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 11th Mar 2011, 14:58
  #3461 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: uk
Age: 51
Posts: 46
As far as I'm aware BASSA are aware of the proposed changes in FDL for flight crew, having read through the proposal it's my understanding that it will affect the flight crew hours more than the cabin crew who's scheme already does most of whats being proposed. 7.5hrs minimum rest not withstanding.

Cabin crew have only had the 900hr restriction for 5 years or so, before this there was no annual restriction on hours, I can only speak for long haul at BA, but cabin crew would regularly do 1200 hours per annum, to the point one of our recent managers complained on a forum chat , and I quote,

"We pay for 1200hrs and only get 900hrs from our cabin crew now".

The other side of the coin is that the cabin crew themselves don't like the 900 hour rule because if they are full time they get up to 3 weeks a year grounded due to 900hrs. thats viewed as a wasted opportunity to earn.

Regardless of where you stand, there is no denying the massive rift between the flight crew and cabin crew at the moment (not a pop just reality). The cabin crew at BA are just not inclined to listen to flight crew calls for solidarity in great numbers regardless of the result of inaction.

Possibly a sad state to be in, but it's the reality of recent times.
flyeruk69 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 15:14
  #3462 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Ottergirl,

I have just read and reread this document now 3 or 4 times and I agree with you.

The working limits are very similar to those that cabin crew already work to.

The 7.5 hour rest period is NOT something someone can be rostered, it is reduced rest during disruption and travelling to and from the hotel is not included in this time.

There are safeguards in that, as now, the captain can reduce a duty day or increase the rest if he feels his crew may be suffering from fatigue.

Written into the document is a duty for the operator to produce fair and workable rosters. This document just sets out the very minimums that an operator can work to, in my opinion it does not mean that operators will work us all to these limits everyday anymore than they work us to the cap371 limits now and as has been pointed out we all have our own agreements or MOAs and they need to be negotiated away before our duty days can be altered.

Added in are these required 30 min meal breaks every six hours which will in actual fact maybe improve some of the cabin crew rosters!

This argument that other airlines will work to these levels and BA will not be able to compete are also strange because the actual document states that some EU countries are already operating to less restrictive versions than this EASA document sets out. eg Ireland and Italy.

I have always found it strange how cabin crew could always work one hour longer than pilots and also required one hour less rest than pilots. One good thing is that this document treats us in the same way, minus the extra pre-flight briefing that we do!!

As for the 900 hours, that still is 900 hours in a calender year it is just that you can do 1000 in a rolling 12 month period which will make it easier for airlines to cope with when someone gets close to their maximum, instead of getting them to sit at home, as happens now.

Obviously I would prefer we stayed under the umbrella of the CAA but having looked at the document and compared it to current cabin crew scheme it is not very different in my meager opinion.

Hope my opinion does not upset anyone too much. Just an opinion and as you all know by now I am quite opinionated!!!!

These are obviously my views and not those of BA.

Last edited by Betty girl; 11th Mar 2011 at 15:34.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 15:54
  #3463 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
BG

Far from being meagre your analysis is excellent and opinion spot-on!
What's all the fuss about?
mrpony is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 18:42
  #3464 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: motorway services
Posts: 118
BG
I have always found it strange how cabin crew could always work one hour longer than pilots and also required one hour less rest than pilots.
We don't do the same job, that's why, pure & simple. We may be in the same tube but the jobs are completely different.
strikemaster82 is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 18:53
  #3465 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
BG,

Fair enough. I genuinely hope you're right and I'm wrong on this one. I think the subtext and legal frameworking of this will mean a fundamental shift in what we're both used to. A bottle of Krug to you from me if you're right.

Cheers!

MrB
MrBunker is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 18:56
  #3466 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Strikemaster, I and all cabin crew are very aware that we do a different job to you pilots.

Both our jobs are tiring but very different.

I think that maybe you have not read the EASA documents about cabin crew hours because they spend a lot of time explaining why they feel cabin crew should trigger the same rest and duty hours as pilots and of course it is for completely different reasons because as you so kindly brought to my attention, we do a completely different job.

