BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think that all this European legislation is getting out of hand.
Sadly none of the crew I asked had any clue of either the proposal, the implementation or the effects of this ruling from EASA. None had any idea of what it was or whether BASSA was doing anything about it.
The 'safety net' that is the UK scheduling document which covers all flying crews including Cabin Crew will be torn up and thrown away. The CAP371 document is widely regarded around the world as the 'gold standard' with respect to the management and prevention of fatigue and is based upon several scientific studies into the effects of prolonged working in the aviation environment.
The EASA documents have no recourse to such studies and have been put together with the input from certain airlines management and HR departments. (AFAIK BA have not had alot of input into the document, you can guess who the main driver has been).
This needs to be sorted out and modified soon and the BASSA members need to push their Union to get a grip on this now. Implementation of new 'legal' structures could happen soon after ratification. As long as your scheme is within those new EASA regulations there is nothing to stop the company from implementing them as the legal supporting documentation has changed.
Beware!
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: hampshire
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG
It sounds to me that Bassa's relatively small voice would have little impact on this proposal but then what do I know I am just a niave cabin crew member.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well lets hope that behind the scenes that they have made a representation on the behalf a BA cabin crew and if not then they are letting their membership down.
Having said that though, I do realise that airlines are always driving down cost etc. but for years BA have operated within the CAA scheme rules but have not up until now rostered either cabin crew or pilots to those limits.
I understand that these new rules will be even less restrictive but I am not sure that, that necessarily equates with BA actually adopting these limits, as up until last November (when Mised Fleet started) they never have rostered to the limit under our current scheme.
They have of course just started to roster Mixed Fleet to the current CAA scheme rules but having looked at quite a few of these rosters, I find it hard to believe that it would be sustainable to roster to even lower limits. In fact some safeguards have already been put in place, to alleviate some of the problems that have developed, as a result of Mixed Fleet crew informing the company that some of the rosters have been too tiring.
What I am saying is that just because the rules get relaxed it might not necessarily follow that ALL the companies adopt the new limits. Some may put safety first and realise that these new limits are unsatisfactory.
It is of course to be applauded that BALPA is highlighting these safety implications.
Having said that though, I do realise that airlines are always driving down cost etc. but for years BA have operated within the CAA scheme rules but have not up until now rostered either cabin crew or pilots to those limits.
I understand that these new rules will be even less restrictive but I am not sure that, that necessarily equates with BA actually adopting these limits, as up until last November (when Mised Fleet started) they never have rostered to the limit under our current scheme.
They have of course just started to roster Mixed Fleet to the current CAA scheme rules but having looked at quite a few of these rosters, I find it hard to believe that it would be sustainable to roster to even lower limits. In fact some safeguards have already been put in place, to alleviate some of the problems that have developed, as a result of Mixed Fleet crew informing the company that some of the rosters have been too tiring.
What I am saying is that just because the rules get relaxed it might not necessarily follow that ALL the companies adopt the new limits. Some may put safety first and realise that these new limits are unsatisfactory.
It is of course to be applauded that BALPA is highlighting these safety implications.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG, from 2012 the CAA will have NO say as to our FTL's.
I understand that these new rules will be even less restrictive but I am not sure that, that necessarily equates with BA actually adopting these limits, as up until last November (when Mixed Fleet started) they never have rostered to the limit under our current scheme.
?)If BA's competitors adopt the new limits, as a previous poster has mentioned, it will only be a matter of time before BA has little choice but to do likewise to compete. It is unlikely that Bidline Rules will protect the pilots for ever so what chance does the WW/EF Scheduling Agreement have?
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: england
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another great idea from the E.U. 
Cost of air travel could rise by a fifth under European VAT proposal
Cost of air travel could rise by a fifth under European VAT proposal
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Human Factor,
Both your bidline and our agreements have the protection that they are negotiated agreements and as such only negotiated changes can be made. Even though SFG does work to near scheme rules they are laid down in an MOA as are Mixed Fleets ( at the moment they are sharing the SFG MOA temporarily) which are also agreements that would require negotiation for change, although in the case of Mixed Fleet there is, at present, no one to negotiate with!!
