BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[Betty girl]

esseedeedee,

Actually there are two standards being worked to.

The uniform guidelines that most staff in BA are asked to work to are very different to those that Mixed Fleet, crew idols and the New York crew out of London City have been given.

Most crew and the ground staff, and these have only last November been relaxed, are allowed to have their jackets open or closed, can wear a cardigan or Jumper under their Jacket, can use or not use the handbag, are allowed to use, and these items are actually mentioned in the standards, the retro BA bag with the 80's logo and the longchamps bags and can use the neck scarf as a cravat or with the toggle

Mixed Fleet are however required to wear the hat, have to have their jackets done up, must use a cravat, are strictly not allowed to use the retro bag and longchamps bags and must use the BA handbag.

I would personally like us all to work to the stricter standards and these standards have always been used with previous uniforms.

I have been told by my manager that the relaxations in the regulations, came in as a result of the ground staff getting cold at some of the departure gates and wanting to use the retro bags also.

Most senior flying crew were surprised at the relaxation in the regulations and it is even more surprising seeing as Mixed Fleet are now required, only a year after the standards being relaxed, to use a stricter set.

Why not make us all work to the stricter standards!!!! At least all the flying crew. I find that you can have a whole crew all wearing it differently and it does look a mess but as a senior crew member I cannot do anything about it because it is actually to standard.

I do know that as well as this a few crew could make more of an effort with their hair etc. and I do manage this on the day myself but if we all had to comply with the new stricter standards Mixed Fleet are working to it would indeed make us all look a lot more uniform and smarter.

[ottergirl]

Hi Bettygirl,

I totally agree with you about the downgrading of our uniform in all aspects but one. That hat! It's a mystery to me why anyone would be upset not to have one. Having worn a variety of uniforms since I started (and managed the crew wearing them) I can tell you that every uniform that we have worn a hat with has been a pain in the proverbial to manage. The last one was originally made of rabbit hair so half the crew were allergic to it, then it became the summer straw one all year round which was just hilarious in the rain! People sat on them so they looked as mishapen as many of the pilots ones do, they got left behind on board, the hat boxes shattered if you dropped them, they blew off on the apron when boarding up the stairs, and were an absolute curse if the temperature hit 30C or over. Add to that the strange effect they had on your hair and you get a picture of why, when Julian MacDonald was briefed for the new uniform, the hat was planned only for VIP flights. Be careful what you wish for you can look fantastic in your uniform without a lump of blue wool on your head.

Good to hear that the new Mixed fleet are making a good impression on line. I overheard a couple of conversations in training this week which leads me to believe that they are just the same as existing crew and all that is needed for the moaning to start is a few roster runs! We shall see!

[Hot Wings]

Talk about missing the point! MF is not just about the uniform. If you want the hat then you'd better be prepared for the stricter standard of performance management, sickness, tardiness, etc... that come with it. Not to mention recognising the fact that the First Officer and not the CSD is second in command of the aircraft.

The issue is about presenting our customers with a consistant standard of crew and level of service.

[ottergirl]

The issue is about presenting our customers with a consistant standard of crew and level of service.

I think not! Consistency means 'the same'! This is about presenting our customers with two different standards of crew and levels of service and, if BA have their numbers right, we'll have a decade of double standards before there is even a 50/50 split.

While it's unusual for me to have anything pro-BASSA to say, I can see why they have decided not to recommend the offer having read the appendix about legal redress. The crew who have lost their jobs have paid their union dues for many years on the understanding that they would receive support, both legal and financial, from Unite should they ever need legal representation in a dispute with their employer. For a union to then sign away that right as part of a 'deal' would be dodging their obligation to those members. Arguably, protecting that right could be the most, if not only, responsible behaviour we have seen from them in the past two years.

It doesn't matter what we think about whether those people should have lost their jobs, what matters is their right to test that decision in an industrial tribunal should they so wish.

[Betty girl]

Ottergirl agree with you totally.

I feel that we should all be working to the same standards. Either all hats or all no hats but you are totally right, the uniform looks great if worn correctly even without the hat. I just could not understand why they relaxed the original standards.