Both our jobs are however needed to carry passengers on an aircraft.

These are my own views and not those of BA.

Last edited by Betty girl; 11th Mar 2011 at 19:38.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 18:58
  #3467 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
As BG was saying....

The tasks of Flight attendants (FAs) require a sufficiently high level of alertness and cognitive performance to ensure safety and adequate response especially in nonroutine situations. From the viewpoint of general health and physiological needs, the same requirements for cockpit and cabin crew should be applied. It has been shown [Vejvoda M et al. 2000] that the fatigue levels of cabin crew towards the end of flight duty period tend to be much higher than those of cockpit crew. In addition, flight attendants have reported increased perceived stress and workload due to changes in duties and responsibilities since “9/11” [Nesthus T et al. 2007]. This result from a study among US cabin crew appears equally applicable to European cabin crew and may further contribute to higher fatigue levels.

From the Moebus stuff that BALPA seem to favour.
mrpony is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 18:58
  #3468 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Thanks Mr. Bunker,

I hope so too. Lets hope that in a years time, this will all be over and we can crack open a bottle.

BG x
Betty girl is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 22:36
  #3469 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
BG you are cherry picking small sections of the proposals that appear to vindicate your willingness to do nothing. Unless they are seen in the overall context of the entire proposals you cannot reach the conclusions you reach about how little they will affect you.

But at least you have taken an interest and formed an opinion. I certainly do not concur with it.
Runway vacated is offline  
Old 11th Mar 2011, 23:15
  #3470 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

R V. I think 'vindicate my willingness to do nothing' is a bit rich.

Are you not one of the pilots encouraging cabin crew to leave Unite! So what exactly are you suggesting someone like me does!

I have read and reread the proposal and I can assure you, I did not cherry pick anything. I genuinely looked at our cabin crew current scheme and compared it with this proposal and the hours were similar. I did think the ability to reduce rest to 7.5 hours, not including transport, was not good but I really doubt many Captains would agree with this being a satisfactory level of rest and the proposal did say that he had to take into consideration how tired his crew were before reducing the rest!

Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree with each other and as Mr. Bunker said, lets hope you are not right! Quite frankly I very much doubt anything that a cabin crew union says will make any difference to what these EU people will do. Plus don't forget that for some countries within the EU this is actually MORE restrictive and those countries will be protesting that it is too strict!!!

These are my views and not those of BA
Betty girl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 00:05
  #3471 (permalink)  
64K
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: London
Posts: 54
Getting back on topic just slightly...

A brief update on our talks with Unite

Yesterday, Keith Williams met with Len McCluskey, the general secretary of Unite, to talk about the current cabin crew dispute. It was a positive meeting and further discussions will be held in the near future.
Hopefully something promising one day soon...?

(Views above are my own, not those of my employer)
64K is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 07:40
  #3472 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Dark side of the Moon
Posts: 14
Off topic again, apologies mods..

Just to clarify, you don't have to belong to a union to register and comment on these proposals. Do you think EU policy makers will pay more attention to 200 responses or 20000? Any aviation professional in the EU should be concerned by this which repeatedly considers the 'economic impact'.

BG, not a dig at you but as LHR EF crew (?) look at the proposals for 'home base' and early starts. Can you see anything to stop BA rostering you six 05:00 starts at LGW! (Or even 06:00 starts which are no longer 'early') Yes I am looking at worst case, just as a rostering computer would.

As BA became increasingly uncompetitive due to it's restrictive rostering and given recent history, do you think they wouldn't try and address their cost base?

Anyone who can afford time to post here should post some feedback on the EASA proposals.
DextersLaboratory is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 09:31
  #3473 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Someone “hiding their head in the sand, like an ostrich” is said to be foolishly ignoring their problem, while hoping it will magically vanish.
123breath is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 10:44
  #3474 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Please stop having a go at me because I am one of the only cabin crew posters on here.

We have agreements, you and us, and these proposals do not mean BA can ignore them. They are just a minimum standard that all EU airlines cannot go beyond.