I do however understand that if other airlines operate to less restrictive rules, this does add pressure for change on airlines like ours, so I can understand why we should all be worried.
Both your bidline and our agreements have the protection that they are negotiated agreements and as such only negotiated changes can be made. Even though SFG does work to near scheme rules they are laid down in an MOA as are Mixed Fleets ( at the moment they are sharing the SFG MOA temporarily) which are also agreements that would require negotiation for change, although in the case of Mixed Fleet there is, at present, no one to negotiate with!!
I do however understand that if other airlines operate to less restrictive rules, this does add pressure for change on airlines like ours, so I can understand why we should all be worried.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bf has just posted a quick note to all cabin crew that Keith Williams and Len McCluskey have met today for discussions. It was a positive meeting and further discussions will be held in the near future.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Bournemouth
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Worrying times
Betty girl,
As MF crew, I find this new proposal extremely worrying. However, as the fleet is only 3 months old, and crew are already reaching their 900 hr limit (some temps who returned to BA last summer), I feel it's impossible to put more pressure on us.
We have been told by some CSM's that this is the reason MAN & AMS have been transferred over for May onwards.
As you mentioned above, we are already working right down on scheme limits. It makes for an uneasy discussion with management when there is no-one to negotiate for us.
What further stunts are they going to pull?!
As MF crew, I find this new proposal extremely worrying. However, as the fleet is only 3 months old, and crew are already reaching their 900 hr limit (some temps who returned to BA last summer), I feel it's impossible to put more pressure on us.
We have been told by some CSM's that this is the reason MAN & AMS have been transferred over for May onwards.
As you mentioned above, we are already working right down on scheme limits. It makes for an uneasy discussion with management when there is no-one to negotiate for us.
What further stunts are they going to pull?!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
StewM,
Don't worry too much because, as I have mentioned, I don't think any airline like BA would want to roster any crew more than BA are already rostering you Mixed Fleeters.
It would be self defeating to have exhausted crew because exhausted cabin crew don't give good service and in my personal view some of the rosters I have seen (not all) have been shattering.
The Man and Ams have been added to help with your hours and also to help keep you productive because they are used as links at the beginning of shorthaul trips and at the end and as you have mentioned the flying hours are lower.
One outcome of this legislation might actually help all crew that operate longhaul rosters like you and WW crew is that the 900 hour would go. I really don't think you need to worry that your rosters will get worse from this because you are all very productive already.
Ultimately I expect that Unite will obtain the right to negotiate for you but seperately to WW and E/F just like they do for SFG, but that wont be untill some kind of settlement!!!!
Hope that puts your mind at rest. I find that you get quite a lot of scare mongering on all forums from one side or the other, so please don't worry.
BG
These are my own personal views and no those of BA.
Don't worry too much because, as I have mentioned, I don't think any airline like BA would want to roster any crew more than BA are already rostering you Mixed Fleeters.
It would be self defeating to have exhausted crew because exhausted cabin crew don't give good service and in my personal view some of the rosters I have seen (not all) have been shattering.
The Man and Ams have been added to help with your hours and also to help keep you productive because they are used as links at the beginning of shorthaul trips and at the end and as you have mentioned the flying hours are lower.
One outcome of this legislation might actually help all crew that operate longhaul rosters like you and WW crew is that the 900 hour would go. I really don't think you need to worry that your rosters will get worse from this because you are all very productive already.
Ultimately I expect that Unite will obtain the right to negotiate for you but seperately to WW and E/F just like they do for SFG, but that wont be untill some kind of settlement!!!!
Hope that puts your mind at rest. I find that you get quite a lot of scare mongering on all forums from one side or the other, so please don't worry.
