BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yellow Pen
I said it could be a result because we don't have a bidding system but it's not the sole reason. There are many other reasons to your claim that we have the worst sickness record in the company.
HiFlyer14
You claim that Mixed Fleet is a result of BASSA's inability to negotiate. I claim that either way BA would have gone forward with it. Why else would they have planned it over so many years, causing a great worry for the cabin crew community and coincidentally left a piece of paper for everyone to see?
What have I personally lost? Money of course but it could also be thought of as an investment as I, and many others, are fighting for our futures. I couldn't care less about staff travel as I never use it. I used to commute a couple of years ago but I still would have gone on strike. I think you will be surprised to see the numbers of commuters at BFC. I have been on a 75% part-time contract for almost ten years. 50% or 33% would be nice but I can wait a few years as it's not really an issue to me. However, many crew are on a full-time contract and wanting to be part-time. The list should be cleared accordingly. As for Mixed Fleet, it would have been created sooner or later. See my point above about BA having planned it for many years.
We are here today because cabin crew, voting for a strike, crossed the picket line (most likely relying on other to strike on their behalf) and VCC who chose to prolong our dispute by filling our positions when they really should have minded their own business.
Why am I still remaining as a member with the union? Because BA would be a horrible place to work for without union representation. The union is not by all means flawless. They have made many mistakes in the past. But, they have also negotiated some of the best terms and conditions in the country. Terms and conditions which you, and everyone else who crossed the picket line, are enjoying.
Chigley
I remember '97 very well as I'm on the old-contract and heard all those different stories back then. Dit any of it happen? No, but the difference is back in those days the new contract tier was integrated with existing fleets and was not a threat. We are now facing a separate fleet. Look at Qantas and what they are facing. The cabin crew are doing a turnaround between LAX and JFK as opposed to a nightstop previously. If they were to demand a nightstop again, Qantas would move it over to Jetstar. All said by a QF crew member.
BA offered, as some of you claim, Mixed Fleet to be integrated with EF and WW fleets. Why are they now against the idea? Surely it could be manageable? We have temporary contracts, on hourly pay, working with us and it seems to be working.
Why should I look for employment elsewhere because WW and KW have all of the sudden decided that we are too expensive for BA? I, and many others, had been with BA a long time before they joined the airline, especially WW. We would also want to be here when they are long gone as we have created ourselves a career with the company. As painful as it seems for some to accept that cabin crew can be a career, and not something you would do for a gap year, it's how we feel and think of our job.
fly12345
Excuses? Not really.
I said it could be a result because we don't have a bidding system but it's not the sole reason. There are many other reasons to your claim that we have the worst sickness record in the company.
HiFlyer14
You claim that Mixed Fleet is a result of BASSA's inability to negotiate. I claim that either way BA would have gone forward with it. Why else would they have planned it over so many years, causing a great worry for the cabin crew community and coincidentally left a piece of paper for everyone to see?
What have I personally lost? Money of course but it could also be thought of as an investment as I, and many others, are fighting for our futures. I couldn't care less about staff travel as I never use it. I used to commute a couple of years ago but I still would have gone on strike. I think you will be surprised to see the numbers of commuters at BFC. I have been on a 75% part-time contract for almost ten years. 50% or 33% would be nice but I can wait a few years as it's not really an issue to me. However, many crew are on a full-time contract and wanting to be part-time. The list should be cleared accordingly. As for Mixed Fleet, it would have been created sooner or later. See my point above about BA having planned it for many years.
We are here today because cabin crew, voting for a strike, crossed the picket line (most likely relying on other to strike on their behalf) and VCC who chose to prolong our dispute by filling our positions when they really should have minded their own business.
Why am I still remaining as a member with the union? Because BA would be a horrible place to work for without union representation. The union is not by all means flawless. They have made many mistakes in the past. But, they have also negotiated some of the best terms and conditions in the country. Terms and conditions which you, and everyone else who crossed the picket line, are enjoying.
