BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)
Duncan's latest piece of drivel, from yesterday, is clearly the work of a disturbed person:
Eh? BASSA's inability to keep even a vaguely correct membership list is down to BA's dirty tricks? Have BA infiltrated BASSA's membership department? Mad, just barking mad ...
'We', DH? What is with this 'we' stuff? 'You' have been fired, as have several of your ilk, for some pretty nasty and tasteless behaviour. The use of 'we' rings a pretty hollow sound.
Ah, the use of ballots and strikes has had a negligible effect so far, and will have even less effect in the future. That much is obvious. As for the threat of strikes - purrleese!!!!
A higher percentage of an ever shrinking minority group? Lies, damn lies and statistics, but DH is sooooo proud of his little percentages. 70-something % of not-a-lot is still ... not-a-lot!
Even more items? There haven't been any items on the ballot papers so far. But perhaps there is a desperate attempt to now try and find a reason, any made-up bloody reason as an excuse for a ballot. However, no attempt is made to get away from the previous ballot 'reasons', and therefore all industrial action is related to the previous ballots which means ... unprotected! Children playing with fire, skating on thin ice, walking the tightrope, etc etc etc. Futile, infantile nosnsense.
flybymerchant, you have hit a nail on the head there! DH has indeed shown his colours as a "no-good, leeching fraudster", and there are many like him still amongst the cabin crew community (Note - I didn't say all cabin crew, but unfortunately there are a couple of thousand like DH in BA
). Why don't they all just leave BA and go and suck somebody elses's life-blood? 
... confirming that our current ballot has had to be cancelled due to BA’s leadership’s preference for yet more “dirty tricks” style tactics ...
... a message simply saying that despite all their bullying, threats and punishments, we as crew are all still here and our spirit will not be broken.
You no longer need actual strikes to pressure the company - ballots can have the same effect, since they carry the threat of strikes.
We simply need to have good, strong ballot results every time, the higher the percentage the better, to keep this pressure on.
.... Oh, and by the way, this time it [the ballot] will have even more items on it. We will of course need to cover yet more breaches of our agreements that have taken place; they may have thought they had gotten away with those, but they haven’t.
flybymerchant, you have hit a nail on the head there! DH has indeed shown his colours as a "no-good, leeching fraudster", and there are many like him still amongst the cabin crew community (Note - I didn't say all cabin crew, but unfortunately there are a couple of thousand like DH in BA
). Why don't they all just leave BA and go and suck somebody elses's life-blood?
On these forums, on the 8th February, BASSAwitch asked about BASSA accounts, and indicated she was questioning BASSA about the subject. I hope she has familiarised herself with the appropriate part of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992, available here Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992
Chapter III deals with Trade union administration and these are the sections applicable:
Anyone wishing to enquire about BASSA's accounts should read this:
If BASSA cannot find, or will not allow you access, you may move to Section 31 for remedy, i.e. apply to the courts for access. Section 31 (1) states that "A person who claims that a trade union has failed in any respect to comply with a request made by him under section 30 may apply to the court [F15or to the Certification Officer]."
I suspect BASSA has an awful lot to hide, financially and otherwise, hence this recent flurry of activity to register BASSA Ltd, and apparently only now legalise it's (future) accounting. I am willing to bet that BASSA has not kept valid accounting records for many years, and therefore cannot supply them to anyone who asks, including it's members who have a right to ask to examine them. Not only that, but other members of Unite also have that right - see last sentence of 30 (1) !!!
BASSA is desperately worried that it's shady practises are going to be exposed by a flood of requests to see it's accounts. Those practises included the money that has 'slushed' around it's committee members. BASSA and ex-BASSA members need to be asking some very pointed questions of where the millions have gone - BASSA must by law account for every penny ...... and they cannot! Are BASSA and ex-BASSA members happy to have been ripped off and robbed blind over all these years? If not, do something about it - it's fraud!
Don't be fobbed off grubby one-page bits of paper - you're entitled to see full and legal accounts!
