BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
I would be willing to offer a lot to BA but only if they were interested and serious to negotiate seriously. They could remove another crew member if they wanted to but it would have to be negotiated. Not imposed.
BASSA have shown they are incapable of real negotiation. They are however very good at propaganda. The question is why so many choose to ignore fact over fantasy?
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: uk
Age: 53
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is a paragraph from the draft copy of Operation Columbus.
The strategy for growing the new fleet relies upon growth of the network, attrition in the old fleets and the appetite for existing crew to reduce their hours through voluntary part time, sabbaticals etc. Recruitment into and promotion within the old LHR fleets will be stopped, and routes transferred to the new fleet as crew numbers reduce in the old fleets. The scope includes designing packages to enable transferee or secondment into the new fleet. Given the difference in remuneration between the old fleets and the new fleet, an important part of the Columbus programme is to make the new fleet as attractive as possible in non-financial ways i.e. lifestyle flexibility, to encourage as many transfers as possible.
It is one of the most worrying parts of the proposal, to make the new fleet attractive I would imagine that the old fleet would have to haven degenerated into something rather awful.
Having looked at the document again I was shocked to see how much of it has become reality.
I do have serious concerns that the final part of the plan is the one that will damage our futures the most.
I have no doubt that our life at BA will be made very unpleasant in an attempt to drive us to New Fleet.
The strategy for growing the new fleet relies upon growth of the network, attrition in the old fleets and the appetite for existing crew to reduce their hours through voluntary part time, sabbaticals etc. Recruitment into and promotion within the old LHR fleets will be stopped, and routes transferred to the new fleet as crew numbers reduce in the old fleets. The scope includes designing packages to enable transferee or secondment into the new fleet. Given the difference in remuneration between the old fleets and the new fleet, an important part of the Columbus programme is to make the new fleet as attractive as possible in non-financial ways i.e. lifestyle flexibility, to encourage as many transfers as possible.
It is one of the most worrying parts of the proposal, to make the new fleet attractive I would imagine that the old fleet would have to haven degenerated into something rather awful.
Having looked at the document again I was shocked to see how much of it has become reality.
I do have serious concerns that the final part of the plan is the one that will damage our futures the most.
I have no doubt that our life at BA will be made very unpleasant in an attempt to drive us to New Fleet.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: uk
Age: 53
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG
The safety net you describe is in the £6,500 region if I remember correctly.
I doubt that we would have triggered the payment over a three-year period.
Having not triggered the payment I believe BA would remove it.
My worry was that if we had needed that safety net many of our routes would have already been transferred to MF.
Without the safety payment the routes that generate good allowances for us would now be fast tracked over to the MF.
We would now be left with all the trips that have no premium pay attached to them, with no safety net.
I also agree with the MTP but do feel it was offered with a lot of unacceptable conditions tied in.
It could have been a starting point for negotiation, but many people had the staff travel issue on top of this to think about.
I know it is a bit cynical and I hate to be so negative, however past experience with our management leaves me in a sceptical position.
The safety net you describe is in the £6,500 region if I remember correctly.
I doubt that we would have triggered the payment over a three-year period.
Having not triggered the payment I believe BA would remove it.
My worry was that if we had needed that safety net many of our routes would have already been transferred to MF.
Without the safety payment the routes that generate good allowances for us would now be fast tracked over to the MF.
We would now be left with all the trips that have no premium pay attached to them, with no safety net.
I also agree with the MTP but do feel it was offered with a lot of unacceptable conditions tied in.
It could have been a starting point for negotiation, but many people had the staff travel issue on top of this to think about.
I know it is a bit cynical and I hate to be so negative, however past experience with our management leaves me in a sceptical position.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hubert,
The agreement is NOT for three years only!
It is the pay deal element that is only for three years.
This is what upsets me so much, is that so many people have been misled by union officials, who seem to be on a totally different agenda, than the one of negotiating a good settlement for us.
Some crew have been attracted across to mixed fleet already to be CS M's and Future Talent but no one is being forced. Probably more VR may be offered in the future but even with all this BA have told the city, who they are not allowed to mislead, that they estimate it will take 10 years for Mixed Fleet to be 40%.
Please take out the letter, with the agreement in it, that we ALL got from BA and reread it slowly. Not the version with the union add ons in, which is totally misleading. You will see that this agreement is valid until it is renegotiated and it is the pay deal that is for three years.
If you have not got the agreement I could try and reprint it here for you. Let me know if you need me to.
P.S. I am glad that we can have a good debate without the usual poster that just seem to want to insult and denigrate crew. I have started to just ignore these poster and just respond to balanced and productive posts. I suggest everyone does this too whatever side of the debate you are on.
Many thanks BG.
The agreement is NOT for three years only!
It is the pay deal element that is only for three years.
