BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[demomonkey]

I.A.T.U. Butler wrote:

The facts are that BA and a VCC army have not been able to destroy BASSA or the spirit of its members.

That maybe so, certainly for a hardcore of members. But if that's all your two years of industrial action has achieved it has been an expensive and high risk way to achieve this. What else has BASSA achieved?

My point is that BASSA's strategy is actually making BASSA and their members more and more marginal. If you vote for more IA then it only gives BA legitimacy for further increasing MF. Result: you lose. I have said this before but you have at some point got to ask who's side is DH really on? The position he has led you to now is really to the benefit of BA not BASSA members. Fair?

It's time to ditch BASSA's current leadership. They're strategy isn't securing the long term future or the best interests of the rank and file member. That is what really matters isn't it?

It's time to stand back, take a deep breath and re-evaluate the situation.

[Betty girl]

Unfortunately, some of you constantly want to give us all the spin, that BA is only looking to Mixed Fleet now.

This is not true at all. I have just come from Waterside where I have been in a meeting with some of our senior managers and they are totally committed to all our fleets. They were very optimistic about the future and are investing in our product and services, and this is across all fleets, WW, E/F and M/F.

It really serves no purpose for some of you to help Bassa in it's quest to have a, them and us situation. We are all crew and we were all new once and we all went through the same selection process. We are all one big team, with most of us working towards giving good customer service, it's just that some joined on WW or E/F and some are joining on Mixed Fleet.

The vast majority of us are getting on fine; and it really saddens me to see people who pertain to want an end to all this, stirring things up, all the time. You are lowering yourselves to Bassa's level!

I know these Bassa trolls are annoying and talk a load of twaddle but please don't use that as an excuse to tar us all with the same brush and make out that BA is only interested in Mixed Fleet. Mixed Fleet will only be 40% in 10 years so BA is looking to invest in and motivate all fleets, not just Mixed Fleet.

Some of you are in a Bassa bubble, both pro Bassa and anti Bassa. You spend all day reading their site, where only a very few post, and living and breathing each others spin. While the rest of us are just getting on with serving our customers and making our airline work.

[spin_doctor]

The facts are that BA and a VCC army have not been able to destroy BASSA or the spirit of its members

The facts are that BA and the 'VCC army' had no intention of destroying BASSA or the spirit of it's members. The only intention was to get the cabin crew to shoulder their fair share of the company wide cost-cutting. Nothing more.

[Wirbelsturm]

The legacy at BA as at Aer Lingus, is a company racked with industrial relations problems

Racked? Not really, only one, the one BASSA claim to be within a grasp of 'winning'. A somewhat optimistic view considering they are only gaining back what they lost two years ago and the company still has its cost savings in hand. Crawling back with its IA tail between its legs might be a better analogy.

as Aer Lingus pilots did not get involved in the cabin crew dispute there. In fact quite the opposite, they supported their cabin crew.

Up until the point where the CC Union agreed schedule and rostering changes to accomodate the companies requirement to cost cut. Then, when those rosters were published, threw their toys out of the pram and refused to operate them. Again, would the circumstances have been different and the requests of the company unfair then ALL other departments would have backed BASSA. The demands weren't unreasonable and BASSA were merely being asked to shoulder a fair proportion of the cost cutting. BASSA refused.

Now after spending a fortune flying in VCC's from around the world,

Surely this can't be true? After all the BASSA missives fail to mention all of the other departments who provided the majority of VCC candidates, many from the parent Unite union, and lays the blame for the failure of the action squarely at the door of the Flight Crew. They work at LHR so didn't need to be flown in did they?

hundreds of millions lost in forward bookings

Do you have the figures to support the 'hundreds of millions' claim? Though not. Oddly enough the 'possibility' of more 'crippling' action from BASSA over the Easter break had an immense impact on the forward bookings by not affecting them in the slightest.

BASSA members are ready to strike again if need be, but with the rather more emollient Mr Williams at the helm of BA, a settlement is withing grasp.

