Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Cabin Crew
Reload this Page >

BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

Cabin Crew Where professional flight attendants discuss matters that affect our jobs & lives.

BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

Old 27th Dec 2010, 08:10
  #2001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Originally Posted by gingerminge View Post
BASSA have always maintained that this dispute was never about a fight for survival and it was about breaking the union. Time has shown that BASSA were correct and that BA has been exposed.

No, it hasn't. That's merely an opinion you hold. No "fact" has been delivered to prove the case in either direction. To be honest, that's why I certainly get the hump with BASSA. Everything, apparently, is a fact, yet not once is any solid evidence presented to back that up. You and I will never know how close the company may have come to bankruptcy. And nor will BASSA.

MrB
MrBunker is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 13:40
  #2002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

I think it is really important that you all realise that some of these posters are just trying to stir you all up.

During the recent snow disruption 40 long haul aircraft diverted as LHR had closed on Saturday 18th and the following day the airport remained closed to arriving aircraft. Flights did not return to LHR until Monday 20th. All the diverting aircraft had two local nights but this was due to the airport not accepting arriving flights until Monday and nothing to do with the disruption agreement.

I was stuck down route during this disruption and two long haul crew were staying in our hotel and they were all keen to get back to LHR as fast as possible. Most cabin crew hate the disruption agreement as it causes their future roster to be disrupted and the vast majority of crew DO care a lot about our customers. In fact many of the diverted pax were resident in the hotel with all the crew and they were very complimentary with the way BA was handling the situation.

Please take with a pinch of salt the posts by some of these BASSA supporters as they are designed to enrage you all and they are not a reflection of what the majority of crew feel or think.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 14:05
  #2003 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: London
Posts: 8
The Majority of crew HATE the disruption agreement - 2 local nights is an outdated ridiculous requirement - I remember diverting into LHR ( we were LGW based) after coming back from GRU, - LGW had closed due to security alert - we landed at LHR and were placed into a hotel at LHR ... for two nights - how ridiculous...
Most crew just want to get to their destination during disrpution and have sufficient rest in which to do so ... 15 hours is plenty of rest time during a diversion..

I am sickened that some of my colleagues think its appropriate for customers to suffer, just so they can have their two local nights ...Madness.
BERTIEBIRDY is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 14:54
  #2004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Birtiebirdy,
That's the whole point, the vast majority of crew do not want the disruption agreement and the couple on here posting that they did want it are just winding you all up for fun.

No one delayed any flight because of the disruption agreement during this recent snow. All the delays were because the BAA closed the airport to arriving flights and nothing to do with the disruption agreement.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 15:34
  #2005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tunbridge Wells
Posts: 148
Betty girl

Please take with a pinch of salt the posts by some of these BASSA supporters as they are designed to enrage you all and they are not a reflection of what the majority of crew feel or think.
Betty Girl, I couldn't agree more. I don't bother feeding the trolls myself (ugly buggers, trolls)
From Tunbridge Wells is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 15:43
  #2006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Betty Girl,

In the main I think you're right. However, I've read elsewhere of one crew member who is boasting of having insisted on his/her 2 nights whilst the rest of the crew went home.

MrB
MrBunker is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 15:45
  #2007 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Crewfriend,

Having worked a day off as a volunteer in the terminals last week, I had the chance to experience first hand the heartbreak, stress and desperation of many of our customers. I was trying to rebook pax using the emergency staff rebooking line and having to tell people who had already been stranded for two days, that there was nothing for another 3 days and they were going to miss their Christmas.

I became even more convinced, than I already was, that in times of mass disruption, we as crew should revert to Sceme rules only re max hours/min rest. (Yes I am cabin crew and an SCCM of nearly 30 years seniority). SF LGW do this, as do Fight crew. I tried to imagine what one of those customers would feel, if they knew that there was no aircraft or crew available to operate their flight, because the cabin crew had insisted in having 2 local nights at an outstation. They would be disbelieving that cabin crew would need MORE rest than the pilots. They'd be furious, with good reason.