Chapter III deals with Trade union administration and these are the sections applicable:
Accounting records
28. Duty to keep accounting records.
29. Duty to keep records available for inspection.
30. Right of access to accounting records.
31. Remedy for failure to comply with request for access.
[Interestingly, Chapter III also has a very clear requirement that "A trade union shall compile and maintain a register of the names and addresses of its members, and shall secure, so far as is reasonably practicable, that the entries in the register are accurate and are kept up-to-date", but we will leave that laugh for another time.]Anyone wishing to enquire about BASSA's accounts should read this:
30 Right of access to accounting records.
(1)A member of a trade union has a right to request access to any accounting records of the union which are available for inspection and relate to periods including a time when he was a member of the union.
In the case of records relating to a branch or section of the union, it is immaterial whether he was a member of that branch or section.
(2)Where such access is requested the union shall—
(a)make arrangements with the member for him to be allowed to inspect the records requested before the end of the period of twenty-eight days beginning with the day the request was made,
(b)allow him and any accountant accompanying him for the purpose to inspect the records at the time and place arranged, and
(c)secure that at the time of the inspection he is allowed to take, or is supplied with, any copies of, or of extracts from, records inspected by him which he requires.
(3)The inspection shall be at a reasonable hour and at the place where the records are normally kept, unless the parties to the arrangements agree otherwise.(4)An “accountant” means a person who is eligible for appointment as a [F14statutory auditor under Part 42 of the Companies Act 2006].
(5)The union need not allow the member to be accompanied by an accountant if the accountant fails to enter into such agreement as the union may reasonably require for protecting the confidentiality of the records.
(6)Where a member who makes a request for access to a union’s accounting records is informed by the union, before any arrangements are made in pursuance of the request—
(a)of the union’s intention to charge for allowing him to inspect the records to which the request relates, for allowing him to take copies of, or extracts from, those records or for supplying any such copies, and
(b)of the principles in accordance with which its charges will be determined,
then, where the union complies with the request, he is liable to pay the union on demand such amount, not exceeding the reasonable administrative expenses incurred by the union in complying with the request, as is determined in accordance with those principles.
(7)In this section “member”, in relation to a trade union consisting wholly or partly of, or of representatives of, constituent or affiliated organisations, includes a member of any of the constituent or affiliated organisations.
So, from 30 (1) it is plain to see that you have a "right to request access to any accounting records of the union which are available for inspection and relate to periods including a time when he was a member of the union". You may have since left Unite and/or BASSA but you can ask for accounting records from when you were a member!If BASSA cannot find, or will not allow you access, you may move to Section 31 for remedy, i.e. apply to the courts for access. Section 31 (1) states that "A person who claims that a trade union has failed in any respect to comply with a request made by him under section 30 may apply to the court [F15or to the Certification Officer]."
I suspect BASSA has an awful lot to hide, financially and otherwise, hence this recent flurry of activity to register BASSA Ltd, and apparently only now legalise it's (future) accounting. I am willing to bet that BASSA has not kept valid accounting records for many years, and therefore cannot supply them to anyone who asks, including it's members who have a right to ask to examine them. Not only that, but other members of Unite also have that right - see last sentence of 30 (1) !!!
BASSA is desperately worried that it's shady practises are going to be exposed by a flood of requests to see it's accounts. Those practises included the money that has 'slushed' around it's committee members. BASSA and ex-BASSA members need to be asking some very pointed questions of where the millions have gone - BASSA must by law account for every penny ...... and they cannot! Are BASSA and ex-BASSA members happy to have been ripped off and robbed blind over all these years? If not, do something about it - it's fraud!
Don't be fobbed off grubby one-page bits of paper - you're entitled to see full and legal accounts!
I don't think there are too many Bassa members left posting on PPRuNe.
Entaxei,
The law does not make allowances for your hypothetical situation. It is 28 days max or nothing! It matters not what BASSA might claim to be doing - the law requires that at all times they must comply with the requirement to make those accounts available. Simple!