Chigley
I remember '97 very well as I'm on the old-contract and heard all those different stories back then. Dit any of it happen? No, but the difference is back in those days the new contract tier was integrated with existing fleets and was not a threat. We are now facing a separate fleet. Look at Qantas and what they are facing. The cabin crew are doing a turnaround between LAX and JFK as opposed to a nightstop previously. If they were to demand a nightstop again, Qantas would move it over to Jetstar. All said by a QF crew member.
BA offered, as some of you claim, Mixed Fleet to be integrated with EF and WW fleets. Why are they now against the idea? Surely it could be manageable? We have temporary contracts, on hourly pay, working with us and it seems to be working.
Why should I look for employment elsewhere because WW and KW have all of the sudden decided that we are too expensive for BA? I, and many others, had been with BA a long time before they joined the airline, especially WW. We would also want to be here when they are long gone as we have created ourselves a career with the company. As painful as it seems for some to accept that cabin crew can be a career, and not something you would do for a gap year, it's how we feel and think of our job.
fly12345
Excuses? Not really.
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember '97 very well as I'm on the old-contract and heard all those different stories back then. Dit any of it happen? No, but the difference is back in those days the new contract tier was integrated with existing fleets and was not a threat.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Nice
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh - oh. You are so right. It was the union that wanted a separate fleet. Now they are trying to rewrite history. We had temps last year earning MF salaries and having days off down route the same way as existing fleets. On return to base however they had MBT's in line with Scheme and now MF. The union wanted a separte fleet so Miss M is being misguided.
Miss M 5811 people voted for IA. I would put good money on some of them being part time so would be unaffected by IA as they will miss it. With nearly 14000 cabin crew now that means more than 8000 crew never voted for IA be it because they are non union, they are union members but could not be bothered to vote, ICC's, Gatwick crew or MF crew. 8000+ crew not in this at all and that is without VCC's.
There are several thousand people hoping Unite the union will reinvent itself and get rid of the 2 Branches and have a union that represents and appeals to everyone. The union started this with 11000 members. Each member paying £16 per month and they have lost several thousand members. That is a lot of cash.
BA is no longer the airline it was and has moved forward. Each of us now has a decision to make and that is. Do we want to be part of it ?
Miss M 5811 people voted for IA. I would put good money on some of them being part time so would be unaffected by IA as they will miss it. With nearly 14000 cabin crew now that means more than 8000 crew never voted for IA be it because they are non union, they are union members but could not be bothered to vote, ICC's, Gatwick crew or MF crew. 8000+ crew not in this at all and that is without VCC's.
There are several thousand people hoping Unite the union will reinvent itself and get rid of the 2 Branches and have a union that represents and appeals to everyone. The union started this with 11000 members. Each member paying £16 per month and they have lost several thousand members. That is a lot of cash.
BA is no longer the airline it was and has moved forward. Each of us now has a decision to make and that is. Do we want to be part of it ?
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
oh-oh
BASSA have been against Mixed Fleet since the very beginning when it was known as Project Columbis. The union offered an integrated solution but BA turned it down. Read my point above. BA have been planning a new fleet for many years and BASSA have known all along that the company would never step back. That's exactly why BASSA have accepted it.
BASSA have been against Mixed Fleet since the very beginning when it was known as Project Columbis. The union offered an integrated solution but BA turned it down. Read my point above. BA have been planning a new fleet for many years and BASSA have known all along that the company would never step back. That's exactly why BASSA have accepted it.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
As you say, MF would have been here in one form or another because that is what BA wanted and the savings justified to them as a business, to push for it.
So it is here; what next?
You want a union and I am 100% behind that, but the union is all 9000 of you. You have accepted that their have been mistakes, everyone makes them, but you have to look at ways of making the mistakes as painless as possible and prioritise your issues.
Do you want each dismissal to be looked at by ACAS, or do you want to look at the guaranteed allowances? There are many things that could be addressed, but you have to be talking.
I am confident that Bassa will keep returning votes with the margin that they have, but I am also sure that BA will take the disruption hit regardless. But it doesn't have to be between the rock and hard place.
Withdraw the threat of action and offer to sit down and talk.
So it is here; what next?
You want a union and I am 100% behind that, but the union is all 9000 of you. You have accepted that their have been mistakes, everyone makes them, but you have to look at ways of making the mistakes as painless as possible and prioritise your issues.
