BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boondocker,
You don't need to apologise to me.
I just can't understand why a little remark by a poster (who incidentally is not air crew or work for BA but does work for another airline) saying he would prefer a cabin crew member to look after him in an avmed situation can lead some posters to reduce this thread to a hypothetical argument about the chain of command and who is more important in a medical emergency situation.
We are ALL important because we ALL have a specific and laid down role to play in these complex situations.
You don't need to apologise to me.
I just can't understand why a little remark by a poster (who incidentally is not air crew or work for BA but does work for another airline) saying he would prefer a cabin crew member to look after him in an avmed situation can lead some posters to reduce this thread to a hypothetical argument about the chain of command and who is more important in a medical emergency situation.
We are ALL important because we ALL have a specific and laid down role to play in these complex situations.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Charon
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before accepting the offer of jumping to the front of the queue of any part-time list and bypassing the Opps and Choice Agreement I would be asking myself one question.
Am I, although it might suit me now and by accepting such an offer, agreeing that I find it acceptable that the same or similar methods of coercion could be used in the future once I have individually varied my contract?
Am I, although it might suit me now and by accepting such an offer, agreeing that I find it acceptable that the same or similar methods of coercion could be used in the future once I have individually varied my contract?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boondocker,
I can see what you are saying but the INDIVIDUAL OFFER does not individually vary our contract. It actually confirms that ALL our terms and conditions remain the same but with an added top up and confirms that they can only be altered through future negotiation plus it confirms a two year pay deal.
However although the offer to the union is similar it has some horrid obstacles in it with regard to future legal action.
So although I have signed the offer because I am no longer in the union and did disagree with the strike call, when reading the version the union has to agree to, I can understand why they would not want to sign it.
You can read both versions by clicking the link on the front page of the Cabin crew ESS.
I can see what you are saying but the INDIVIDUAL OFFER does not individually vary our contract. It actually confirms that ALL our terms and conditions remain the same but with an added top up and confirms that they can only be altered through future negotiation plus it confirms a two year pay deal.
However although the offer to the union is similar it has some horrid obstacles in it with regard to future legal action.
So although I have signed the offer because I am no longer in the union and did disagree with the strike call, when reading the version the union has to agree to, I can understand why they would not want to sign it.
You can read both versions by clicking the link on the front page of the Cabin crew ESS.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767
Thank you PC767, those of us not in BASSA have no access to this kind of thing usually. I, like Betty, am shocked if it's true (assuming that BASSA is telling the truth is not something I do very often these days) because it does seem to be unnecessarily provocative at a time when creeping on eggshells seems more appropriate. What would be the rational behind it I wonder as someone could only accept the offer if they had already left the Union by 14/12/10 so there is not even an incentive to leave Unite. I will be asking for more information tomorrow at work.
PS I also agree with Betty about all this petty point scoring over Av med situations; we deal with whatever we encounter then we tell the Captain what we did, there's even a crew member assigned that role in the medical drill! Very simple! No need for a "who's got the biggest appendage" competition.
Ottergirl. can I draw your attention to the following, which was posted on the Bassa web site;
“They (Manpower) have confirmed that you are on a list for a contract reduction. As you say you are on the list but this is a second list - there are two lists before yours which will be made offers before the list that you are on. Bill has said that those who sign/have already signed the Individual Offer will be offered part-time first - before others on the list that have not signed. I am not sure whether you have or have not signed, as that information is not available to me.”*
*This is a direct ‘cut and paste’ from a letter received by a crew member from their line manager.
“They (Manpower) have confirmed that you are on a list for a contract reduction. As you say you are on the list but this is a second list - there are two lists before yours which will be made offers before the list that you are on. Bill has said that those who sign/have already signed the Individual Offer will be offered part-time first - before others on the list that have not signed. I am not sure whether you have or have not signed, as that information is not available to me.”*
*This is a direct ‘cut and paste’ from a letter received by a crew member from their line manager.
PS I also agree with Betty about all this petty point scoring over Av med situations; we deal with whatever we encounter then we tell the Captain what we did, there's even a crew member assigned that role in the medical drill! Very simple! No need for a "who's got the biggest appendage" competition.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: on a cloud
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Perhaps BA have reached a point in their manpower plan whereby they NEED to reduce 'heads' on the current fleets?