Ultimately, I think you might find BASSA attempting to throw what (few) historical accounting records it has in to a ramshackle building and setting fire to the lot, thus claiming "Oh, woe is us, we lost everything in a devastating fire!"
And all this manoeuvring over BASSA Ltd and anything similar - this needs careful examination by BASSA's members. What does BASSA's constitution or Rule Book demand? Surely it must inform all members, well in advance, before stuff like this takes place? BASSA has already exceeded it's powers over elections for it's committee, but no one has challenged this! How many other of it's own rules is the committee breaking? Plenty, I am willing to bet. Dishonest to the core!
The law does not make allowances for your hypothetical situation. It is 28 days max or nothing! It matters not what BASSA might claim to be doing - the law requires that at all times they must comply with the requirement to make those accounts available. Simple!
Ultimately, I think you might find BASSA attempting to throw what (few) historical accounting records it has in to a ramshackle building and setting fire to the lot, thus claiming "Oh, woe is us, we lost everything in a devastating fire!"
And all this manoeuvring over BASSA Ltd and anything similar - this needs careful examination by BASSA's members. What does BASSA's constitution or Rule Book demand? Surely it must inform all members, well in advance, before stuff like this takes place? BASSA has already exceeded it's powers over elections for it's committee, but no one has challenged this! How many other of it's own rules is the committee breaking? Plenty, I am willing to bet. Dishonest to the core!
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jungles of SW London
Age: 77
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxei makes a very good point, but even if the accounts were being transfered/transposed/ transport etc., does that not apply to the current accounts? Should not all previous accounts still be available under that part of Union legislation?
My personal view would be that the PCCC would be well advised to stay well clear of that particular bag of ferrets, as I predict there will be skin and fur everywhere when somebody does, eventually, get access.
Speaking of someone, it seems to me that, according to 30.1;
(My bold) ....... that even Litebulbs himself would be entitled to view any accounts that are available. 
Personally, I cannot abide institutional politics and I'm not good at 'intense' meetings, although I've attended a few, but it seems to me that there is now something a bit sinister about BASSA Ltd. Incompetence and even inadequacy in non governmental institutions can, in the final analysis, be overlooked or forgiven in semi volunteers, but financial inadequacy in any organisation must be guarded against at all cost. It seems to me that the more and longer the Branch prevaricate or delay, the more likely something not right with the state of Denmark will be found.
Roger.
My personal view would be that the PCCC would be well advised to stay well clear of that particular bag of ferrets, as I predict there will be skin and fur everywhere when somebody does, eventually, get access.
Speaking of someone, it seems to me that, according to 30.1;
(1)A member of a trade union has a right to request access to any accounting records of the union which are available for inspection and relate to periods including a time when he was a member of the union.
In the case of records relating to a branch or section of the union, it is immaterial whether he was a member of that branch or section.
In the case of records relating to a branch or section of the union, it is immaterial whether he was a member of that branch or section.
Personally, I cannot abide institutional politics and I'm not good at 'intense' meetings, although I've attended a few, but it seems to me that there is now something a bit sinister about BASSA Ltd. Incompetence and even inadequacy in non governmental institutions can, in the final analysis, be overlooked or forgiven in semi volunteers, but financial inadequacy in any organisation must be guarded against at all cost. It seems to me that the more and longer the Branch prevaricate or delay, the more likely something not right with the state of Denmark will be found.
Roger.
Last edited by Landroger; 14th Feb 2011 at 17:22. Reason: Mr. Bernouli has just said what I am saying with rather more force and conviction.
Landroger,
Not quite, I think. You must read 30 (1) in it's entirety. It begins with "A member of a trade union has a right ........". It has to be a member of BASSA or Unite. BASSA is a section of Unite, so someone wishing to see the accounts of BASSA only needs to be a Unite member, not necessarily a BASSA member. However, as has already been highlighted, a person who was previously a member of Unite or BASSA can ask to see accounts for the period that they were members.