BG
These are my own personal views and no those of BA.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sorry Betty Girl but I have to disagree. This isn't scaremongering. This is happening and it's happening right now. If you are in any doubt of that, please take the time to read the R&N thread.
Really? Two years ago, would you have thought BA would have rostered Mixed Fleet as they have? The truth is, EVERY airline will do whatever it has to in order to survive. If that means a high crew turnover, then so be it. Just have a look at some of the Middle Eastern airlines. Known for great service and also known for working their crew to the very limits. Again, if you have any doubt, have a read through the ME threads.
StewM,
I'm sorry if that worries you but in my opinion, it should. BASSA are in the situation they are now because they never thought BA would do what they have. Frankly, I'm not sure there is a lot we can do it about it. Not enough cabin crew in this country have the knowledge or interest in what is happening in the industry to make a difference. Those of us on here and on other aviation sites are in the minority, which ever side of the fence we may be sitting on. In the majority, it seems apathy rules. (Obviously, not including BG in that, even if we do disagree on this threat!)
Don't worry too much because, as I have mentioned, I don't think any airline like BA would want to roster any crew more than BA are already rostering you Mixed Fleeters.
StewM,
I'm sorry if that worries you but in my opinion, it should. BASSA are in the situation they are now because they never thought BA would do what they have. Frankly, I'm not sure there is a lot we can do it about it. Not enough cabin crew in this country have the knowledge or interest in what is happening in the industry to make a difference. Those of us on here and on other aviation sites are in the minority, which ever side of the fence we may be sitting on. In the majority, it seems apathy rules. (Obviously, not including BG in that, even if we do disagree on this threat!)
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@StewM
After a chat with some of the crew managers today, there is a recognition that working mixed fleet to the limit will damage the very enthusiasm that BA are hoping for. They are thinking very carefully about which routes to add to the fleet to offset this. MAN is definately going to lower those flying hours. MF will get better as it grows, a new fleet always takes time to bed in.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jetset lady,
I do think BA will indeed come after WW and E/F in the future and they will use M/F as an example of more efficient and productive rostering. However the rostering of Mixed Fleet is very tight already and seems worse than what you, yourself are working to.
I don't actually see how it could be tighter than it already is as BA have already altered the days off after some of the trips, to alleviate the tiredness that some of the crews were reporting back to them and I realise they also did this when SFG was set up but some longhaul trips on Mixed Fleet are not even triggering a day off after, let alone two.
I don't think we always disagree!! I agree with lots of your posts and think you talk a lot of sense.
We both agree that Bassa have created a big mess and are actually doing us all a huge disservice. We need a good, strong and democratic union to represent us and if people like you and I feel unable to support them, all they are doing is creating their own demise and that is bad for us cabin crew.
I do think BA will indeed come after WW and E/F in the future and they will use M/F as an example of more efficient and productive rostering. However the rostering of Mixed Fleet is very tight already and seems worse than what you, yourself are working to.
I don't actually see how it could be tighter than it already is as BA have already altered the days off after some of the trips, to alleviate the tiredness that some of the crews were reporting back to them and I realise they also did this when SFG was set up but some longhaul trips on Mixed Fleet are not even triggering a day off after, let alone two.
I don't think we always disagree!! I agree with lots of your posts and think you talk a lot of sense.
We both agree that Bassa have created a big mess and are actually doing us all a huge disservice. We need a good, strong and democratic union to represent us and if people like you and I feel unable to support them, all they are doing is creating their own demise and that is bad for us cabin crew.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG,
I'd strongly, strongly urge you to look into what the new EASA FTLs would mean for you if implemented. There's simply no commercial way BA would be able to leave our current negotiated industrial agreements in place and survive in a market where other airlines can roster to the new "scheme" that the EASA proposals will bring in. Having a strong union or a set of agreements that can only be changed by negotiation will be an irrelevance. The airline will have to adopt the new scheme or wither on the vine in the face of such marked efficiency differences that other airlines will be able to reflect in their ticket prices. I think you can forget MBTs as you know them and a reasonable slip time down route. I'm away from my main computer at the mo but when I get back I'll post a list of the changes these would represent and why BA would have no choice to implement them from a commercial point of view.