As more routes move to Mixed Fleet in Jan, Feb and March there will be a need to reduce the current manpower levels on EF and WW. (wasn't it the plan to have offered part-time to everyone who wanted it by March 2011?)
As some one already mentioned, I'm not sure that BA are able to offer part-time to those still in the Union whilst it is still in dispute with the company...collective bargaining rights etc?
It certainly will rattle a few cages though!
Just a thought....
As more routes move to Mixed Fleet in Jan, Feb and March there will be a need to reduce the current manpower levels on EF and WW. (wasn't it the plan to have offered part-time to everyone who wanted it by March 2011?)
As some one already mentioned, I'm not sure that BA are able to offer part-time to those still in the Union whilst it is still in dispute with the company...collective bargaining rights etc?
It certainly will rattle a few cages though!
Just a thought....
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see what you are saying Hula but just don't understand why it would make any difference that they are in dispute because the transfers take place under an already agreed ops and choice agreement which does not affect overall numbers on WW and E/F. Plus transfers have recently taken place only a couple of months ago.
I understand that they want to reduce numbers but I think the only reason they have not been doing that, up until now, was that they WERE using it as a way to persuade the strikers that they will be given part time if they agree to the offer. So I think this is a deliberate ploy to try and put pressure on Unite.
I do think however it could be seen as discriminatory against union members because they are being treated differently to non-union members who have signed the agreement.
I also flew with a non-striker who has remained in the union and he was waiting for part time. So he has been left out too because he IS in a union and that does not seem fair.
If I was on a list I would be one of the lucky ones but it does not stop me thinking it is not right and just going to polarise peoples views about how unfair they perceive BA is.
I understand that they want to reduce numbers but I think the only reason they have not been doing that, up until now, was that they WERE using it as a way to persuade the strikers that they will be given part time if they agree to the offer. So I think this is a deliberate ploy to try and put pressure on Unite.
I do think however it could be seen as discriminatory against union members because they are being treated differently to non-union members who have signed the agreement.
I also flew with a non-striker who has remained in the union and he was waiting for part time. So he has been left out too because he IS in a union and that does not seem fair.
If I was on a list I would be one of the lucky ones but it does not stop me thinking it is not right and just going to polarise peoples views about how unfair they perceive BA is.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not only about not having gone on strike. Those that didn't, but who remain in the union seem to do so with the reasoning that they'll vote "no" again. But is that enough? Should they be doing more? Just passively sitting there, supporting the union via monthly subs and thereby allowing them to continue their madness is, I'm sorry to say, a rather weak and pathetic position at this late stage.
We all know the answer to this, but why are these people seemingly not pushing their union to take another stance, change their tactics and actually, God forbid, LISTEN to their members? Those that still can't/won't see that this union just simply has no interest in those that don't want to strike, are seriously letting themselves down now, and are playing a very large part in allowing this dispute to trundle along unchecked.
It comes down now to having to make a serious and final choice. People either support the union, or they support their employer. Not an ideal situation I know, and not one I'd want to be generally acceptable in the real world. But in this particular case, which has become more surreal than any other industrial dispute I can think of, it really is time for people to plant their flag firmly in one camp, or the other, and to deal with the consequences either way.
To anyone still in the union - PLEASE use your vote - and PLEASE, if you vote "yes" then follow-through on it. Do not muddly the waters by saying one thing, but doing another. If you vote "no" or do not intend to vote, you have to ask yourselves very very seriously, why you remain a member.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: france
Age: 62
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ops & choice....
If you're peed off with Mr Francis selecting people out of order wait and see what they have planned if strike dates are announced!!
Goodbye BASSA influence and all the "nice to have" titbits in BA that some cabin crew take for granted. Non strikers will be protected of course. BA are not going to give an inch I have been reliably informed.
Finally on BALPA being expelled from the TUC and the recent formal complaint from BALPA about a poster on the BASSA forum. A curt reply was posted on BASSA by Mr Holley and has received over 3000 views and hundreds of replies from militants. Some very choice words demonstrate disgracefully the gulf in relations between the two parties.