More interesting details from this TULCRA link futher up the thread shows that a union must provide, to the Certification Officer, an Annual Return (Section 32 - Annual Return) that includes this:
and
Section 32A requires that the union also provide the full details of that annual return, within 8 weeks of it being sent to the Certification Officer, to all of it's members! So all members must be informed, as shown in Section 32A (3) (d), of the details of
Not quite, I think. You must read 30 (1) in it's entirety. It begins with "A member of a trade union has a right ........". It has to be a member of BASSA or Unite. BASSA is a section of Unite, so someone wishing to see the accounts of BASSA only needs to be a Unite member, not necessarily a BASSA member. However, as has already been highlighted, a person who was previously a member of Unite or BASSA can ask to see accounts for the period that they were members.
More interesting details from this TULCRA link futher up the thread shows that a union must provide, to the Certification Officer, an Annual Return (Section 32 - Annual Return) that includes this:
(aa)details of the salary paid to and other benefits provided to or in respect of—
(i)each member of the executive,
(ii)the president, and
iii)the general secretary,
by the trade union during the period to which the return relates,
(ii)the president, and
iii)the general secretary,
(c)a copy of the rules of the trade union as in force at the end of the period to which the return relates
the salary paid to and other benefits provided to or in respect of—
(i)each member of the executive,
(ii)the president, and
(iii)the general secretary
(ii)the president, and
(iii)the general secretary
That means that all BASSA or former BASSA members must have had access to DH's BASSA salary, allowances and benefits (preferable rate mortgage or preferable rate loans?). If not, why not? 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: france
Age: 62
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA's murky accounts
I've just come on to post about BASSA's books but you guys have stolen my thunder!
I wrote to Unite and they've written back but fobbed me off with "we're too busy" and come back to us at a more convenient time when we're not in a dispute. I'll scan the letter and post it on here (is that legal?) Maybe I should write to the branch secretary as surely a "secretary" would by definition keep accounts.
I smell a big fat rat here. If we all write to them they can't ignore the requests. I've just read above that they have to show me the books within 28 days so I'm going to write back with that little gem and see what they say! Is it illegal if they deny me this right?
Also can anyone help with this. I want to write to them about their forum where the mod has posted something that is blatantly untrue. Someone said I should do a "who is" search on their website so when I type in "bassa.co.uk" into this domain search utility it comes up with a "registrant's address". Now assuming this is public information do I write to that address and if so who is it that I'm writing to? Thanks in advance to any computer geek that can help.
I wrote to Unite and they've written back but fobbed me off with "we're too busy" and come back to us at a more convenient time when we're not in a dispute. I'll scan the letter and post it on here (is that legal?) Maybe I should write to the branch secretary as surely a "secretary" would by definition keep accounts.
I smell a big fat rat here. If we all write to them they can't ignore the requests. I've just read above that they have to show me the books within 28 days so I'm going to write back with that little gem and see what they say! Is it illegal if they deny me this right?
Also can anyone help with this. I want to write to them about their forum where the mod has posted something that is blatantly untrue. Someone said I should do a "who is" search on their website so when I type in "bassa.co.uk" into this domain search utility it comes up with a "registrant's address". Now assuming this is public information do I write to that address and if so who is it that I'm writing to? Thanks in advance to any computer geek that can help.
BASSAwitch,
If they try and fob you off then Section 31 (Remedy for failure to comply with request for access) applies. The law does not allow for them being too busy - they are required to provide access within 28 days - period. Quote the legislation, Section 30, and then remind them of what Section 31 contains. See what response you get from that. The more who do it the better. If they have any common sense, they will consult their lawyers, who will smile and take their (your?) money, and remind them of their responsibilities under the law!
Not so much illegal, but they open themselves up to action under the law if they do not give you access.
This will provide them with a serious problem, because I don't believe that they have prepared any valid accounts or annual returns for some time. They are knowingly in deep poo. Big time!
