BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[Colonel White]

Are cabin crew not needed? Try departing a full 747 without any cabin crew onboard and you will see what happens. I gather you would get a personal visit from CAA.

If it were not for the sales folk, rev man, finance, schedules, ops cntrol etc.. all those people you seem to despise, you wouldn't have a destination, a slot, a 747 or any passengers in the first place ! You could, however have all the former and then wet lease a plane (as BA did during the strikes) - so having your own cabin crew , plane and (whispered softly) flight crew are not essential.

[Yellow Pen]

I seem to remember full 747s departing LHR during the strike without many cabin crew on board at all! One SCCM (not necessarily an existing cabin crew member), a handful of experienced crew and the rest VCC. Now that the VCC are experienced, we could feasibly depart LHR with no BA employed cabin crew on board.

As to the 'virtual airline', it's a great plan on paper but has anybody ever actually made it work in the real world?

[GearUp CheerUp]

Surely what everyone else is doing can't be too important or time-consuming as they have enough spare time to complete both cabin crew training and crew flights.

Has it not occured to you (and DH, come to think of it) that maybe, just maybe, people's abscence while they do VCC training, flights or recency is covered by overtime, other colleagues filling in or them catching up on their work later?

[Colonel White]

As to the 'virtual airline', it's a great plan on paper but has anybody ever actually made it work in the real world?

Suspect a lot of startups begin in this fashion - get some revenue coming in and then progress to dry lease and own crew.

[Yellow Pen]

Precisely. 'Virtual airline' works for a small operator, but not for a major carrier where attempting to wet lease a 50 x B777 operation just ain't gonna happen.

[Bengerman]

Whilst entertaining, Miss M's arguments are simply a rehash of previously rehashed BASSA mantras. The way FORWARD has to rest with the cabin crew themselves and the best way they can help themselves is to oust the militant idiots who put their membership in this unenviable position, elect some reasonable, pragmatic reps who can use common sense and get the dispute sorted at the earliest opportunity.

[Stiffco]

Thanks to Colonel White for the last few posts; tells it as it is.
Which, I am sure caused a hissy fit when a certain over inflated balloon was burst.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Tiramisu wrote

Miss M,
No offence, but I'm not the type to frequent BFC even if it was the last place on earth!

Ha ha.You and me both. Quite simply I couldn't think of a worse place. Spoke to one crew who admitted that the place was pretty full of 'trashed' crew on the day she visited. Sad.

Miss M wrote

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?

Oh come on Miss M. You obviously dont know the history of DH 'negotiation' skills. He would have gone on for 9 years never mind 9 months. Remember Bassa have shot to pieces at the time the long range agreement in 88, part time in 93, the crew card system in 94 etc. If it would have been upto Bassa none of the above would have happened. It always particularly amuses me when the Bassa stalwarts go on about what Bassa has done for crew, when if it would have been upto them, part time would NEVER have happened. Try taking that away from 60% of crew nowadays. Also if only Bassa would have tried to be proactive you never know that longhaul might just have had some kind of preferential bid system by now. Oh but no, they have trashed that idea in the past too.

[Missyminx]

What I would like to know is, what are peoples' views on how this is all going to end? As a previous post mentioned, BA doesn't really need to do anything. They have achieved more than they could have hoped for thanks to the self-destruct approach of a dysfunctional union. They (the union) have become, as they stand, an irrelevancy, both in the eyes of BA - and to those of us who just want to come to work and enjoy our job, look after the safety and welfare of our customers and have a bit of fun with our colleagues down route. In my experience, this has been pretty much the norm on all of my trips since the 'strike', often with almost full crew turnouts (cabin and flight) enjoying sociable time out. This job, like life is all about what you make it, (just don't make it out to be something it is not!). The minority of militants are legends only in their own minds. Miss M declares she will strike for as long as it takes. To achieve what precisely? Where is there cohesion in the Unions' plans? Come to that, what ARE their plans? They really need to be communicating in a less emotive manner and concentrating on working towards an acceptable (ST notwithstanding) closure to all this; as closure there does need to be.

[ChicoG]

What I would like to know is, what are peoples' views on how this is all going to end?

Dylan Thomas wrote: "Do not go gentle into that good night". But that's exactly what BASSA will do. The "legacy" crew (MissM's words, not mine) have no power now - striking was their last and only weapon, and it no longer works - and therefore all they have is occasional posturing and a bit of finger pointing, interspersed with the occasional BASSA missive that criticises without offering any alternative.

I think you'll see the old and expensive legacy crew reaching their sell by date, taking their (BA supported to the tune of 500 million quid a year) pension and slinking off to grow tomatoes.

This dispute finished when WW put his foot down and said "No More", and only a few deluded individuals that think BASSA speak the truth, and nothing else, believe otherwise. All that's left are are a few fatuous legal arguments.

To be honest, I don't know why people like MissM don't know when they're beaten. She implies that she almost can't wait to strike and go to Bedfont; heaven knows what she's going to do when it finally sinks in that the whole exercise was pointless and embarrassing, and probably won't ever happen again.

Pimms anyone?

[stormin norman]

What's the betting on Staff Travel being given back before the next ballot ?

[dilldog01]

Miss M seems to be of the opinion that apart from Waterside and the flight/cabin crew on the aircraft BA don't employ anyone else ?

[Snas]

Miss M seems to be of the opinion that apart from Waterside and the flight/cabin crew on the aircraft BA don't employ anyone else ?