Well I was in a hotel bar near LHR last night and several BALPA reps were laughing hysterically about it all. Sounds like it was a wind up and Gorgeous Holley and his band of misfits have fallen for it.
Oh and it's not illegal to "spy" on a "private" forum. Read case law before you start spouting off about "illegal" activity like "cyberstalking".
Goodbye BASSA influence and all the "nice to have" titbits in BA that some cabin crew take for granted. Non strikers will be protected of course. BA are not going to give an inch I have been reliably informed.
Finally on BALPA being expelled from the TUC and the recent formal complaint from BALPA about a poster on the BASSA forum. A curt reply was posted on BASSA by Mr Holley and has received over 3000 views and hundreds of replies from militants. Some very choice words demonstrate disgracefully the gulf in relations between the two parties.
Well I was in a hotel bar near LHR last night and several BALPA reps were laughing hysterically about it all. Sounds like it was a wind up and Gorgeous Holley and his band of misfits have fallen for it.
Oh and it's not illegal to "spy" on a "private" forum. Read case law before you start spouting off about "illegal" activity like "cyberstalking".
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of posts have been deleted, probably because the moderators are as fed up as I am with this silly argument by supposedly intelligent people!!
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the start of all of this, BA asked the crew for part-time volunteers and voluntary redundancy. Once they had the numbers they tried negotiating a plan. BASSA refused to negotiate sensibly, so BA had to impose. BASSA kicked up a fuss so BA had to start MF to cover the costs. All of this was threatened before hand, just as the removal of staff travel was. BASSA are still in dispute, so BA cannot go ahead with their plan of part-time for all who want it. BA would be in a right fix if BASSA were to win but all part-time requests had already been granted. However, BA can go ahead and grant the requests of those no longer in dispute. I think this decision makes logical straight-forward business sense.
The fact that it upsets the BASSA supporters who are being bypassed is probably pleasing to lots of people in BA. If you asked your child if it wanted some sweets, then you went in to the shop to buy it some and it punched you in the belly as you walked out the shop, would you still give it the sweets? Neither would I.
The fact that it upsets the BASSA supporters who are being bypassed is probably pleasing to lots of people in BA. If you asked your child if it wanted some sweets, then you went in to the shop to buy it some and it punched you in the belly as you walked out the shop, would you still give it the sweets? Neither would I.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have to agree with Betty Girl, by-passing strikers on the p/t list in favour of non-strikers is discriminatory and antagonistic to say the least. Why are BA so intent on rattling the cages of an already angry and bitter section of the workforce? If the company wanted peace then this is certainly not the way to go about it.
However, if I was in BASSA and considering striking the one big question I would be asking myself is why are BA provoking us and steering us into taking further IA?
However, if I was in BASSA and considering striking the one big question I would be asking myself is why are BA provoking us and steering us into taking further IA?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: on a cloud
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE]Goodbye BASSA influence and all the "nice to have" titbits in BA that some cabin crew take for granted. Non strikers will be protected of course. BA are not going to give an inch I have been reliably informed./QUOTE]
Interesting. Do you have substantive factual evidence to prove this? Or is it simply galley / flight deck FM? (eg the 90 days notice of change of contract has been doing the rounds for almost 2 years now!!)
Interesting. Do you have substantive factual evidence to prove this? Or is it simply galley / flight deck FM? (eg the 90 days notice of change of contract has been doing the rounds for almost 2 years now!!)
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a huge amount of mistrust of BA.
Cabin crew in general, strikers and non-strikes are frightened that BA will renege, in the future, on what they are promising e.g. that we can keep our current terms and conditions unless negotiated otherwise.
This skipping of people on the transfer and part-time lists, that have not signed the current agreement, is very unfair and is a worry to all crew.
You cannot sign the new agreement if you are in the union whether you were a striker or not.
The Ops and Choice agreements are being trampled over as BA already transferred people on these lists just before Christmas, so what has changed?! All this is doing is actually showing Bassa to be correct, in that BA cannot be trusted with keeping any agreement.