If they try and fob you off then Section 31 (Remedy for failure to comply with request for access) applies. The law does not allow for them being too busy - they are required to provide access within 28 days - period. Quote the legislation, Section 30, and then remind them of what Section 31 contains. See what response you get from that. The more who do it the better. If they have any common sense, they will consult their lawyers, who will smile and take their (your?) money, and remind them of their responsibilities under the law!
Is it illegal if they deny me this right?
This will provide them with a serious problem, because I don't believe that they have prepared any valid accounts or annual returns for some time. They are knowingly in deep poo. Big time!
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really am hoping my comrades
at Bassa have their house in order, if only to come back on 'ere and end the speculation of members, ex members, pilots, ground staff, airline staff (me) and managers that contribute to this thread.
If they can't, then they deserve whatever the law deems fit.
at Bassa have their house in order, if only to come back on 'ere and end the speculation of members, ex members, pilots, ground staff, airline staff (me) and managers that contribute to this thread.If they can't, then they deserve whatever the law deems fit.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: france
Age: 62
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Internet privacy?
Am I right in thinking that anything that's on the internet is public?
I ask because Google shows the address used to register the BASSA website can also be found on the Winchester City Council planning applications website.
Sounds expensive. 
Interestingly a lot of the planning application was around about the time of the strikes.
I know where my letter of complaint is going now.
I ask because Google shows the address used to register the BASSA website can also be found on the Winchester City Council planning applications website.
Raise roof of garage to create games guest room, convert ground floor to gym and store.
Interestingly a lot of the planning application was around about the time of the strikes.I know where my letter of complaint is going now.
I'll happily admit that I am not an expert in these fields, but it shows what can be achieved if you just do some homework, however small.
BASSA has relied upon it's members being of the 'can't be bothered' or 'doesn't interest me' brigade. Whether you like it or not, that seems to be mostly what they have got as a membership, and it has resulted in the BASSA committee and their cohorts taking advantage, and fibbing and scheming their way through it all. All for little else than the personal advantage of a very select few, but at the expense of many, including BA staff that have absolutely nothing to do with BASSA!
With a disinterested attitude, BASSA members have absolutely no right to expect a safe haven from retaliation by BA in this industrial dispute. All that has gone on is deserved by BASSA members, I'm afraid. If you want to play big boys 'games', you had better have done your homework. Excuses such as 'I never knew' or 'I didn't think it was important' just don't cut it as union members. Unfortunately, you allowed yourselves to be played for fools.
Industrial action is big stuff, and you have deservedly got hammered. I feel sure that there is more hammering to come. Because you didn't do your homework! The committee are idiots, and members didn't ask searching questions, allowing the committee to get away with figurative murder.
Now that some have sensibly walked away from BASSA, or those still within BASSA are finally, belatedly asking questions, you only have to do a little homework, and BASSA are quickly shown for the shallow, fibbing, conniving tripe that they are. If you want closure, deal with the problem - the BASSA committee!
BASSA has relied upon it's members being of the 'can't be bothered' or 'doesn't interest me' brigade. Whether you like it or not, that seems to be mostly what they have got as a membership, and it has resulted in the BASSA committee and their cohorts taking advantage, and fibbing and scheming their way through it all. All for little else than the personal advantage of a very select few, but at the expense of many, including BA staff that have absolutely nothing to do with BASSA!
With a disinterested attitude, BASSA members have absolutely no right to expect a safe haven from retaliation by BA in this industrial dispute. All that has gone on is deserved by BASSA members, I'm afraid. If you want to play big boys 'games', you had better have done your homework. Excuses such as 'I never knew' or 'I didn't think it was important' just don't cut it as union members. Unfortunately, you allowed yourselves to be played for fools.
Industrial action is big stuff, and you have deservedly got hammered. I feel sure that there is more hammering to come. Because you didn't do your homework! The committee are idiots, and members didn't ask searching questions, allowing the committee to get away with figurative murder.
