Wirbelsturm

I dont think that the press would buy such things as "we offered them the savings but they didnt take them" line any more.

The press is well aware that BASSA has offered a TEMPORARY pay cut, and still wants crew numbers returned to their previous levels on some routes. Plainly daft.

Its almost as if the reps are unable to read, or,hear. I know they cant negotiate successfully!!

Andyismyname,

I quite agree, the problem is that given the abject lies spread over the last year by BASSA including those sent by e-mail and text are BASSA so sure?

The other problem is that all of the pro BASSA supporters have complained that they cannot survive a pay cut. As BA have not implemented any pay cut but BASSA have who exactly are BASSA representing?

Have any of you on here seen what they are proposing to BA yet?

Or are you all just guessing what the proposal is?

I have been searching all the press and cant find anything anywhere with any direct quotes - can one of you give me a link - many thanks

Just a thought,

Isn't inflation about 3.4% at the moment???

Maybe a pay freeze is being called a 3.4% pay cut using BASSA spin!!

Lightbulbs,

Either BASSA represent crew and speak on behalf of their membership or they do not.

Every statement made by them, through their representation is therefore the 'voice' of crew who are members of that union...if it isn't then what is the union representing?

If crew do not want to be associated with the ongoing farce that seems to be their representation, a leadership which seems to be unilaterally dictating new terms and conditions which have been ascertained through a show of hands at a racecourse, then they should leave and find more appropriate representation.

Wiggy
 

I cannot tell you what 10000 employees are saying. I can say that 7000+ agreed with a balloted position however.

Wibelsturm,

I can and it's as follows,

The judge was bought by BA on both cases.

Simon Calder who has written the odd article in the Highlife, works for BA.

The BBC because they gave the PCCC some airtime, work for BA.

ITV again as the above, work for BA!

I better go and 'calm down and have a cup of tea' like bitsnpieces!:rolleyes:

I'm BA cabin crew and the above represent my personal views and not those of BA.

I'm sure that your section of Unite conducts itself correctly, but Bassa have a different set of priorities it seems.

When I was asked to ballot for a strike, it was made absolutely clear to me that this was a vote to walk out of my job. It was not to be a threat, or a 'statement', or a positioning tactic, it was a vote indicating I would withdraw my labour, without condition, if asked to by the union.
By doing that, the union could say, as you do above, that they had a defined level of support that they could rely on.

Bassa however, have seen the Yes vote as an end in itself. They have allowed any rumour or justification for a Yes vote to flourish. They have been very vague as to what cabin crew should be voting Yes for. Most aren't bothered by the imposition of the 1 down complement, but do care about their pay, their days off, their promotion prospects, their roster stability etc. Bassa have encouraged crew to vote Yes for all of these reasons, and also to vote Yes to 'force BA to negotiate, to 'give Walsh a bloody nose', to show him we aren't going to let him run the operation, etc.

Crew have also voted Yes because they went to Kempton park and all their mates have voted yes and it's all about solidarity.

So, you might start to see why 7480 people voted Yes. As far as Bassa is concerned, any reason to vote Yes is a good reason.
BUT, very few have equated a Yes vote with a determination to withdraw their labour on the chosen day. There is a big disconnect there between
1. The Yes VOTE and
2. the INTENTION to strike.

This was Bassa's big mistake - Bassa know it and BA know it. That's why Litebulbs, that they don't have 7000+ members 'agreeing with the balloted position'. There isn't one, there are 7000 different ones, and few of them are enough to make the voter actually walk out.

Classic
 

My congratulations on a very well worded post, however I would still question some points.

BASSA have a mandate and until day 1 of a strike, if called, the comments about support are just speculation. I was talking to BA WW crew members yesterday, who are completely behind the action and we had an in depth discussion. They had strong opinions on the issue and at no time did I get the impression that they were blindly following whatever their reps said.

Thousands of supporters have turned out to branch meetings and having been a rep for a while, it is hard enough to get email responses, let alone to get members to turn up to meetings in their own time.

The first vote announcement was a joke and I was embarrassed for my Union because of it.

Litebulbs
 

Bulbs, glad you are posting, I have asked this a few times but cant get an answer, with your union experience perhaps you will know: -

Strike pay - How would a striker qualify for this? How will BASSA know who is on strike and for how long etc?

Litebulbs,

The point I was trying to make was that the 'voice' of BASSA has been less than truthful over the past 12 months thus leading to difficulty in believing what they propose now.

Would the ballot have been different if BASSA had been fully truthful and open as to the true nature of the ballot being ONLY over imposition? I doubt it but as we will never really know any guess would be pure speculation.

7000 have voted for action on the basis of information that many could call suspect. BASSA have taken great effort and gone to great lengths to ensure that the 'crewmour' and 'galley FM' stories that have circulated during the run up to the ballot have remained stoked and unfettered.

Many crew that I have met are still certain that the ballot was over New Fleet and their subsequent reduction in pay. Not the mere inconvienience of having to work with one less crew member. Now the Union is offering to cut their pay as well. Hardly fair representation is it? Especially as no crew members have lost their job over the crew number reduction.

BASSA have had their chance and failed their membership.

Snas
 

I have asked the question and will let you know.

I'm baffled now!

So, Lightbulbs, UNITE's position now is:

We demand a 3.4% paycut and those members who volunteered to be made redundant should be compelled to be re-instated and pay back their redundancy package. That or we go on strike!

Or have I missed something?!!

As I have said many times before, I do not work for BA, but I am a Unite rep. I am no more aware of the complete package being compiled by the BASSA reps and Unite FTO's, than most people on this site.

Right, hands up here and I was trying (badly) to prove a point about hearsay and speculation against fact. I stand by my figures, but if you read a little further back, you will see that I spoke to 2 crew members last night. That is the sum total of crew who I have spoken to directly since the ballot and they were fully informed.

As to what they thought a strike would achieve, I did not ask (it was a social event and you only get so much bandwidth at 1 am in a bar!)

A reduction in pay of 3.5% would mean CC losing about the same amount as they would lose in a 13-day strike (3.5% being about 13 365ths).

Does that mean that BASSA are proposing that CC lose income, but continue to work, as they would lose if they went on a 13-day strike, but suffer the strike effect on their income forever?

good call Flaps 40

Unite has not put forward a document on cost savings