possibly) their assurances. Sadly BASSA have fallen at hurdle after hurdle after hurdle. Instead of giving out factual information they have embarked on a campaign of rhetoric and personal attacks.
Crew complements are contractual! False.
You cannot be sacked for striking! False.
We will get staff travel back within 24hours! False
A CC strike will ground the fleet! False
The Cabin Crew ARE BA! False
What I was trying to get across was that running a business, especially one the size of BA, is a complex, time consuming and difficult task. The various pieces of the puzzle that have to come together are complex in the extreme. Cabin Crew are one small piece of that puzzle and to expect the CEO to drop everything and personally lead the negotiations with Unite is arrogant in the extreme.
Alot of crew believe the rubbish BASSA spout. The vast majority on the BASSA council have no idea how to run a business either. They stated that when they were given the opportunity to view the confidential figures. But crew believe them wholesale and allow themselves to be led up the garden path.