|
Oh sorry. For those of you unsure as to why Unite have recommended a rejection of the offer, this explanation taken from their website should clarify::hmm:
All of us within British Airways were hoping to be in a position, to be able to recommend, at long last, a deal that would bring about a welcome return to normality for our airline. This has not been possible. After a sensible pause for reflection from both sides since the last days of industrial action, talks resumed directly with our General Secretary Tony Woodley and British Airways CEO Willie Walsh. These concluded late yesterday evening and were unsuccessful. Though the dispute was over imposition, British Airways insisted that any settlement must include several new areas. * New fleet * Changes to the disciplinary, grievance and redeployment agreements * A complete renegotiation of the trade union facilities agreement * Two year pay freeze * Two year capped pay deal * Introduction of monthly travel payment * Future promotion * Route transfer procedure to new fleet * Ops and choice * New disruption agreement Though not ideal, with good will on both sides this could have formed the basis of "A way forward" The words were fairly broad and not particularly specific or detailed, as it would require a huge leap of faith to entrust or guarantee the rest of your flying career to "good will." Your union was prepared to fulfil our half of the bargain but in the end what was missing was the complete absence of any " Good will" on behalf of British Airways. Without that, it would be impossible to have the required faith in what are essentially just words. Actions speak far louder. A systematic insistence of zealously pursuing an increasing number, now over fifty, dispute related disciplinaries and applying disproportionately harsh sanctions - for trivial reasons. Alongside this an obvious desire to permanently "punish " all those, who participated in a legal and lawful strike have become the stumbling blocks. How could we recommend, in good faith acceptance of a set of words, the spirit of which has already been broken before the ink is dry on the paper? We would be misleading you and were just not prepared to do that. British Airways customers must ask why there are still on going threats to their travel plans, essentially over punitive decisions our CEO opted to take. If he had not chosen to take these actions, this dispute could well have now been resolved. It would be wise to reflect that for many in higher management the focus appears to be on crushing cabin crew, rather than the business of running an airline and carrying passengers. There simply is no sensible business rationale to insist on enforcing decisions that will affect between 4000 and 5000 people permanently, unless it is over pride or a desire for revenge. It simply does not make sense. There will of course be an on line ballot to ask your views in the next few days, but to be absolutely clear, we have no other choice but to join both Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson in recommending that you join us in rejecting this proposal . |
My first reading of this suggests that the union are absolutely right to reject. This document signs off to the new redeployment arrangements one month from now. It says that the details of the mechanism for intra-fleet transfer of work/aircraft is in a side letter, but that BA will base this on commercial needs.
Does this not make the MTP ineffective as a mechanism to protect existing crew? What commercial need could exist that would induce BA to transfer work onto the old fleet once the new fleet was fully manned and operational? At that point, existing crew would no longer have work and would have the right to 52 weeks on the sliding decreasing salary to find a new position...which would be where the flying has gone. New Fleet. The union is to have 12 weeks (from 6th April) to agree new consultative framework in replacement of existing negotiating bodies. Obviously, some people hold the opinion that all employment changes should be unilaterally imposed, but I do not accept that there should not be mutual involvement. |
So, BASSA rejected the deal.
Unite no longer have the power to force BASSA's hand. The decision to call off strike action MUST come from the BASSA reps. Odd then that the next set of hissy fit strikes will have absoloutly nothing to do with the original premise of imposition. The next bunch of useless actions will be down to the consequences of taking ill advised action in the first place to restore lost ST and in a vain attempt to re-employ some of those who were guilty of bullying, threatening and obstructive actions. Many of whom were BASSA reps themselves, nothing like looking after your own whilst blindly ignoring the masses. Seems like a good reason to lose your job. |
Reargunner,
Whilst the concerns you have voiced are valid the threat of 'New Fleet' is another battle to be fought. Trying to call IA over new fleet will result in an immediate injunction by BA as the ballot was for imposition, nothing more. Rejection of the above plan is based simply on the refusal to reinstate those under suspension and staff travel as 'goodwill' gestures. |
Sorry Wirbelsturm, I don't understand you.