BA do not roster us to cap371 limits now, nor Gatwick, which have their own MOA and they do not even roster Mixed Fleet to cap371 limits, so why do you insist that just because they CAN do something, that they WILL do something. As an airline BA have always negotiated with it's aircrew about these things.

You are the very people that keep telling us all, what a reasonable company BA is but it seems that when you may have your own hours increased, because that seems to be the biggest difference for pilots, you don't like it. As you keep telling us BA are a reasonable company and I am sure they will honour your bidline, unless negotiated otherwise with you all.

Of course they could set up a new fleet of pilots and bring in direct entry Captains!! but of course you wouldn't mind would you, as long as they understood what they were signing, it would be totally up to them if they wanted to work to lesser agreements!!!After all it is fine for them to do that with the cabin crew!! Just joking!! Some of you of course will not see the joke but I know a lot will!!!!
Betty girl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 10:58
  #3475 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
BG,

I get the joke, no snags, although your analogy would have to contain us refusing to negotiate at a union level before hand ( )! However, I think the point that people are urging upon you here is that the change in the ruleset (when all changes are taken into account) would place negotiated industrial agreements so far from the legal maximums that it would only be a matter of time before airlines started rostering towards them (if not, as you point out re industrial v scheme, all the way to the absolute limit). When that process begins BA will have only one choice and that will be to do the same or become increasingly more and more expensive in comparison to our competitors. Like it or not, I don't believe people will pay that much of a premium to fly BA. And when that happens, it'll be our agreements, all of our agreements, placed under a very forensic microscope. But, as I said yesterday, I fervently, genuinely hope that you're right and I'm wrong. Better still, I hope we can stop this EASA bastardisation (even some of their own points admit they're not scientifically proven and are driven by commercial aspects - that's an alarm bell, right there) before it even gets wings (sorry).



MrB

PS As much as I like it, I can't really justify heavy captains in today's competitive marketplace and I know I'm shooting my future command in the foot by supporting that viewpoint.
MrBunker is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 11:00
  #3476 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

64K,

Yes I highlighted this too and I think it is a really good step forward.

Also KW has been coming into the CRC every morning, before he starts work, to talk to cabin crew direct about what they think it will take to end this dispute and he is going to do this all next week too. He want to talk to as many cabin crew as he can before resuming talks with Len.

I am very optimistic about this and think he seems to be very proactive and I like his style of management so far from what I have seen.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 11:02
  #3477 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: pluto
Posts: 179
mrpony

It has been shown [Vejvoda M et al. 2000] that the fatigue levels of cabin crew towards the end of flight duty period tend to be much higher than those of cockpit crew.
If all the ccrew were asleep on the final landing of a long day it would make no difference; the pilots on the other hand......
blimey is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 11:09
  #3478 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

Mr Bunker,

I really do understand these concerns and I am pleased that BALPA are putting forward your views but as I have said there are already EU airlines working to lesser rules than EASA.

Also there are EU airlines that are WAY MORE unionised than BA eg Air France, Iberia, Finnair, to name a few so I am just not convinced that this doomsday scenario of all airlines working to the lowest common denominator is completely correct.

We shall see.

Thank you for the considered way that you debate without the need to insult me.

Thanks BG.
Betty girl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 11:18
  #3479 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 942
Angel

blimey,
You run the risk of making yourself look silly.

I think we want ALL our aircrew to be working at their optimum, whether they be pilots or cabin crew. I don't think it would be a good idea for any crew to be so tired they were asleep, even if it were just the ones sitting at the doors!
Betty girl is offline  
Old 12th Mar 2011, 12:28
  #3480 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: St. John's Wood
Posts: 295
I don't think it would be a good idea for any crew to be so tired they were asleep, even if it were just the ones sitting at the doors!
True! Which is why it is so difficult to understand why so many BA cabin crew feel that shopping on a layover, particularly in North America, is so much more important than planning their rest properly during that layover. The resulting moans about tiredness et al on the return journey just don't cut the mustard, do they?
Abbey Road 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.