Odd that you use the word emollient, I would suggest that it is probably more pertinant that you consider the irritant to have gone away and are attributing a minor success to BASSA that Willie Walsh has been forced upward to take a more responsible role as Kieth Williams's boss. Obviously now as the CEO of the parent company he will have no influence whatsoever in the future proceedings! A settlement seems to involve only giving the petulant child their toys back but retaining the reason for the original, forgotten tantrum. BA will NOT re-instate crew numbers, BA will NOT remove/disband new fleet. BA and IFcE have no need of scape goats, they have achieved the departmental required rationalisation that will save the company millions into the future, a little lost now is of no consequence when the future looks good to the investors.

BASSA members might get their ST back but the original cost savings measures will, now, always be there. Two years of idiocy by BASSA to achieve nothing. Enjoy the victory.

[I.A.T.U. Butler]

Just to add that someone on this forum, probably Carnage Matey/Wibblystream, said in the later part of 2009, that at the first sign of industrial action..." all the cabin crew will be down at the doctor's practicing their coughs".

The expectation was that the strike would quickly be beaten.

Didn't quite work out like that, did it?

[Yellow Pen]

Why do all of the BASSA hardcore believe this rubbish?

Because they have to believe something so that they can convince themselves they've won the dispute. You'll notice how the reason for the dispute was originally 'imposition'. Now that it's clear the imposition will stand the reason has been massaged into 'union busting' so that BASSA can claim that they are still in existence and have beaten BA. Never mind that they are still working one down and Mixed Fleet are growing every month, as long as BASSA are in existence (and largely ignored by BA) they'll paint it as a victory. It was never about union busting, it was about getting the required savings and BA have achieved that in spades.

PS. The strike was quickly beaten: twice in court and then over the 22 days of actual industrial action. Flogging the same dead horse repeatedly doesn't make it a victory for BASSA. BA have already got all they wanted.

[MrBernoulli]

The expectation was that the strike would quickly be beaten

And it was! Quickly contained, neutralised, and now utterly ineffective.

BASSA members are ready to strike again if need be, ...

There will be no more strikes from BASSA on this issue. Simple. It ain't going to happen.

[Wirbelsturm]

Just to add that someone on this forum, probably Carnage Matey/Wibblystream, said in the later part of 2009, that at the first sign of industrial action..." all the cabin crew will be down at the doctor's practicing their coughs".

The expectation was that the strike would quickly be beaten.

Didn't quite work out like that, did it?

Because BA have achieved what they set out to achieve, fair cost savings from all departments. Usual BASSA tactic of grab a quote, attach it to someone with a reasoned argument and twist their name!

The ability of BASSA to utilise its one and only weapon, the strike, has, effectively, been neutered. BASSA can ballot until the cows come home but the likelyhood of more actual action is very, very low. A Union with no ability? How useful.

To quote a crew member overheard on the bus after a trip, back when Duncan was playing on his bouncy castle at Bedfont, 'I voted for IA, I've got a day off tomorrow so I'll go down to Bedfont to show my support'

With that level of support and commitment BASSA are powerless.

Enjoy your self attached 'victory', as usual BASSA hardliners are the only ones who see it that way. More positive spin than Alistair Campbell.

[I.A.T.U. Butler]

I think some of the posts here demonstrate a worrying form of early Alzheimers, even prosody, or just a simple a re -writing of history.

The level of support and commitment over 22 days of strike action showed that BASSA and its members stood up to a tyrannical CEO who ruthlessly attempted to bust the union. It has taken Walsh so long with his failed strategy, he has had to move on to another job!! What a success. He could at least have had the courtesy to clean up his own mess.

And since the appointment of Keith Williams, in a move Vladimir Putin would no doubt empathise with, there does at least appear to be a chance of peace. For instance, Walsh refused to meet or negotiate with any of the BASSA committee, a decision now reversed by Keith Willaims.