Now that some have sensibly walked away from BASSA, or those still within BASSA are finally, belatedly asking questions, you only have to do a little homework, and BASSA are quickly shown for the shallow, fibbing, conniving tripe that they are. If you want closure, deal with the problem - the BASSA committee!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The accounts for any trade union are a matter of public interest, and can therefore be viewed on the Certification Office website. The most recent accounts for Unite, 2009, can be found Certification Officer - Existing Trade Unions
From my very brief scan there are several interesting things:
DH is NOT mentioned in the expenses list, even though some NIL claimants are. Why not?
LM only claimed 224, a lot less than other BASSA reps on the list, lower down the pecking scale. Why?
Fund 5, branch fund refers to BAeSSA. Presumably now known as BASSA?
So, am I right in thinking approx 7.2 million from BASSA in 2009?
Where o where has it gone? Someone with an accounting mind please decifer and regurgitate for us trolley-guys and -dolls please!
Wonder when 2010 accounts will be finalised?
From my very brief scan there are several interesting things:
DH is NOT mentioned in the expenses list, even though some NIL claimants are. Why not?
LM only claimed 224, a lot less than other BASSA reps on the list, lower down the pecking scale. Why?
Fund 5, branch fund refers to BAeSSA. Presumably now known as BASSA?
So, am I right in thinking approx 7.2 million from BASSA in 2009?
Where o where has it gone? Someone with an accounting mind please decifer and regurgitate for us trolley-guys and -dolls please!
Wonder when 2010 accounts will be finalised?
Last edited by HiFlyer14; 14th Feb 2011 at 23:34.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Wiltshire, UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a thought - might BAeSSA refer to a branch at British Aerospace?
Everything needs to be gone through with a fine toothed comb and those responsible for witholding or massaging the figures should be brought to book, lol. That should sort them out, to be discredited totally in the public forum.
Everything needs to be gone through with a fine toothed comb and those responsible for witholding or massaging the figures should be brought to book, lol. That should sort them out, to be discredited totally in the public forum.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: france
Age: 62
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More dirty tricks indeed
Well, it would appear that I've stirred a hornet's nest here. The regime are on to me and my inconvenient questions seem to have come to Dear Leader's attention. I hope I don't get named and shamed and bannished to the civilised world for my treachery. I'm just waiting for his forum post accusing me of working for the "union busters"....zzzzzzzzzzz
So while I reluctantly take on this whistleblower's roll what else can we find out? From the certification officer's website the last Unite accounts here show that BASSA officers have indeed taken very little from Unite's Executive Account Expense's which state;
With such low claims the BASSA officers either do very little work for the executive council or have an income stream elsewhere from the branch itself;
The accounts don't show these as itemised amounts. So with the BASSA chair living in LA who funds her flights back to the UK for "union business"? Does BA pay for her flights or does the branch? How about all the conferences and delegations they go on- where is the money for that? Bedfont Fun Park, bouncy castles, face painting for the kids- where's the funding coming from?Do reps ever need to stay in hotels, buy lunch/dinner etc?
Without verifiable facts I'm not for one minute suggesting that anything improper is going on but I'm suspicious with what I'm uncovering. By their estimates (pre-IA) BASSA had around 10,000 members each contributing £15 per month. That's an income of £150k per month or £1.8 million a year. I don't think it's healthy for the branch secretary to have such free reign with so much money nor do I think it's a good idea for the rest of the committee to be on his payroll- which is what this amounts to.
Basic union politics have always been to get people on your payroll so they start to think like you do- interests are then aligned, so who would want to stop the gravy train? Mugabe, Gaddafi, Mubarrak, Ben Ali, Sadaam Hussein used similar tactics to ensure survival and continued "groupthink". Not that I'm comparing the BASSA branch to these despots but I'm alarmed that the whole BASSA rep community is allowing this dispute to go on.
Unite don't seem to be overseeing these going ons either. I hope my suspicions are proved unfounded, I really do.
HiFlyer14 the footnotes on page 24 of their accounts say that "BAeSSA Staff Association" transferred to AEEU on 30th Sept 2000. AEEU appears to be the "Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union" who have a presence at BAe Systems (previously British Aerospace) so I don't think it's anything to do with BASSA2000 at BA.