Do you want each dismissal to be looked at by ACAS, or do you want to look at the guaranteed allowances? There are many things that could be addressed, but you have to be talking.
I am confident that Bassa will keep returning votes with the margin that they have, but I am also sure that BA will take the disruption hit regardless. But it doesn't have to be between the rock and hard place.
Withdraw the threat of action and offer to sit down and talk.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Litebulbs,
Bassa no longer represents the majority because only 5811 voted for their recommendation to strike. That means about 8000 of us did not vote to strike.
Many, like me, are leaving the union because they feel it is NOT representing their views anymore.
Isn't a union supposed to represent it's members? Well Bassa's attitude seems to be if you don't agree with us leave!!! Unfortunately that is what people have felt they must do and in the long run this will actually make Bassa impotent.
Unite needs to address this and set up a separate Unite branch, totally different from Bassa where initially Unite officials could run it until fresh elections could be held because quite frankly most of us, including some of the faithful have lost faith in DH and Co..
Bassa no longer represents the majority because only 5811 voted for their recommendation to strike. That means about 8000 of us did not vote to strike.
Many, like me, are leaving the union because they feel it is NOT representing their views anymore.
Isn't a union supposed to represent it's members? Well Bassa's attitude seems to be if you don't agree with us leave!!! Unfortunately that is what people have felt they must do and in the long run this will actually make Bassa impotent.
Unite needs to address this and set up a separate Unite branch, totally different from Bassa where initially Unite officials could run it until fresh elections could be held because quite frankly most of us, including some of the faithful have lost faith in DH and Co..
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs
The union is trying to talk with the company. The company is trying to talk with the union. At least that's the impression they are trying to give ut but nothing's happening.
Do I agree with the list of 10 items of dispute? No. I would be more than happy to satisfy with the following:
Staff travel - We were warned before taking industrial action that we would lose it permanently. Personally, as I never use it, they could keep it but many commuters who rely dependently on it have suffered greatly. However, it's a matter of principle that we never should have been punished for going on strike.
Sickness - If any crew member who was genuinely sick during the strike can provide relevant paper work they should be allowed to have their earnings docked restored. However, if any crew member reported sick instead of actually going on strike, they have themselves to blame. Had they gone on strike instead they would have been able to apply for strike pay.
Trade union facilities agreement - We should be allowed to have union representation and allow the union representatives to negotiate for us, whether it's done by BASSA or a different branch. However, the agreement never should have been removed in the first place.
Arbiratration - Everyone who has been suspended and/ or dismissed, allow them to have their disciplinary case reviewed by a third party. I don't actually believe that some have been suspended and/ or dismissed for just about anything or simply because BA thought they were going to do something. There has to be more actual facts to it. Let them have their individual hearing and take it from there. There should be no guarantees about the outcome In my opinion that's as fair as it can get.
Disregard for union agreement of the disruption agreement is not really an issue. BA and the union should be able to discuss it but the decision whether to use it shouldn't be the union's and it should certainly not be used as a weapon because we are in a dispute with the company. Allocation of part-time, use of volunteers and a separate pay settlement are issues which I don't agree with but I can't see the company backing down.
Mixed Fleet is what the talks should focus on. It's my greatest concern. We have worked to existing crewing levels for 18 months and it's not an issue any more. If we were to demand that they were to be re-instated to previous crewing levels we would see Mixed Fleet growing even quicker.
The union is trying to talk with the company. The company is trying to talk with the union. At least that's the impression they are trying to give ut but nothing's happening.
Do I agree with the list of 10 items of dispute? No. I would be more than happy to satisfy with the following:
Staff travel - We were warned before taking industrial action that we would lose it permanently. Personally, as I never use it, they could keep it but many commuters who rely dependently on it have suffered greatly. However, it's a matter of principle that we never should have been punished for going on strike.
Sickness - If any crew member who was genuinely sick during the strike can provide relevant paper work they should be allowed to have their earnings docked restored. However, if any crew member reported sick instead of actually going on strike, they have themselves to blame. Had they gone on strike instead they would have been able to apply for strike pay.