Two years ago, at the start of all this, I suggested to the union that a negligable-cost-to-us way of helping to meet our cost savings target would be to keep industrial rules for planning, but revert to Scheme rules off-schedule. It doesn't cause major trauma to crew at LGW and even has some benefits in roster stability. Needless to say my suggestion wasn't treated seriously.

We are in the mess we are in now, because BASSA hasn't changed with the times. They STILL think the best way to protect agreements is to say no to everything. You may feel that's served you well over the years, but the trouble is that is just stores up trouble for the time when economic neccesity means the Company can no longer shy away from a face off. You may feel that the Company is out of order "imposing" things, but there comes a time, when it is no longer able to sit around waiting for BASSA to negociate properly, or agree to work WITH them in times of severe disruption, but just has to get on with it to save the airline.

You may think that this is nothing to do with saving the airline and all to do with union busting, but I'm afraid that exposes your total ignorance of BA, the airline industry as a whole and basic economics. The same ignorance shown by BASSA in presenting an offer to the Company claiming 172m savings, that actually turned out to be worth 52m. That was either gross incompetence or disgraceful deceit, there is no middle ground on that one. And I remind you, that when that offer was rejected, BASSA on a show of hands at a meeting voted to no longer negociate with BA (unless it was based on this discredited offer). So please don't keep going on about imposition. BA even extended the negociation deadline from June to October to try to accomodate BASSA and Amicus negociating through ACAS.

At some point they had to act. In the same way they had to act (fast) when our customers Christmases were threatened with destruction during the recent bad weather. Did they ask the unions for the DA to be implemented? I don't know. Were they able to contact BASSA? Did they answer the phone? Did they say no? Did they try to play politics? I don't know, but actually now, I don't care, I'm just glad they did what they had to do to minimise the appalling impact it was having.

You were proud to insist on your 2 local nights were you? I won't say, if you'd experienced the distress of our customers in the terminals, you wouldn't feel that way, because I suspect that's probably not so, but you need to be forced to see that this disconnect you seem to have, between happy customers and a thriving business which PROTECTS your future, can't go on.

The way you think things should be, what you think is right (or your rights) is fine, in a bubble where we are the only airline and there are no competitors, but in the real world it's pure idealistic dreaming.
Beagle9 is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 17:26
  #2008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 142
Excellent post Beagle 9.

I think you express exactly how the vast majority of us feel, whichever side of the door or whichever department we work in.
Sporran is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 17:26
  #2009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Tunbridge Wells
Posts: 148
Beagle9 - what an excellent post and you are to be applauded for putting customers first

I think you have hit the nail on the head - all this selfish behaviour on the part of the few militants is indicative of the "me,me,me" mindset that Bassa has encouraged.

I believe that if more crew were as kind-hearted as you and did see the distress caused to customers first hand instead of choosing to be in the Bedfont-Bubble, then maybe they could extricate themselves from the grip of the monster that Bassa has become.
From Tunbridge Wells is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 17:46
  #2010 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in a house
Posts: 131
Isn't it strange that crew were recruited for their genuine warmth and attention to the customer? What happened?

bassa - thats what.
essessdeedee is offline  
Old 27th Dec 2010, 22:07
  #2011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Age: 61
Posts: 107
Beagle9 excellent post.

Unfortunately if you spoil people for a long period of time some of them will behave in a very spoilt mannner.

By their actions the militant ones are hastening the onset of what they fear most, namely replacement by cheaper more motivated staff. Inevitably the excellent non-militant cabin crew, of whom there are many, get tarred with the same brush.