This is what upsets me so much, is that so many people have been misled by union officials, who seem to be on a totally different agenda, than the one of negotiating a good settlement for us.
Some crew have been attracted across to mixed fleet already to be CS M's and Future Talent but no one is being forced. Probably more VR may be offered in the future but even with all this BA have told the city, who they are not allowed to mislead, that they estimate it will take 10 years for Mixed Fleet to be 40%.
Please take out the letter, with the agreement in it, that we ALL got from BA and reread it slowly. Not the version with the union add ons in, which is totally misleading. You will see that this agreement is valid until it is renegotiated and it is the pay deal that is for three years.
If you have not got the agreement I could try and reprint it here for you. Let me know if you need me to.
P.S. I am glad that we can have a good debate without the usual poster that just seem to want to insult and denigrate crew. I have started to just ignore these poster and just respond to balanced and productive posts. I suggest everyone does this too whatever side of the debate you are on.
Many thanks BG.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: uk
Age: 53
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was not referring to a three-year deal. I was just going on my past experience with this company. I doubt very much that you will need the top up payment as the figure is very low. If your allowances were under this figure a lot of our routes would have quickly moved to MF.
What I am suggesting is that the initial growth of MF will be relatively slow so you will never need the top up, what BA tend to do in this situation is remove the payment stating that it was never needed.
That is when the majority of the routes will be transferred to MF.
We will eventually be left with routes with very poor allowances and have no protection.
This will be the final phase of Operation Columbus, making the old fleet people transfer over to NF because the old fleet is no longer financially beneficial.
This would most likely be done by offering a payment to buy our contracts and put us on the MF contract.
What I am suggesting is that the initial growth of MF will be relatively slow so you will never need the top up, what BA tend to do in this situation is remove the payment stating that it was never needed.
That is when the majority of the routes will be transferred to MF.
We will eventually be left with routes with very poor allowances and have no protection.
This will be the final phase of Operation Columbus, making the old fleet people transfer over to NF because the old fleet is no longer financially beneficial.
This would most likely be done by offering a payment to buy our contracts and put us on the MF contract.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: birmingham
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Focus on uniform
As a CSD on WW I'm pleased with the focus on uniform standards. Spend half an hour in crc and you will see some sights. Over the years I have approached crew on my flights who are not adhering to the laid down uniform standards and have been met with various responses ranging from tears to been accused of bullying and harrassment.
Dirty tabbards, scuffed shoes, poorly ironed shirts the list is endless and I see this on almost every flight.Arriving at a destination I'm often embarrassed especially (as in LA) when we queue up next to other airlines who look immaculate!
For lots of crew who like to bleet about 'being the face of the airline' maybe now they'll be forced to look at their poor standards of uniform dress!
Dirty tabbards, scuffed shoes, poorly ironed shirts the list is endless and I see this on almost every flight.Arriving at a destination I'm often embarrassed especially (as in LA) when we queue up next to other airlines who look immaculate!
For lots of crew who like to bleet about 'being the face of the airline' maybe now they'll be forced to look at their poor standards of uniform dress!
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG
I'd second that desire, however I can't see BA management improving the deal on the table. If you look at the history of this dispute, the offers have got successively poorer. The last (and deemed by BA to be final) offer was more than reasonable. It gave cabin crew a heck of a lot more than other bargaining groups have had (look at the deal struck with ground crew which involves headcount reductions). From the sidelines it would seem that the reason that the Unite leadership would not actively recommend it was because whilst staff travel would be returned, seniority would not. Again, from the sideline I think that it was a real pity that so few cabin crew actually voted.
I also believe that the dispute is being perpetuated by a few people on the union side who have a personal axe to grind and who could not be reasonably described as impartial. Union reps need to be able to advise members of their rights. The role is all about being the voice of the members in dealings with management. It is not about foisting personal agendas on management and members. I'm sure that there are some good reps within BASSA, it's just a pity that the only ones we on the outside se, are the more strident variety.
Lets hope for all our sakes that some of the more decent and intelligent union reps can move forward and sign an agreement, probably similar to the one on the table but hopefully better and we can all get on with our lives.
I also believe that the dispute is being perpetuated by a few people on the union side who have a personal axe to grind and who could not be reasonably described as impartial. Union reps need to be able to advise members of their rights. The role is all about being the voice of the members in dealings with management. It is not about foisting personal agendas on management and members. I'm sure that there are some good reps within BASSA, it's just a pity that the only ones we on the outside se, are the more strident variety.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hubert,
You can't just let your imagination run wild and imagine all these dreadful scenarios and act as if they are definitely going to happen. You have to base things on fact. Fact is that Bill Francis has given his word that we can keep our terms and conditions and continue to negotiate all our agreements.
You say they removed the last 'pay back' deal after three years and yes they did but that was because it was only agreed for three years and in actual fact, hardly any crew ever got paid out from it because we nearly all earned more than we previously had, with the exceptions of a few E/F crew who had previously done a lot of split duties.