Trade union facilities agreement - We should be allowed to have union representation and allow the union representatives to negotiate for us, whether it's done by BASSA or a different branch. However, the agreement never should have been removed in the first place.
Arbiratration - Everyone who has been suspended and/ or dismissed, allow them to have their disciplinary case reviewed by a third party. I don't actually believe that some have been suspended and/ or dismissed for just about anything or simply because BA thought they were going to do something. There has to be more actual facts to it. Let them have their individual hearing and take it from there. There should be no guarantees about the outcome In my opinion that's as fair as it can get.
Disregard for union agreement of the disruption agreement is not really an issue. BA and the union should be able to discuss it but the decision whether to use it shouldn't be the union's and it should certainly not be used as a weapon because we are in a dispute with the company. Allocation of part-time, use of volunteers and a separate pay settlement are issues which I don't agree with but I can't see the company backing down.
Mixed Fleet is what the talks should focus on. It's my greatest concern. We have worked to existing crewing levels for 18 months and it's not an issue any more. If we were to demand that they were to be re-instated to previous crewing levels we would see Mixed Fleet growing even quicker.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trade union facilities agreement - We should be allowed to have union representation and allow the union representatives to negotiate for us, whether it's done by BASSA or a different branch. However, the agreement never should have been removed in the first place.
The agreement was not removed. BASSA withdrew from it unilaterally.
The agreement was not removed. BASSA withdrew from it unilaterally.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
I see it the same way, but it is easy for me just looking into this as an interested observer. If you canvased opinion on both threads about your last post and whether BA would engage based on it, I imagine that the consensus would be yes, but that consensus is of no importance. What is important is if your crew colleagues feel the same way. Only you and them will be the judge, not pprune.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M,
I can see that a lot of what you say sounds fair and put how you put it many would also be happy with that, in fact it dose not sound that much different from the agreement that Unite and TW negotiated.
Do you not feel that having DH so firmly in-charge is actually at odds with him ever agreeing to those things, after all he is one of the dismissed crew!!
Do you feel that you need a new leadership in order that all this can move on?
I also feel that the reason so many of us did not want to strike over the crewing levels in the first place was that we could see that it would only make Mixed Fleet bigger. I am glad that you understand this now.
BG
I can see that a lot of what you say sounds fair and put how you put it many would also be happy with that, in fact it dose not sound that much different from the agreement that Unite and TW negotiated.
Do you not feel that having DH so firmly in-charge is actually at odds with him ever agreeing to those things, after all he is one of the dismissed crew!!
Do you feel that you need a new leadership in order that all this can move on?
I also feel that the reason so many of us did not want to strike over the crewing levels in the first place was that we could see that it would only make Mixed Fleet bigger. I am glad that you understand this now.
BG
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
You really make me want to scream with frustration.
You are STILL going on about being "being stuck at home with no work for weeks living on my basic".
Why cannot you see that it makes no sense for BA to let that happen?! As routes get transfered (as there becomes less of us) you may be going to fewer places, but you'll be going to the places you do still go to more often.
Let's say in 15 years "Legacy fleets" represent 30% of the total (Number plucked out of the air), your roster might read JFK days off, JNB days off, LAX days off, JFK days off, JNB days off, what is most unlikely to read is however, AV, AV, AV days off ,AV, AV ,AV days off etc. etc......BECAUSE, for the millionth time, HOW IS IT IN BA'S INTEREST TO PAY YOUR BASIC AND PENSION FOR NO WORK FROM YOU????
Please, please, please......don't spout that ridiculous piece of union propaganda again, my blood pressure won't take it!
Please, please, please, just try to think through carefully, in a logical way all these things you hear and figure out for your self, whether they actually make any sense. If you did, even YOU may start to question whether BASSA's sold you a pup.
You really make me want to scream with frustration.
You are STILL going on about being "being stuck at home with no work for weeks living on my basic".
Why cannot you see that it makes no sense for BA to let that happen?! As routes get transfered (as there becomes less of us) you may be going to fewer places, but you'll be going to the places you do still go to more often.