What BA should be doing is trying to persuade crew that Bassa is wrong and that they truly mean what they say. This is a very bad move by BA and it is just making people like me worry that BA cannot be trusted and it is just plain stupid of them.
Bassa have handled this whole dispute very badly but BA have too and the majority of crew are moderate and just feel stuck in the middle, not knowing who to trust anymore and this is certainly not going to bring trust, is it ?
Cabin crew in general, strikers and non-strikes are frightened that BA will renege, in the future, on what they are promising e.g. that we can keep our current terms and conditions unless negotiated otherwise.
This skipping of people on the transfer and part-time lists, that have not signed the current agreement, is very unfair and is a worry to all crew.
You cannot sign the new agreement if you are in the union whether you were a striker or not.
The Ops and Choice agreements are being trampled over as BA already transferred people on these lists just before Christmas, so what has changed?! All this is doing is actually showing Bassa to be correct, in that BA cannot be trusted with keeping any agreement.
What BA should be doing is trying to persuade crew that Bassa is wrong and that they truly mean what they say. This is a very bad move by BA and it is just making people like me worry that BA cannot be trusted and it is just plain stupid of them.
Bassa have handled this whole dispute very badly but BA have too and the majority of crew are moderate and just feel stuck in the middle, not knowing who to trust anymore and this is certainly not going to bring trust, is it ?
Last edited by Betty girl; 13th Jan 2011 at 11:00.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Reading
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl, you said "You cannot sign the new agreement if you are in the union whether you were a striker or not"................um, who would know?
I am sure you could say that you sent a letter to BASSA resigning two or three months ago..........does anyone think that BASSA are very good at keeping records?
Just a thought!
I am sure you could say that you sent a letter to BASSA resigning two or three months ago..........does anyone think that BASSA are very good at keeping records?
Just a thought!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well of course you could do that, I completely agree and I would not blame anyone, but BA are strictly not allowed to offer inducements for people to leave the union, so I would hope that was not their reason for doing so.
I am no longer a member because I felt I had to leave because I did not go along with the mandate to strike but are you suggesting that people only get to move from area to area within IFC if they leave the union.
Would that be acceptable if BA said that only non union people could have part time in other departments!! I don't think if BA were in dispute with say pilots and only non union pilots could move from E/F to WW or visa versa or Customer Service staff could only have part time if they were not in the union. Is that right!
Do you think it is acceptable to single out one set of workers and treat them differently. I don't and I am one of the ones that could have benefited!
I am no longer a member because I felt I had to leave because I did not go along with the mandate to strike but are you suggesting that people only get to move from area to area within IFC if they leave the union.
Would that be acceptable if BA said that only non union people could have part time in other departments!! I don't think if BA were in dispute with say pilots and only non union pilots could move from E/F to WW or visa versa or Customer Service staff could only have part time if they were not in the union. Is that right!
Do you think it is acceptable to single out one set of workers and treat them differently. I don't and I am one of the ones that could have benefited!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl, I think it is a consequence of the collective bargaining agreement that those outside BASSA have been given the opportunity to go part time.
Those who are still in the union have delegated their bargaining rights, in toto, to BASSA and so long as BASSA have an agreed mechanism for transfers, and so long as they are in dispute with their employer, then BA do not have an obligation to go through the mechanism for BASSA members.
It s the same for the Disruption Agreement - BA might do the decent thing and inform BASSA that they are implementing it (assuming there are any channels of communication still open), but do not seek the agreement of the union before doing so.
Those who are still in the union have delegated their bargaining rights, in toto, to BASSA and so long as BASSA have an agreed mechanism for transfers, and so long as they are in dispute with their employer, then BA do not have an obligation to go through the mechanism for BASSA members.
It s the same for the Disruption Agreement - BA might do the decent thing and inform BASSA that they are implementing it (assuming there are any channels of communication still open), but do not seek the agreement of the union before doing so.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm quite sure that people could sign this deal if they wanted as you have suggested Andyismyname. However, it still surprises me that crew feel disadvantaged by not having left the union in time to take up the current offer. After the first opportunity back in the summer people have had more than enough time to make that decision should this situation arise again. If crew have crossed the picket line I really don't see what benefit they feel they have from staying with BASSA when they weren't prepared to support them, do they really think that BASSA will help them if a situation requires it? Even DH has stated that these people will have to deal directly with Unite reps.