At the risk of sounding hard done by Mangers (a breed that I belong to) are often regarded by the troops as being a pure overhead of little worth.

The reality is that there are aspects of my job for example that the likes of Miss M perhaps don’t even know exist let alone how to perform.

She regards Managers as not being responsible for BA being the world’s favourite airline, that’s Cabin Crew who achieved that, cabin crew that were recruited by managers, trained by managers, dressed by managers, scheduled etc etc (I could go on clearly)

It’s a team for goodness sake and please start behaving like one of it’s members.

Her (Miss M's) statement of "Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together..." displays a level of arrogance and ignorance in equal measure.

[Flap33]

Staff Travel

I can't see ST being returned, it would be a major concession by the company and I think given the opinions on this thread we are in agreement that BA don't need do anything at the moment; BASSA appear to have been excluded from the party.

Given the Government Spending Review coming on 20th October and the expectation of 10,000s of public sector job losses I would predict that any call for strike ballot would be given short shrift by Unite - they really are going to have bigger fish to fry..... If BASSA are kicked out of Unite and decide to go it alone would BA still be able to go after Unite for damages?

In some respects, Unite might actually have to finish BASSA off themselves in order to protect the greater Union... If WW and Tony Woodley can reach an agreement I would suggest BASSA be de-recognised by BA and crew given the option of going straight into Unite Mainstream and accepting that the batle is lost, sign the new agreement (whatever that maybe) and get on with returning this airline to the top.

[spin_doctor]

I can't see ST being returned, it would be a major concession by the company

I disagree, I think if the LT believe that returning ST (as part of an agreed settlement) will end this dispute then it will be returned.

I'm aware that in doing so lots of 'backing BA' types will wail and gnash teeth, however you can't have it both ways. Numerous statements to the effect that it is BA's trainset and they must be allowed to manage it as they see fit apply just as much in this example. If it's in the best interest of the company and the shareholders to return ST, they will do so.

[Wirbelsturm]

I have to agree with Spin Doctor on this one as well.

I think ST has been used as a big stick to prevent a mass 'sheeple' walkout by BASSA members 'coz BASSA said so' and made them look more carefully as to the irrational reasoning behind the action.

Now it could be used as a carrot to entice an agreement which could, potentially, be far less accomodating than those offered in the past but the 'return of ST' can be used by BASSA as a token of 'victory' however false and hollow that token may be.

Personally I don't mind in the slightest if ST is returned, I would just like to see an end to this ridiculous dispute and get on with doing what we all do best until the next round of concessions looms.

[Juan Tugoh]

If it's in the best interest of the company and the shareholders to return ST, they will do so.

I agree. However, at the moment it seems that to be in dispute with BASSA is no real problem, there is no real threat of any IA - the current ballot while it remains active is a paper tiger. If they strike on this ballot they can be sacked as the IA is no longer protected. Another ballot is problematical as it has to be on a separate and unrelated issue, BASSA and UNITE officials have publically included ST and Disciplinary issues as part of the current dispute. They need another issue - one that motivates sufficient BASSA members to strike that the strike has teeth. So far BASSA's strikes have not had enough teeth; BA have not been forced to change their policy one iota, so far the strikes have failed. Why would a new one change that?

For BA, it is a different equation. While the dispute is on they can introduce New Fleet and other working arrangements and BASSA are powerless top stop it, they are not being consulted. BA have not even started to talk about a pay deal, except for the 1000 or so crew who have signed a deal with BA and who are not BASSA members. All the time a pay deal is not negotiated, the pay budget for CC is going down in real terms due to the effect of inflation. It may not be high at the moment but 2-3% of a multi-million budget i not to be sneezed at.

So with no real threat and the pay budget easing and other minor benefits there is little to change BA's position, Return ST? Why? - there is little benefit to BA, even if it will allow a settlement all it will do is allow the malcontents to continue to foment discord, while BASSA will claim a victory that will embolden them and reinvigorate a toothless and increasing marginalised BASSA. Where is the real upside for BA?

[Wirbelsturm]

Juan Tugoh,

What you say make good sense when viewed from an employees perspective or from a laymans perspective. From the viewpoint of the investor however any discord within a company, no matter how small, can be seen as a negative incentment. The problem with having an open festering dispute with one part of your employee base is that no-one can predict when it might explode. By reaching agreement the company has the possibility to build in clauses preventing such idiotic, ill thought out and damaging action in the future. Such a soloution is far better when enticing prospective investors to back the company as it shows that the management team are proactive with dealing with disputes rather then allowing them to fester.

That is why, with the new aircraft orders looming, the access to South America opening up, the increase in African flights happening and the increased LH leisure market from LGW, I think the company will want this dispute settled on their terms and not BASSA's. If that means the return of ST as a 'gesture' then so be it.

[ChicoG]

One could equally well argue that with the status quo, with most of the BASSA reps removed or emasculated, and legacy crew steadily rolling out of the company at the normal rate of attrition, that the company need do nothing; the festering sore will heal itself, and the dead skin covering it will simply blow away in the wind.

[The Blu Riband]

Maybe BA should put the return of staff travel to a vote!

Let the staff decide.

Personally I thought the last offer of a return with zero seniority was satisfactory.

Anybody can see that after a year or so it could be negotiated back to their original dates.

But the snag there is that word again; negotiation.

Not Bassa's strong point.