I have also read the appendix and I can also see why this is causing such a problem.

I am beginning to think that Willie Walsh does not actually want a settlement because he seems to be making it as hard as possible.

After a year of this hell, that many of us who have already left the union, are powerless to stop, I just feel like a pawn, stuck in the middle and hated by strikers because I worked and hated by posters like Hot Wings because I am cabin crew. Well that's how it feels anyway.

[Wheezyjet]

Betty girl

I know you might not think so, but I admire you enormously. You are clearly dedicated and professional, and display great clarity of mind. Don't stop posting, because you are thought provoking, your views are balanced, and I think you contribute a great deal to this thread. So I bet you've got a lot more support than you think!

[Betty girl]

Thanks so much Wheezyjet.

That has made me feel a lot better.

[ottergirl]

From the tone of some of Hot Wings posts, he may well have not had much time for us crew before all this started. Oh well!

I think we are now officially at 'Deadlock'. Just like being on X-factor really. Given that there isn't much we can do about it, (despite all the helpful hints on this forum), then we have to concentrate on what we can do. We already have an advantage over the new crew because you and I have years of experience as well as the right attitude. Believe me, it is much easier to 'be outstanding' when you know what you are doing and not having to keep digging out your service manual. Do you remember what it was like to be new and having to keep asking the senior crew? Who do the new crew have to ask? Talk about being thrown in at the deep end!

Keep the faith, one day this will all be a bad memory and we'll still have the greatest job going.

[Betty girl]

ottergirl you are so right.

I am just going to continue, as I always have, and give the best customer service I can. Thanks for your wise words.

[Caribbean Boy]

Legal stuff

There has been much one-sided reporting of Unite being unable to legally support their disciplined members. Let's get some facts.

BA has a disciplinary procedure, EG901, which includes the right of a disciplined employee to make two appeals. The appeals will result in the sanction being confirmed, rescinded or varied.

Following several sanctions, including dismissals, Unite complained repeatedly, so BA offered binding ACAS arbitration. Here is BA's offer.

Unite and British Airways agree that if any employee who has been subject to disciplinary action (in connection with the current dispute) by British Airways and whose name appears in the confidential annex to this agreement (a 'Relevant Employee') decides to bring an Employment Tribunal claim for unfair dismissal, then as an alternative to Employment Tribunal litigation, that claim will ordinarily be dealt with under the Acas arbitration scheme for the resolution of unfair dismissal disputes.

British Airways and Unite agree that the Arbitrator's decision will be binding and before entering the Acas arbitration scheme they will enter into an agreement to this effect, to which the Relevant Employee will also be a party.

Any arbitration hearing will take place only after British Airways' internal appeals procedure has been exhausted. In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.

The BA offer goes on to state:

Where a Relevant Employee refuses to agree to the use of the Acas arbitration scheme, or initiates any legal action whatsoever connected to the disciplinary case which is not within the ambit of the Acas arbitration scheme, Unite will withdraw all direct and/or indirect support and assistance to that Relevant Employee, including any legal support, immediately and permanently.

An Acas review of all dispute related disciplinary cases that have been dealt with under British Airways' disciplinary procedures will also be conducted. British Airways is committed to giving full and fair consideration to any Acas recommendation arising from that review. Nothing in this section will be taken or cited as a precedent for any past or future cases.

So, the fuss is about BASSA not being able to legally support a member who declines binding arbitration after having gone through BA's disciplinary procedure or who wants to take legal action outside the the scope of the ACAS arbitration scheme. It's for this that BASSA wants to prevent their members from voting on BA's offer.

[Tiramisu]

Latest from BASSA, sent to me by a colleague.

Nov 12th, 2010 by admin

"And so this is Christmas
And what have you done
Another year over
A new one just begun"

-John Lennon, “Happy Xmas, War is over”

And so we are, one year after imposition and we are still very much at war with BA. Now the ballot has been “halted” we are back to where we were post Bedfont and have little choice but to initiate another ballot for industrial action as soon as legal issues are settled.