Let's say in 15 years "Legacy fleets" represent 30% of the total (Number plucked out of the air), your roster might read JFK days off, JNB days off, LAX days off, JFK days off, JNB days off, what is most unlikely to read is however, AV, AV, AV days off ,AV, AV ,AV days off etc. etc......BECAUSE, for the millionth time, HOW IS IT IN BA'S INTEREST TO PAY YOUR BASIC AND PENSION FOR NO WORK FROM YOU????
Please, please, please......don't spout that ridiculous piece of union propaganda again, my blood pressure won't take it!
Please, please, please, just try to think through carefully, in a logical way all these things you hear and figure out for your self, whether they actually make any sense. If you did, even YOU may start to question whether BASSA's sold you a pup.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said Beagle,
Yes, I too noticed Miss M again say she would be sitting at home with NO work.
I agree, as do most crew, it would negate all the savings made from Mixed Fleet, if the rest of us were not used to our maximum also and BA have again and again said that they will share the routes out fairly , moving them back and forth between fleet, because they actually want ALL crew to be happy and therefore productive to the business which needs happy crew in order to give good customer service!!!!!
these are my own views and not those of BA
Yes, I too noticed Miss M again say she would be sitting at home with NO work.
I agree, as do most crew, it would negate all the savings made from Mixed Fleet, if the rest of us were not used to our maximum also and BA have again and again said that they will share the routes out fairly , moving them back and forth between fleet, because they actually want ALL crew to be happy and therefore productive to the business which needs happy crew in order to give good customer service!!!!!
these are my own views and not those of BA
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM,
You say that the Union Facilities Agreement should never have been taken away from Unite.
It wasn't.
The reps at a regular monthly meeting, handed over a letter stating that they were withdrawing from it. A manager, that I know well and trust implicitly, was at that meeting and said that the managers there were totally stunned, when they were presented this. They just couldn't work out why the union would do something so self defeating.
I think BASSA's members should insist on seeing the minutes to this meeting and demand an explanation as to WHY they did it, because it's that that's stopped the reps being derostered or having any imput into product development etc.
You say that the Union Facilities Agreement should never have been taken away from Unite.
It wasn't.
The reps at a regular monthly meeting, handed over a letter stating that they were withdrawing from it. A manager, that I know well and trust implicitly, was at that meeting and said that the managers there were totally stunned, when they were presented this. They just couldn't work out why the union would do something so self defeating.
I think BASSA's members should insist on seeing the minutes to this meeting and demand an explanation as to WHY they did it, because it's that that's stopped the reps being derostered or having any imput into product development etc.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Nice
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is time for Unite to get a grip
There are so many of us now who have left the union as we are so unhappy with the direction we were being taken in. Only 5800 now want Industrial Action and of them some are treated with distain as they are on part time and wont actually need to take action. The company is offering masses of part time contracts now and people are jumping at them creating many vacancies on Mixed Fleet. These are the very same people who have voted for IA. The union branches threw away their facilities agreement off their own back. This was the not company but the branches. Even the union was flabagasted by this unitteral decision without keeping them in the picture. There is now a growing ground swell from both within the union and from outside amongst the community for Unite to take total charge and rebrand the 2 branches under 1 heading ie Unite the union and have an election to bring in new progressive reps willing to work with the company. Unite now needs to show its presence.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shouting aside, some fair points have been made. If the remuneration package for MF in its entirety, is less than your allowances package, then it would be cost effective to leave you at home. I do not know the facts of that however.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: London
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But that would still leave a large number of employees at home earning basic pay of say £13,000 to £40,000 a year for doing absolutely nothing. I'm not sure how that would ever be financially worthwhile for the company?
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yellow Pen
Either way it should be put back in place. It would be no cost for BA.
Litebulbs
It remains to be seen but I am certain that sooner or later we will reach an agreement with BA.
Betty Girl
Something needs to be done once all of this is over. Members have left the union but I still stand by my opinion that we need union representation. A new leadership in the union might be the way forward. Unfortunately I believe the trust between management and some of us has been lost.