Many posters here have been wrong about the resolve of the cabin crew to get a fair and honourable settlement. Some here are so desperate at point scoring, they even bring up BA's successful injuncting of ballots, but then fail to mention the one that was overturned on appeal. Thanks to BA's perverse use of the legal system to utilise tiny indiscretions in the balloting process to void a democratic ballot, the RMT have now had a judgement where that avenue has now been closed to the likes of BA and London Transport. But of course, BA pilots fail to mention how their OpenSkies action was injuncted by BA, when they were using QC John Hendy, the same legal team as BASSA. Remember how you bottled out of that action guys?

There is a strike mandate by the way, up there like an albatross, as some of you appear to have forgotten. If the talks fail, the strike goes ahead and most of you on this thread can eat your words again.

However after a period of intelligent and successful negotiations, I am anticipating an elegant resolution to this dispute.

[Wirbelsturm]

The level of 'support' is irrelevant, the strike mandate is irrelevant. Bassa have failed to achieve anything apart to a return to the status quo after the initial imposition. Unite won't call more action and they will advise BASSA against it. If BASSA and their lunatic secretary go ahead then it will have no impact whatsoever!

Delude yourselves as much as you like, BASSA is a toothless dog now so negotiation is the only way forward if BASSA want to salvage anything from this.

[Juan Tugoh]

I think some of the posts here demonstrate a worrying form of early Alzheimers or at least a re -writing of history

Sadly not the least of which are your own. For example you say

BA pilots fail to mention how their OpenSkies action was injuncted by BA

The truth is that BA never took out an injunction preventing BALPA from striking over OpenSkies, indeed it was BALPA itself that took legal advice and decided that it would not strike. The legal issue has not gone away, the principle of Companies Rights having more weight than an individuals Human Rights will come to the ECHRs at some stage, BALPA did not have deep enough pockets to persue it. Unlike BASSA they were not willing to place their members in a position where they could be dismissed or become financially liable.

It has taken Walsh so long with his failed strategy, he has had to move on to another job!!

Spin this any way you want, Walsh got promoted, he is KWs boss and if he decided to take an interest could dictate how BA proceed. The fact that BA have the cost savings they needed and far far more means that he does not have to micro manage this situation. Furthermore the demonisation of WW as a tyrant weakens the argument, he is a business man and he dealt successfully and well with all the unions bar BASSA, strange that for a union buster, this argument is a typical toddlers argument; "everyone else is wrong other than me."

There is a strike mandate by the way, up there like an albatross, as some of you appear to have forgotten. If the talks fail, the strike goes ahead and most of you on this thread can eat your words again.

I don't think that there are any that have forgotten that there is a strike mandate still extant, indeed the only reason it is still out there is because BA granted an extension to the mandate. Many would rather that they hadn't, many would rather have seen whether UNITE allowed BASSA to strike again. Incidently you have failed to answer my question. What will another strike achieve that 22 days of striking has so far failed to achieve? Can you answer that? Is the answer too painful to contemplate?

I would happily see BASSA strike and suffer the consequences, they need to lose and know that they have lost. They have already lost they just cannot accept it yet . This is now all about trying to get back to what they had before the first strike, the principle of imposition still stands, MF are here and nothing, I repeat NOTHING that BASSA went on strike for originally will be returned.

Faith is believe in the absence of facts and evidence. Keep the Faith, it is all you have left.

[Abbey Road]

It has taken Walsh so long with his failed strategy, he has had to move on to another job!!

It has obviously escaped your attention, DH, that the IAG set-up was in action before the industrial action occurred, and WW was in line for top job then. Your wibble-speak might work over on the BASSA forum - it doesn't cut the mustard here.

Another strike? Not likely at all. BASSA 'Yes' voters don't have the courage of their supposed convictions.

[Yellow Pen]

Thanks to BA's perverse use of the legal system to utilise tiny indiscretions in the balloting process to void a democratic ballot,

What, like sending out 1000 more ballot papers than you had members? I agree, it's a fricking disgrace. What kind of dictatorship isn't allowed to stuff the ballot boxes? Shame on the law!