I agree this figure is low but it is now just a safety net, the previous offer was higher but that was a replacement which, although it was higher, would have not rewarded those that did the harder, longer,trips. I actually prefer the new offer but just wish we had, had an active union negotiating for us and maybe it would have been a bit better. What we got was an embittered DH dragging crew into a dispute and loosing a lot of crew their staff travel for nothing. It could have been so much better!
Colonel White,
Yes it is more of a desire than anything else. Had we had a useful union it may have been better but as you say not much hope now. Incidentally had we have had a productive union the Mixed Fleet crew could also be working to better agreements. They are going to be getting a worse deal than Gatwick now and that is thanks to Bassa.
You can't just let your imagination run wild and imagine all these dreadful scenarios and act as if they are definitely going to happen. You have to base things on fact. Fact is that Bill Francis has given his word that we can keep our terms and conditions and continue to negotiate all our agreements.
You say they removed the last 'pay back' deal after three years and yes they did but that was because it was only agreed for three years and in actual fact, hardly any crew ever got paid out from it because we nearly all earned more than we previously had, with the exceptions of a few E/F crew who had previously done a lot of split duties.
I agree this figure is low but it is now just a safety net, the previous offer was higher but that was a replacement which, although it was higher, would have not rewarded those that did the harder, longer,trips. I actually prefer the new offer but just wish we had, had an active union negotiating for us and maybe it would have been a bit better. What we got was an embittered DH dragging crew into a dispute and loosing a lot of crew their staff travel for nothing. It could have been so much better!
Colonel White,
Yes it is more of a desire than anything else. Had we had a useful union it may have been better but as you say not much hope now. Incidentally had we have had a productive union the Mixed Fleet crew could also be working to better agreements. They are going to be getting a worse deal than Gatwick now and that is thanks to Bassa.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl is right......an offer is on the table, one which is extremely generous in my opinion given the circumstances, and Bassa should do the right thing and sign-up.
If their membership had read the latest offer properly, without Bassa looking over their shoulder whispering doom and gloom, and if they felt able to accept it in good faith, they could be looking forward to security in employment for the next few years. As things stand they do not have that security, thanks to Bassa. If, in three years, BA start to fiddle with the agreement, and in doing so betray that good faith, then that is the time to talk about industrial action, not before. Any more industrial action now will clearly be counter-productive and bring forward the demise of current agreements. Strike action has become futile in this current dispute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
Staff travel will obviously still be an issue, but once the dust settles in a year or so, and industrial relations within BA are much improved with a much more rosy outlook financially as we emerge from the recession, there might be scope for negotiations between a 'New Bassa', (patent pending...... remember 'New Labour'......didn't they do well for a few years/3 elections? All Bassa need to do is replace DH & co with a Blair/Brown/Mandelson type team
) and BA to improve the situation as far as staff travel for strikers is concerned. Those who have lost staff travel will have to be patient on this one.....they will be in a much better position to get it back next year than now....it just isn't going to happen in the current dispute. BA have won this one.
This would provide the 'legacy' crew with an opportunity to prove to the rest of us just how good certain amongst them keep telling us they are, as they would in effect be in competition with the new Mixed Fleet.
The alternative is indeed 'doom and gloom' for anyone supporting Bassa
If their membership had read the latest offer properly, without Bassa looking over their shoulder whispering doom and gloom, and if they felt able to accept it in good faith, they could be looking forward to security in employment for the next few years. As things stand they do not have that security, thanks to Bassa. If, in three years, BA start to fiddle with the agreement, and in doing so betray that good faith, then that is the time to talk about industrial action, not before. Any more industrial action now will clearly be counter-productive and bring forward the demise of current agreements. Strike action has become futile in this current dispute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.
Staff travel will obviously still be an issue, but once the dust settles in a year or so, and industrial relations within BA are much improved with a much more rosy outlook financially as we emerge from the recession, there might be scope for negotiations between a 'New Bassa', (patent pending...... remember 'New Labour'......didn't they do well for a few years/3 elections? All Bassa need to do is replace DH & co with a Blair/Brown/Mandelson type team
) and BA to improve the situation as far as staff travel for strikers is concerned. Those who have lost staff travel will have to be patient on this one.....they will be in a much better position to get it back next year than now....it just isn't going to happen in the current dispute. BA have won this one.This would provide the 'legacy' crew with an opportunity to prove to the rest of us just how good certain amongst them keep telling us they are, as they would in effect be in competition with the new Mixed Fleet.
The alternative is indeed 'doom and gloom' for anyone supporting Bassa
Last edited by 123breath; 8th Oct 2010 at 14:00.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: london
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's dragged on so long now that maybe my memory fails me, but are you sure there's an offer on the table? To accept the offer re guaranteed top-ups you had to be non-union on 1st July, and I thought the last overall offer made my BA was withdrawn when the last set of strikes took place?