Beagle9
I suppose when it gets to that point it will be very handy for BA to get rid of us by claiming that there's nothing left for us. Put us in the redeployment agreement (if it's left) where we'd have to re-apply for another position and I can assure you there won't be any vacancies available. BF did previously say that it has never been used for cabin crew. Should that be some sort of reassurance for the future? We are already losing routes almost every month. Continue with this pace and 30% representation would only be a few years away. Should I retire at the age of 65 I have another 28 years left and seeing how things are progressing with this new fleet I can't see myself in the company by that time. But, then again I forgot that cabin crew can't make a career...
BA have done a very good job so far by giving the less popular routes to Mixed Fleet and trying to give us the impression that they are not after us. We have lost both DEN, NBO and MRU. How long until they are coming after SIN, HKG and NRT? Even with the top-up payment it would only be a matter of time before they are wanting to re-negotiate it as we will be operating fewer routes, hence earning less averagly.
I never said the facilities agreement have been taken away from Unite. I did however say that should have been removed by whom who withdrew from it.
Either way it should be put back in place. It would be no cost for BA.
Litebulbs
It remains to be seen but I am certain that sooner or later we will reach an agreement with BA.
Betty Girl
Something needs to be done once all of this is over. Members have left the union but I still stand by my opinion that we need union representation. A new leadership in the union might be the way forward. Unfortunately I believe the trust between management and some of us has been lost.
Beagle9
I suppose when it gets to that point it will be very handy for BA to get rid of us by claiming that there's nothing left for us. Put us in the redeployment agreement (if it's left) where we'd have to re-apply for another position and I can assure you there won't be any vacancies available. BF did previously say that it has never been used for cabin crew. Should that be some sort of reassurance for the future? We are already losing routes almost every month. Continue with this pace and 30% representation would only be a few years away. Should I retire at the age of 65 I have another 28 years left and seeing how things are progressing with this new fleet I can't see myself in the company by that time. But, then again I forgot that cabin crew can't make a career...
BA have done a very good job so far by giving the less popular routes to Mixed Fleet and trying to give us the impression that they are not after us. We have lost both DEN, NBO and MRU. How long until they are coming after SIN, HKG and NRT? Even with the top-up payment it would only be a matter of time before they are wanting to re-negotiate it as we will be operating fewer routes, hence earning less averagly.
I never said the facilities agreement have been taken away from Unite. I did however say that should have been removed by whom who withdrew from it.
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Nice
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM you sound like those of us who have been knocked for leaving the union, are part timers, could see that there needs to be a compromise over MF and is thinking forward. There is no doubt that the Company wants a union. One body they can work with. Instead we have 2 branches point scoring half the time and Reps with personal agendas. Talks are restarting this week and the greatest fear is that the Reps will not move forward till staff travel benefits are returned completly. All the other issues are within a whisper of a deal eg part time. Something like 500 have been offered it this past 2 weeks. ACAS for the sacked and suspended. Each case has to be dealt with separate. The vast majority of whom are now back. 19 sacked fair enough but none of us know the ins and outs and they are one would assume be being financed to tribunal by Unite if they think they are going to win their case. We want a new union that the Company can work with and one that represents us all and not just 5811. A new Unite union not 2 branches could give Unite a 12000 membership. Sooner or later the leaders of Unite are going to question the finances and how they can win back the rank and file.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: on a cloud
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juan
Re read my post re VCC...I said,
You make out that I naively believe that VCCs were introduced for mass disruption (snow, ash) only.
By saying that I don't agree with VCC as a strike busting technique (although innovative!) means just that I don't agree with it (personally)
This was an innovative idea to counteract any strike action
By saying that I don't agree with VCC as a strike busting technique (although innovative!) means just that I don't agree with it (personally)
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: London
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
But, they have also negotiated some of the best terms and conditions in the country.
You go round and round in circles exercising your right to have your say but I am afraid it is now too boring to listen to. You will not accept reason and I feel that is no hope for you if you do not get out of that hole you have dug yourself. It is time to move on and live whatever you want to do with your life. Or join in what BA are now building. But please stop making one excuse after another after another.........
People have tried and tried to tell you how it is but you will not listen. Just repeating your answers is just plain silly, even though those people try very hard to guide you.