I left the union before the first strike because I felt they no longer represented my views and I did not support the action to strike. However, despite my personal views I do not agree with BA discriminating a particular section of it's workforce. The Staff Travel issue alone is IMO on dodgy ground, but deliberately by-passing strikers for p/t and transfers is blatant victimisation. And if this behaviour is acceptable where does it stop?
I left the union before the first strike because I felt they no longer represented my views and I did not support the action to strike. However, despite my personal views I do not agree with BA discriminating a particular section of it's workforce. The Staff Travel issue alone is IMO on dodgy ground, but deliberately by-passing strikers for p/t and transfers is blatant victimisation. And if this behaviour is acceptable where does it stop?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to a BA manager the disruption agreement states they only have to inform Bassa and explain the time scale. There has never been a requirement to seek their permission, obviously there has to be an obvious cause for the agreement to be used, like ash cloud or snow etc.
This is a quote from the disruption agreement and one of our managers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The IFS Operations Manager will contact the chairperson of each of the Trades Unions to inform them of the situation and recommend a timescale for which the disruption agreement will be required."
I can confirm that the IFCE Operations Manager did make the required contact prior to the Disruption Agreement being activated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So BA did follow the procedure correctly.
With regard transfers and part time, I can see what you are trying to say but don't quite see why the fact that Bassa have withdrawn from union processes that this would affect previous agreements. All along BA have been saying that they will honour our agreements.
Whether BA are in the right or wrong and so far they have done everything by the book, I will agree, it is still a strange thing to do if they truly want an end to all of this.
Although I find being at work fine now, I really don't want to go through all the stress of another strike and I would hope that my employer would do everything it can to avoid this for both the sake of our company and our customers. I do tend to come on here and post more when I am stressed about the situation at work, sorry if I am beginning to bore some of you!!! Because I am obviously stressed as I am on here all the time at the mo!!
But this is NOT the way to regain peace or trust. It really isn't!!
This is a quote from the disruption agreement and one of our managers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The IFS Operations Manager will contact the chairperson of each of the Trades Unions to inform them of the situation and recommend a timescale for which the disruption agreement will be required."
I can confirm that the IFCE Operations Manager did make the required contact prior to the Disruption Agreement being activated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So BA did follow the procedure correctly.
With regard transfers and part time, I can see what you are trying to say but don't quite see why the fact that Bassa have withdrawn from union processes that this would affect previous agreements. All along BA have been saying that they will honour our agreements.
Whether BA are in the right or wrong and so far they have done everything by the book, I will agree, it is still a strange thing to do if they truly want an end to all of this.
Although I find being at work fine now, I really don't want to go through all the stress of another strike and I would hope that my employer would do everything it can to avoid this for both the sake of our company and our customers. I do tend to come on here and post more when I am stressed about the situation at work, sorry if I am beginning to bore some of you!!! Because I am obviously stressed as I am on here all the time at the mo!!
But this is NOT the way to regain peace or trust. It really isn't!!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another thing!
A lot of the strikers already hate those of us that signed the agreement !
Now they have a reason to despise us. Thanks BA.
It makes us look like brown nosers that just signed to get advantage!
Plus some people have been waiting on these lists for years patiently waiting their turn and I do feel very sorry for them.
I can see that the transfers, just before Christmas, went ahead because Unite promised to ballot all it's members and that was a sign of BA's good faith. It is probably because Bassa reneged on this, that this has happened but it is just going to make everything worse, it really is! Trust me!!
A lot of the strikers already hate those of us that signed the agreement !
Now they have a reason to despise us. Thanks BA.
It makes us look like brown nosers that just signed to get advantage!
Plus some people have been waiting on these lists for years patiently waiting their turn and I do feel very sorry for them.
I can see that the transfers, just before Christmas, went ahead because Unite promised to ballot all it's members and that was a sign of BA's good faith. It is probably because Bassa reneged on this, that this has happened but it is just going to make everything worse, it really is! Trust me!!