And £3m to the Labour party and £3.7m to the TUC seems to be more member's money poorly spent.
I'm beginning to see how a Liverpool dock worker has got to the top.
I'm just waiting for his forum post accusing me of working for the "union busters"....zzzzzzzzzzzSo while I reluctantly take on this whistleblower's roll what else can we find out? From the certification officer's website the last Unite accounts here show that BASSA officers have indeed taken very little from Unite's Executive Account Expense's which state;
Members of the Joint Executive Council are reimbursed for any expenditure incurred by them in the performance of their duties on behalf of the Union. They are also reimbursed for the loss of earning whilst on Union business.
Certain members of the Joint Executive Council receive Delegation allowances and payments in their role as branch officers.
Without verifiable facts I'm not for one minute suggesting that anything improper is going on but I'm suspicious with what I'm uncovering. By their estimates (pre-IA) BASSA had around 10,000 members each contributing £15 per month. That's an income of £150k per month or £1.8 million a year. I don't think it's healthy for the branch secretary to have such free reign with so much money nor do I think it's a good idea for the rest of the committee to be on his payroll- which is what this amounts to.
Basic union politics have always been to get people on your payroll so they start to think like you do- interests are then aligned, so who would want to stop the gravy train? Mugabe, Gaddafi, Mubarrak, Ben Ali, Sadaam Hussein used similar tactics to ensure survival and continued "groupthink". Not that I'm comparing the BASSA branch to these despots but I'm alarmed that the whole BASSA rep community is allowing this dispute to go on.
Unite don't seem to be overseeing these going ons either. I hope my suspicions are proved unfounded, I really do.
HiFlyer14 the footnotes on page 24 of their accounts say that "BAeSSA Staff Association" transferred to AEEU on 30th Sept 2000. AEEU appears to be the "Amalgamated Engineering and Electrical Union" who have a presence at BAe Systems (previously British Aerospace) so I don't think it's anything to do with BASSA2000 at BA.
And £3m to the Labour party and £3.7m to the TUC seems to be more member's money poorly spent.
I'm beginning to see how a Liverpool dock worker has got to the top.
Last edited by BASSAwitch; 15th Feb 2011 at 08:20.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure there is nothing fishy going on and that all of the money paid in good faith by past and present BASSA members is all accounted for. I'm sure that the BASSA executive will put all of these unsavoury questions to bed by publishing the accounts in accordance with the rules.
Why wouldn't they if they have nothing to hide?
Why wouldn't they if they have nothing to hide?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Allegations
Great work BASSAwitch.
I'm sure the moderators are keeping a close eye, as well as DH & co, but just a quick reminder (which I'm sure you don't need, but in case others do)........be careful what you write!!!
If there has been foul play we need to be sure that it's the perpetrators that get punished, and not the whistleblowers.
I'm sure the moderators are keeping a close eye, as well as DH & co, but just a quick reminder (which I'm sure you don't need, but in case others do)........be careful what you write!!!
If there has been foul play we need to be sure that it's the perpetrators that get punished, and not the whistleblowers.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I understood it at the time of the Unite merger, the basic difference between the Amicus and TGWU branches was in the way they managed their funds. CC89 had to pay all their subs to AEEU/Amicus and then Amicus paid the bills. Bassa had always had autonomy over their own accounts and, apart from paying their tithes to Unite, TUC and some to the Labour party, were allowed to maintain this position after the merger. (Members can opt out of Labour party contributions) They were keen to maintain this right on the grounds that if they needed to hire an office on the Bath road, pay someone to manage the membership details(lol) or any other things rising from a dispute, then they could. They also pay every rep a daily rate for days not flying but I'm not sure how much that is. I imagine that their wage bill has gone through the roof if they are paying DH, NM and any others who are no longer on the BA payroll.
I'm suspecting that, unless one of the reps was an accountant in another life, the accounts are disorganised without necessarily being corrupt.
I'm suspecting that, unless one of the reps was an accountant in another life, the accounts are disorganised without necessarily being corrupt.