[TightSlot]

However after a period of intelligent and successful negotiations, I am anticipating an elegant resolution to this dispute.

As are we all.

Just to remind you all - When a post is made in a provocative style, it is not mandatory for you to respond in kind, or indeed, at all.

Think before you post

[L337]

The legacy of this dispute will be BA analysing those departments who were able to supply VCC's and yet still managed to perform and make their targets. Clearly the airline is still grossly overstaffed on the ground, and I trust BA will wield the axe and cut all of those unnecessary jobs that are burdening its profits.

You know as well as I do that all departments worked harder and longer hours to cover those people working as VCC.

[Yellow Pen]

Putting forward hypothetical positions without any evidence of proof, is rife in the anti-BASSA sentiment on this thread.

What, like claiming its a union-busting exercise? Or claiming that Willie has had to move on because he failed in his management of the dispute?

I am not going to trade insult with JT or others here, I like dealing in facts.

And yet you've failed to produce many of these so-called facts. You can't even get the BALPA Open Skies dispute right, despite it all being public domain.

And the fact is that in resolving a dispute as bitter as that which BA has emabraked on with its cabin crew, it is important that a resolution is found that cannot be dissected into a simple polarisation of who won or who lost.

I would say BASSA embarked on the dispute in anticipation of BA rolling over. It didn't happen and they've been floundering since, seeking to pin the blame on Walsh, pilots, VCC, scabs, bent judges and anyone else they can lash out at. The fact remains that after more than two years of dispute you are worse off than you were before. That is a fact.

In this dispute there are no winners; it has been costly for both sides. It was a war of attrition and like any war that is unable to succeed with a knockout punch, eventually both sides have to sue for peace.

Blimey, it seems reality has started to dawn on you. There may be no winners, but BA have secured circa £25M savings per year on an ongoing basis.

The principle of imposition does not stand, as that is exactly what UNITE want to establish, so that employers do not emulate BA's disastrous example.

It does stand. The court agreed with it. Unite have not overturned. BA have imposed and gotten away with it. Unless you've seen the extra purser position return and the CSD back in their office.

Remember other large companies who were facing industrial action in 2009 like British Gas, the AA and BT were able to successfully resolve their differences through negotiations.

As did BA, with every single other employee group.

Only BA decided to take a macho line employing union busting tactics and were widely condemned by over 100 academics.

Evidence of the union-busting techniques please? BA took a hard line after over 12 months of negotiation, during which BASSA adopted a 'no negotiation' stance.

The Royal Mail was suffering from a similar management style as BA until its CEO Adam Crozier left for ITN. Only after his departure was the dispute quickly resolved. The same will be the case at BA hopefully.

Hmmm, parallels. Two companies that have been owned by the state, who are failing to keep up with more fleet-footed competitors and in whom some employees simply cannot accept the fact they are no longer a monopoly and have to adapt.

And that is what is at the root of BA's dispute, and the reason why an industrial psychologist has been employed to navigate a path to resolve matters. It became personal and the personality of one man in particular, made it impossible to end the dispute.

Exactly. By jove you've got it. That man is Duncan Holley.

It was always going to be a difficult dispute for BA's cabin crew who have a job that most people clearly covet. It is notable that most VCC's have not queued up to join the Mixed Fleet. Why not?

Because they have perfectly good jobs elsewhere in BA and are not wannabe cabin crew. They are there to help BA through a difficult industrial time.

So just to remind those who say we have lost, you have weakened trade unionism through getting involved in another departments dispute.

Nope. There are no negative consequences to trade unionisn at all. The law has not changed. BASSAs stupidity in being unable to to operate within the law has no implications for other more competently run unions.

It was none of your business anymore than cabin crew criticising the actions of pilots, had they gone on strike over OpenSkies. You cannot run with the fox and the hounds.

When cabin crew said they'd strike til BA went bust it became all of our business. When you threaten the livelihoods of other employees don't expect them to stand by and ignore it.