If the militant ones could bring the company to a halt and make it cave in on a regular basis like they used to it might be worth a try. As they have proved several times this year they can no longer do that what is the point in trying further industrial action?
draglift is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 15:43
  #2012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: southeast
Posts: 419
Draglift, I presume your last question was rhetorical? I feel it's time that the vast majority of decent CC stand up and get counted. The militant element of BASSA have caused so much damage, distress, anger and so many problems. This sorry mess must be ended - once and for all.
sidtheesexist is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 16:50
  #2013 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,241
The sad truth of the matter is that the membership of BASSA have it in their power to stop this lunacy once and for all. As with the last vote a majority of a minority, which, when taken in context, was a very small proportion of total membership voted for further industrial action.

This dispute, if BASSA are to be believed, only ever hedged on imposition. Yet here we are a year and a half down the line. Two ineffectual strikes later, Reps suspended for bullying and harrasment or just not bothering to turn up for rostered trips and still BASSA maintain that they are the victims. The company has demanded nothing from them apart for accepting that the new crewing levels will say. By their own actions BASSA have relinquished any hope of influence over New Fleet as they just aren't prepared to negotiate.

Considering that Len McKlusky managed to achieve the highest office within the Unite group with an outstanding majority of 14% of total membership it just shows how dysfunctional the Unite organisation is. Add into the mix the abject inability of BASSA to organise anything or negotiate anything and I pity the company negotiators who have to deal with the mess.

Come on all of the normal, hard working, pro active CC members. Please don't sit on your vote, don't take the easy 'no return' option. Either vote Yes or No and lets have a full, true, representation of feeling and then we will all have a common ground to begin meaningful discussion.

Always remember that, in the current ludicrous system, a non returned vote is a vote in favour of IA and is what the militants want.

Over to the discussion on CF and the BASSA forum. Good luck.
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 16:58
  #2014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Just one point -

Originally Posted by Wirbelsturm View Post
Reps suspended for bullying and harrasment
Is that the truth. or were some reps suspended as part of due process, when investigating an allegation of bullying and harassment?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 19:21
  #2015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,241
Is that the truth. or were some reps suspended as part of due process, when investigating an allegation of bullying and harassment?
Symantics I suppose but, yes, 'alleged' bullying and harassment. It is the truth, they have been suspended over allegations (as yet unproven in some cases, proven in cases where the individual has been dismissed) of bullying and harrasment and behaviour bringing the company into disrepute.
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 20:09
  #2016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
I wouldn't call it symantics at all. A suspension pending investigation is very different from suspension as a punishment.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 20:16
  #2017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,241
Fair enough, though I am fairly familiar with the process which does, quite clearly, state that any person under investigation will be suspended pending the outcome of that investigation. This has led to some people claiming suspension as a punishment when it is used whilst awaiting investigation although the rules quite clearly state the reasoning behind it.
Wirbelsturm is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 20:26
  #2018 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
I agree and it appears that the branch in question have used that tactic, which I think is wrong.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 21:04
  #2019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Why did not BA bother to approach BASSA to have the DA activated?

Even if BASSA would have said NO, it would have been a different matter as BA would have shown a bit of dignity instead of putting another imposition on us. I don't doubt for a second that BASSA would have allowed it to be activated. It's about gentlemen's agreement, something which our LT doesn't seem to be honouring.

I agree with Betty Girl that many crew, myself included, hate the idea of having 2 local nights after a diversion. BASSA have agreed to a reduction to 15 hours. However, as long as BA does not does seem to be willing to reach an agreement with us, I and many others will be sticking to current scheduling agreements.

My next trip is an LR and if we divert I will be requesting 2 local nights as per our agreement.

Crew, please. Remember that our DA is contractual and they cannot suspend nor sack you for requesting it.

Stick to your current agreements.
MissM is offline  
Old 28th Dec 2010, 21:08
  #2020 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Isn't it strange that crew were recruited for their genuine warmth and attention to the customer? What happened?

bassa - thats what.
Such an insult.

I think that you will find MANY crew who are devoted and passionate about their jobs. I love my job more than anything and make sure that every single passenger who gets off the aircraft is pleased.
MissM is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.