Cheers
MrB
I'd strongly, strongly urge you to look into what the new EASA FTLs would mean for you if implemented. There's simply no commercial way BA would be able to leave our current negotiated industrial agreements in place and survive in a market where other airlines can roster to the new "scheme" that the EASA proposals will bring in. Having a strong union or a set of agreements that can only be changed by negotiation will be an irrelevance. The airline will have to adopt the new scheme or wither on the vine in the face of such marked efficiency differences that other airlines will be able to reflect in their ticket prices. I think you can forget MBTs as you know them and a reasonable slip time down route. I'm away from my main computer at the mo but when I get back I'll post a list of the changes these would represent and why BA would have no choice to implement them from a commercial point of view.
Cheers
MrB
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Mr Bunker.
I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them.
I can understand how worrying it is for the pilot communities in particular because competition for pilot jobs is so high across Europe and the World at the moment and BA pilots are very well remunerated compared to some of the European low cost carriers but for cabin crew, the terms and conditions that Mixed Fleet are working to, are actually at the level BA want. They are on a low basic and productive compared to E/F and WW and work to an incentive scheme and BA realise that you need, keen and happy cabin crew, to give good service, not knackered tired ones. So apart from comming for us now (people like me), the job has been done. Of course I can completely see how worrying it must now be for all of you because of course BA could repeat their model of direct entry senior crew onto a new pilot fleet on new terms and conditions!
I also want to make the point that BA is a very safety minded airline and I really don't think they would put profit before safety, although of course maybe some of the smaller airlines might be tempted to, so I have faith in the fact that all our management are aware that the CAA rules are the safest and as such I personally believe BA will continue to use these guidelines. I do think however they will definitely adopt the new total hours per year because of course the 900 hours limit, incidentally also imposed by the EU, has been a nightmare for BA.
I think maybe you should start a new thread called EASA because I feel that this is not what this thread is about. I know that you are all convinced that Unite has not looked into this but I feel it is a tenuous link with this dispute and although it is important, I don't think it is what this thread is supposed to be talking about.
These are all my own personal views and not those of BA.
I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them.
I can understand how worrying it is for the pilot communities in particular because competition for pilot jobs is so high across Europe and the World at the moment and BA pilots are very well remunerated compared to some of the European low cost carriers but for cabin crew, the terms and conditions that Mixed Fleet are working to, are actually at the level BA want. They are on a low basic and productive compared to E/F and WW and work to an incentive scheme and BA realise that you need, keen and happy cabin crew, to give good service, not knackered tired ones. So apart from comming for us now (people like me), the job has been done. Of course I can completely see how worrying it must now be for all of you because of course BA could repeat their model of direct entry senior crew onto a new pilot fleet on new terms and conditions!
I also want to make the point that BA is a very safety minded airline and I really don't think they would put profit before safety, although of course maybe some of the smaller airlines might be tempted to, so I have faith in the fact that all our management are aware that the CAA rules are the safest and as such I personally believe BA will continue to use these guidelines. I do think however they will definitely adopt the new total hours per year because of course the 900 hours limit, incidentally also imposed by the EU, has been a nightmare for BA.
I think maybe you should start a new thread called EASA because I feel that this is not what this thread is about. I know that you are all convinced that Unite has not looked into this but I feel it is a tenuous link with this dispute and although it is important, I don't think it is what this thread is supposed to be talking about.
These are all my own personal views and not those of BA.
Last edited by Betty girl; 11th Mar 2011 at 09:36.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Mr Bunker.
I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them
I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them
MrB
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr B
Before we put this thread drift to bed, can you publish a link to the proposals so that not only can Bettygirl and I see what we are up against but also so that we can spread the word. Is there a website which has all the information because some of the suggestions on here are beyond belief? 71/2 hours off after a long haul flight does not seem to be either wise or desirable from anyone's point of view; it will be time for a career change because fiscally unviable is better than dead!