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That offer is the last offer and it was turned down by Bassa but I am sure as some crew have accepted it (about 1000) it's not unreasonable to think that it would still be there if Bassa made a bit of an effort.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might be right....I've lost track/interest myself. I'm sure if Bassa knocked on Willie's door with their collective tails between their legs he would invite them all in to talk though, as I remain convinced that he doesn't really want to sack them all.........it just wouldn't look good for the corporate image. That's why he's been so patient up until now.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that the offer that BA made back in July hasn't been rescinded. BASSA members may have voted to reject it, but I would think that just as previously,the offer would remain on the table until such time as BASSA can persuade Unite to ballot for further IA. At that point BA would retract theoffer. Not sure what happens as a result of Unite kicking off court action. I'd have thought that if the union accepts the offer, the court action would get dropped.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: uk
Age: 53
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BG
It’s not my imagination, it is 25yrs experience working for BA.
We are working for a business and that is what drives their decisions.
It is not about how we feel it’s about getting the job done for as little as possible.
When we have no union and we are represented by a management run staff association, I think you may be in for a bit of a surprise.
It won’t be about who went on strike or not, we will all be worse off.
It’s not my imagination, it is 25yrs experience working for BA.
We are working for a business and that is what drives their decisions.
It is not about how we feel it’s about getting the job done for as little as possible.
When we have no union and we are represented by a management run staff association, I think you may be in for a bit of a surprise.
It won’t be about who went on strike or not, we will all be worse off.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bassa would almost definitely want some kind of a face-saving gesture from Willie, and that depends on how generous he is feeling, but even without anything tangible I'm sure Bassa's proven record of twisting the truth would make any agreement/climbdown look like an outright victory for Union militancy. It really is up to them to go knocking on his door.
The way I see it this is their only realistic option if they want to survive this war (sorry for yet another reference to war) in any shape or form.
Come on 'New Bassa', arise from the ashes.
The way I see it this is their only realistic option if they want to survive this war (sorry for yet another reference to war) in any shape or form.
Come on 'New Bassa', arise from the ashes.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl
Did you get this in writing? Of course you didn't which means what she said doesn't mean anything. Surely you can't that naive enough that you are actually believing what one of our managers said to you?
Tiramisu
According to a different source within the company all 767 will be converted to WW configuration (sooner than you think) and be transferred over to WW for a few years before returning back to EF again.
I recently had a meeting with one of the E/F Fleet Managers and she told me that she had been offered a move to Mixed Fleet but she chose to stay on E/F. She told me that there are NO plans to get rid of WW or E/F and that we would just gradually get smaller as Mixed Fleet gradually gets larger. She said that all new entrants would go on to Mixed Fleet but that would only happen as routes expanded and as WW and E/F crew retire or leave etc. NO ONE WOULD BE FORCED TO GO.
Tiramisu
Bill Francis and Glenn Reynolds have both categorically stated that as long as the 767s are here, and that is till at least 2016, the CSD role will exist on Eurofleet. If not, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: AROUND AND ABOUT
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M wrote
Sorry Miss M thats wrong. Flew with one of the flight crew managers on 757/767 fleet recently and they catorgorically denied that. There was a rumour that Boeing were going to pay for the EF 767's to be converted to WW as the 787's were delayed, but that is now NOT going to happen
According to a different source within the company all 767 will be converted to WW configuration (sooner than you think) and be transferred over to WW for a few years before returning back to EF again.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM
Do you honestly believe that every word said to you from BA management is a complete lie?
Surely you can't that naive enough that you are actually believing what one of our managers said to you?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi dolly bird, welcome to pPrune.
You and me both! I have spent a few hours on standby today and was having a good look at the uniform standards. Truly appalling. So much so that I just suggested to my manager that if Eurofleet want to roster me to a stint in CRC as uniform police then I would be happy to oblige. Many other Eurofleet CSD's would be up for it as well. I have also popped to cc direct and got a supply of lanyards to hand out in briefing for anyone not in posession of one that conforms to the standards!
As for the new uniform control in Cranebank, the CSST trainers have always been happy to point out shortcomings but it has taken a while to convince SEP that they should join our campaign. Time for a new culture, lets give Virgin a run for their money!
As a CSD on WW I'm pleased with the focus on uniform standards. Spend half an hour in crc and you will see some sights. Over the years I have approached crew on my flights who are not adhering to the laid down uniform standards and have been met with various responses ranging from tears to been accused of bullying and harrassment.
As for the new uniform control in Cranebank, the CSST trainers have always been happy to point out shortcomings but it has taken a while to convince SEP that they should join our campaign. Time for a new culture, lets give Virgin a run for their money!