I have spoken to a lot of journalists/reporters over the last few days and they all ask me the million dollar question “what will it take to settle this dispute”? A fair question, which I tend to give 4 answers to.

The strange thing is that all 4 of my key points cost BA not a red cent, so as usual with BA this is not, was not, never has been about costs. It’s about humiliating and battering the workforce into accepting changes to their terms and conditions while along the way smashing the union by sacking, bullying and intimidating the reps using a variety of assistance whether it be the Daily Mail or US union busting companies. Once BA finally accept that they are not going to succeed in destroying us perhaps they also might like to ponder the 4 points below. Perhaps if they hadn’t banished all BASSA reps from the talks we might have got here before. They have to realise there is no point in making sweet talk with Unite or the TUC, BASSA/Amicus are the main bodies they need to talk with and agree with, no matter how much they may hate us.

These then are then just my fundamental thoughts on what would provide the basis of a deal that we would feel more comfortable presenting to you.

Firstly, there must be a complete return of staff travel with all its seniority. To accept a company have the right to punish people who legally withdraw their labour is to accept the end for trade unionism...end off. This punishment has already been in place 7 months now and, for people like Brendan Barber of the TUC to sit back and not address this fundamental attack on rights also undermines his position. (Also there must be a complete removal of any threats to remove staff travel in the future “at their sole discretion”).
Secondly, and I think this is one issue where we are nearly there - a binding and independent ACAS arbitration of all disciplinaries connected to the dispute. I’ll say no more on this for now.
Thirdly, either BA accepting those sick during strike action were genuine and redressing deduction from wages issues or accepting the matter be allowed to progress to the courts.
The removal of threats if a new negotiated facilities agreement cannot be reached within 8 weeks.

There you are in one simple paragraph, 4 no-cost measures which BA can accept which could very well unlock the door and start the beginning of the end. There are obviously other areas of concern but if BA take the above steps that will prove they are looking to genuinely solve this dispute and, in my opinion BASSA would be able to enter meaningful talks with that aim.

Will BA comply?

My gut feeling is No, the ingrain hatred of all things BASSA has rendered them almost incapable. Ever since Day 1 they have been on the offensive. I remember well when Bill Francis and James Ferran arrived in Cabin Services, Lizanne and I, in an effort to start on a positive note, invited the pair out to dinner one Friday evening and booked a table. When they arrived (late) the first thing Bill Francis said was “you can have two hours”. “Oh Dear” I thought, hardly the way to start an evening or lay a foundation on which good relationships could be established. When it soon became obvious, over our 2 hours together, that our waiter knew more about the job of cabin crew than James Ferran, it became obvious that BA were hell bent on pursuing Columbus and destruction of most of the corner stones of our agreement and were putting the people in place to achieve it. There has to be a basic philosophy change from where BA management were then and still are now. Perhaps it is impossible unless we have a change of leadership from their side. Perhaps the trenches have been dug too deep. They of course will say the same about us - we are famously dysfunctional, we can’t agree ever, we are militant Luddites etc etc. They may even believe it. However we have all been democratically elected, are (or in my case) have been crew ourselves for many years and you have continually given us a mandate to carry on doing what we are doing. As I see it they don’t have a mandate unless you count that of an Airbus captain who must forever more always remain nameless.

There I go, I hear BA management saying, “Holley, point scoring again - he can’t resist it”. Sorry it’s hard to keep anger out of all this - I have seen the hurt and despair the BA cabin crew work force are currently going through. I have seen and heard it in my own kitchen. I know crew literally too frightened to leave their rooms down route in case they get into a row with flight deck or VCC. I have heard of crew who won’t speak at their place of work for fear of being accused of bullying and harassment. I have spoken to crew who have been unfairly sacked for next to nothing who are making themselves ill and depressed. I hear of families being torn apart with divorces and life-long friendships broken never to be repaired. I see all around me the considerable stress and pain of a work force genuinely confused why a company who by and large were the best and most profitable should suddenly turn on the largest group of people who have put them there. And for what reason? Bigger profits - bigger bonuses. Yes there is anger, plenty of it - it has been nothing short of madness. But there has to be an end one day presumably, a solution and some steps back taken by both sides especially when it comes down to personal animosities. Are BA with Walsh at the helm big enough? Perhaps they just don’t want to?