Regards
OG
Before we put this thread drift to bed, can you publish a link to the proposals so that not only can Bettygirl and I see what we are up against but also so that we can spread the word. Is there a website which has all the information because some of the suggestions on here are beyond belief? 71/2 hours off after a long haul flight does not seem to be either wise or desirable from anyone's point of view; it will be time for a career change because fiscally unviable is better than dead!
Regards
OG
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ottergirl,
There is actually a thread on the Rumours and News thread above, where some pilots are voicing their opinions.
Opinions seem to vary, not all are predicting the end of the world!!! It seems to be monthly hours that is worrying them the most and I expect that is, what is, really the worry for our pilots.
I can't imagine that BA would roster 7.3 hours off after a transatlantic flight or that any of our Unions would accept that even if the rules did allow for it!!
Take care
There is actually a thread on the Rumours and News thread above, where some pilots are voicing their opinions.
Opinions seem to vary, not all are predicting the end of the world!!! It seems to be monthly hours that is worrying them the most and I expect that is, what is, really the worry for our pilots.
I can't imagine that BA would roster 7.3 hours off after a transatlantic flight or that any of our Unions would accept that even if the rules did allow for it!!
Take care
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty girl, despite using this issue to get in a dig at BA pilots, I shall try and explain why you have missed the point...
This is not about NF, WW or EF. This is not about pilots protecting their current pay and conditions (our union have done a very effective job on that score), nor is it about us needing the support of the cabin crew in a struggle that will only benefit us.
This is about a fundamental upheaval in the way ALL crew can be rostered throughout the entire EU. What was previously an illegal roster will become the norm, be you a pilot or stewardess. The entire concept and definition of 'fatigue' has been changed, and the playing field has been tilted firmly in favour of the airlines. Bless you for thinking that BA will not put safety before profit. The EASA proposals completely re-define what is meant by 'safe'.
If you think your current agreements will protect you, then I beg to differ. How will you go about ensuring such protection? Strike? I think not. With competitors rostering to the new limits, and enjoying the commercial advantage they will bring, BA will have no choice but to impose (there's that word again!) a change in working practice. Take it or leave.
What the pilots are trying to do is make you aware that these proposals are on the horizon. Most cc are utterly unaware of this threat to their quality of life, which in itself speaks volumes for the competence of BASSA. I, and most other pilots, want them to be aware of the situation. If they choose to act, then they need to let BASSA know, and quickly. If they choose not to, then at least they have had the choice.
By all means continue to criticise the pilots in BA if you wish. But on this issue the interests of pilots and cabin crew are aligned.
This is not about NF, WW or EF. This is not about pilots protecting their current pay and conditions (our union have done a very effective job on that score), nor is it about us needing the support of the cabin crew in a struggle that will only benefit us.
This is about a fundamental upheaval in the way ALL crew can be rostered throughout the entire EU. What was previously an illegal roster will become the norm, be you a pilot or stewardess. The entire concept and definition of 'fatigue' has been changed, and the playing field has been tilted firmly in favour of the airlines. Bless you for thinking that BA will not put safety before profit. The EASA proposals completely re-define what is meant by 'safe'.
If you think your current agreements will protect you, then I beg to differ. How will you go about ensuring such protection? Strike? I think not. With competitors rostering to the new limits, and enjoying the commercial advantage they will bring, BA will have no choice but to impose (there's that word again!) a change in working practice. Take it or leave.
What the pilots are trying to do is make you aware that these proposals are on the horizon. Most cc are utterly unaware of this threat to their quality of life, which in itself speaks volumes for the competence of BASSA. I, and most other pilots, want them to be aware of the situation. If they choose to act, then they need to let BASSA know, and quickly. If they choose not to, then at least they have had the choice.
By all means continue to criticise the pilots in BA if you wish. But on this issue the interests of pilots and cabin crew are aligned.