The legacy of this dispute will be BA analysing those departments who were able to supply VCC's and yet still managed to perform and make their targets. Clearly the airline is still grossly overstaffed on the ground, and I trust BA will wield the axe and cut all of those unnecessary jobs that are burdening its profits.

Those departments were analysed repeatedly before the axe even came close to your department. I doubt they've got much to fear.

[fruitbat]

Be careful what you wish for Butler. Imposition purely met IFCE's cost saving target for the 2009 cuts. Every other department made their target then.

If there is a new round of cuts, which there surely will be, all departments will have new targets. So IFCE will be asked to make yet more cuts along with everyone else.

[Ops_Room_Junkie]

As with my very young children, there comes a time when you have to call time out in a debate that is too complex for them to comprehend. It is good to debate but sometimes young children are unable to remember their original stance and the lies they previously told. When they do this you find you are suddenly trying to debate an issue that has changed from its original topic.

At this point, I have to advise my children that the debate is over.
Don't feed these trolls anymore, it is a waste of your breath. BASSA, like my children, now need to go and watch the TV or play with their toys (if they can find them after they threw them out of their pram) whilst the grown ups actually go about the difficult decisions of sorting the household budget.

All of us outside BASSA (who now change their original position as it can maybe save them face and make them look macho) know this was about cost savings and not union busting. HOWEVER, we all also know there was a single union in BA that needed to understand IT does NOT run BA's business. They are their to represent their staff and try and negotiate their terms and conditions but NOT to dictate to the Management Team, CEO and other departments how BA should be run and what our brand may be allowed to be. However, due to their intransigence and reluctance to accept any meaningful and long term changes to their jobs (which are at the forefront of our brand) without being paid extra money and given more staff (both which increase costs on top of the capital required to invest in the brand initially). They needed to change their attitude, otherwise this saga will run and run and every time BA wants to change even the most minor part of their on board product, they are disabled by having to go cap-in-hand to the BASSA reps first (not the crew, they get no choice. They are dictated to by those with the most and the most to loose).

How then can anyone inside the BASSA bubble think for even a single moment that this does not affect EVERY employee of BA is beyond contempt. Would you expect me to stand by idly doing nothing if a group of louts starting attacking my family? To say well, they not attacking me are they, it's not my fight. Of course it is, if some group attack something you care about, know about, wish to succeed and have a vested financial and emotional interest in, of course its your business. To suggest otherwise makes me angrier than ANY of ALL the other BASSA stories - and there are a lot to choose from!

BA are my family, I love working for BA. I want BA to succeed, I want to continue doing what I do but also knowing that to do so I will have to compromise on things as the business changes. The same choice put to crew but they refused to accept this, we have all taken the pain but do so as we are looking towards the longer game and not reacting to scare tactics put out by a union to gain support and continue it's subs/profits rolling in.

You have achieved nothing but pain and suffering for your members, other BA employees (who have every right to disagree with your lies and tactics) BA shareholders, BA customers. If you are lucky you may get back what you had when you started this nonsense, and by doing so claim you have won.
Idiocy!

You continue to put the blame at a CEO that had a job to do and a job that frankly one that many of us wished previous CEO’s had done years ago and that was simply to take back control of the business. To let it be run by the management team for the shareholder, the customer and the whole staff group. Not run by BASSA reps for the benefit of WW CSD’s.

There are many thousands of BA staff and not just the 5000 BASSA members that have say in this.

This was always about cost savings and putting BA in control of running it’s own business and being able to make changes as the world markets change so we can keep up with other airlines. If BASSA had been a progressive union that work with, rather than against, the company then union busting would never have been needed. BA got their cost savings and lets all pray they have killed this 70’s union off in the process!

[Lord Daddy Flash]

Ops Room Junkie.

Bravo, magnificent post

Anyone seen any accounts yet??

LDF

[MrBernoulli]

Anyone seen any accounts yet??

Nope, because there haven't been any BASSA accounts, as required by law, for many years! And DH knows that! Rather than this industrial dispute, accounts is an area that, I believe, will finally see him come crunching down to earth.