I would urge BA to think seriously now, we are at another set of crossroads. Accept it is BASSA - alongside colleagues from AMICUS - who they simply have to do business with. They could start by facilitating reps to attend meetings, so bridges can start to be built or at least the bricks ordered. They could start by looking at my points above. BASSA are big enough to roll up sleeves in a serious effort to make peace but we are also equally prepared to carry on the fight if BA are not.

I'm a non-union member with no access to BASSA forum, the above was sent to me by email.

[essessdeedee]

Ottergirl

I think we are now officially at 'Deadlock'. Just like being on X-factor really.

Shall we let the viewers (customers) vote and the lowest number (bassa) thrown out?

Keep the faith

interesting choice of words, Ottergirl, particularly as the strikers say it to each other.

[bar none]

Throughout this thread the word `Striked` has been used. Is this a word ?
I thought that `Struck` would be more appropriate.
Who knows !

[ottergirl]

Caribbean Boy - your post

In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.

If BA have the right to reject any recommendation by the arbitrator, and they only commit to giving it fair consideration, then it's not worth the paper it's written on. It is still the legal right of the dismissed to test the verdict at Industrial tribunal and it remains part of their contract with Unite that the union should fund that challenge.

essessdeedee

Sorry if that is the case, it's a very common phrase that my kids use all the time so I had no idea it belonged to the Bassa faithful.

Tiramisu

I know crew literally too frightened to leave their rooms down route in case they get into a row with flight deck or VCC. I have heard of crew who won’t speak at their place of work for fear of being accused of bullying and harassment.

Thats a funny bit! They could always try being civil then they could go out like everyone else!

[Betty girl]

Can DH not see that he had all 4 of his conditions before he went on strike. Dose he not realise the irony of what he writes.

He seems perfectly happy with the actual offer now and it is more or less the same as it was before he took his members out on strike.
So why on earth did he do it and cause our company and employer to loose so much money?

Please one of you more sensible reps, call a meeting and ask him to stand down. He has lost the plot.

[Betty girl]

bar none,

In the UK we tend to say striked not struck, no idea if it is correct or not but it is common practice in the UK.

[Caribbean Boy]

ottergirl,

There is a difference between an arbitrator and an arbitrator's decision.

And the arbitrator's decision is binding.

[Hot Wings]

Ottergirl,
I've got lots of time for the wonderful crew of EF but no time for the many arrogant and condescending WW crew that I met during my time as a young 2-striper on the 744! Coming from another airline, my first few months in BA were a real eye-opener - and not in a good way!!! Unfortunately, too many crew have been all too happy to swallow BASSA's anti-pilot rubbish. How would you all feel if BALPA had published similar material?

[ottergirl]

British Airways is committed to giving full and fair consideration to any Acas recommendation arising from that review.

So why this? It doesn't say that they will follow the recommendation just that they will consider it.

Is it appropriate for Unite to give away someone elses rights to settle a dispute that they are no longer party to or have the werewithal to vote upon?

Hot Wings
I hope I would have the wisdom not to tar you all with the same brush especially as I know many of you personally and like many of you very much.

[spin_doctor]

What struck me most about DH's latest is that he even admits himself that they want to drag the negotiation on and on and on...

When asked a straight question "What will it take to end this?" he comes out with 4 points (which, as has already been mentioned, they had to start with). However far from being an answer to the actual question he then goes on to say:

There are obviously other areas of concern but if BA take the above steps that will prove they are looking to genuinely solve this dispute and, in my opinion BASSA would be able to enter meaningful talks with that aim

So his idea of 'ending' the dispute is for BA to concede the items BASSA want and which are all a direct result of the industrial action, in order that they can then start talking.

In effect he wants to wind the clock back to pre-strike, and start all over again. Of course it's far too important to trust anyone else with so he'd have to stay on as secretary...