I was simply saying what my reason for feeling I should reject the proposed agreement. BA have introduced these terms (settlement of the new redeployment agreement is to be in one month...work transfer to New Fleet is to be made on commercial needs...restucturing the union negotiating bodies to be completed in 12 weeks). How can I agree this now and then fight them in the future? I'm pretty sure I can't. Surely if I accept this document, then I have accepted all of it, not just the bits that I am ok with? |
Reargunner
In negotiations there will always be parts of an agreement you perhaps do not like. You end up with the best deal possible. BA and BASSA have been discussing this since Feb 09 (or not discussing, in BAASAs case)
It is time to bring this to a close and get on with trying to save an Airline. If IA is called again on anything other than the past imposition, BA will again surely injunct. |
cessnapete...IA can be called at any time on the existing ballot's mandate. No new terms need to be introduced. The Union are only polling crew on the proposal tabled and I am explaining why I don't consider the proposal to be something I can accept.
I don't think the parts I find unacceptable are minor slightly disgreeable parts of an otherwise ok deal. They are fundamental. These are exactly the same aspects of the deals offered by BA that have caused me to vote against it before. The change to the redeployment agreement along with the company's refusal to make a binding agreement to how work is removed from existing crew makes BA's deal sound to me like I am signing away my job. Just like the Open Skies fight, I cannot prevent the company from creating a low cost base...I can only resist by fighting for terms that will offer existing crew some protection from its consequences. In the Open Skies battle, the effort to get the best possible protection floundered because BA found a legal loophole, but then BALPA took the next best step and pushed the company to strengthen the scope clause to protect the work of BA pilots. The pilots used industrial muscle to get this (limited) protection from the company. The cabin crew are having their attempt undermined because some employees have been persuaded that the battle is not justified, that it is "unreasonable" and that Backing BA involves necessarily betraying a group of colleagues. |
Reargunner,
We are where we are. I guess the question you should be asking is - If you do not accept this proposal - do you think you will end up with a better deal if you elect to strike again? With WW having played hard ball up to now and done everything he had said he would do; with over 70% of rostered crew having turned up on the last day of the last strike; with the previous strikes and no flying because of volcanic ash there are many crew who, however much they might want to, simply cannot afford to strike again, do you genuinely believe that you will be able to get a better deal out of him by rejecting this deal and striking again? Bear in mind that it will all need to be done in a relatively short space of time as after 12 weeks from the initial strike date he will be able to sack anyone who does not turn up for work. If you genuinely think by rejecting this deal you will get a better one then that is fair enough. However, don't reject it because you don't like or agree with it - this is no time to be sending 'strong messages' to the company. |
Just like the Open Skies fight, I cannot prevent the company from creating a low cost base...I can only resist by fighting for terms that will offer existing crew some protection from its consequences. So its just that you're unwilling to play your part in making it so...because you might take a hit? Someone else ought to take the hit perhaps? Welcome to the dichotomy at the heart of modern Western business... |
The change to the redeployment agreement along with the company's refusal to make a binding agreement to how work is removed from existing crew makes BA's deal sound to me like I am signing away my job. 1. The only thing that is bringing in New Fleet faster is BASSA's insistence on putting 184 crew back on planes. If we want to prevent New Fleet, then to ask for crew back on is utter madness. BASSA are NOT representing our interests by doing so. 2. Where in the latest offer does it mention the redeployment agreement please? |
Wobbler...do I think I will get a better deal by striking? Do you think I will get a worse one?
As far as I can see, accepting this deal means I will keep my existing T&C until New Fleet is fully operational then I will lose all of it. I will be told there is no work for my existing job and put into Careerlink. The redeployment agreement I will have just accepted gives me 3 months on full basic to find a new vacancy. Then 3 further months on 75% of that basic and then a further 3 months on 50% etc. So, if New Fleet is still growing and recruiting I can apply for a job there or leave. If I strike, and it is not supported by a lot of cabin crew, then in June the company can terminate all cabin crew contracts and offer new ones with 90 days notice. As far as I can see, there is very little between the two threats to my livelihood. |
HiFlyer. Page 6 EPC ...Changes to corporate policies that apply to all colleagues across the company and covered at the BA Forum and EPC have been subject to discussion. It is the intention to conclude these discussions within one month of completing this offer.
The Employment Policy Committee has been seeking agreement on new redeployment, grievance and disciplinary proceedures. Also previously described by bill Francis Oct 23rd as part of "our package of changes to IFCE"....he says "we added to our package an offer which includes a new monthly travel payment, proposed changes to the disruption agreement and our proposed new redeployment arrangement" and that this is * Surplus colleagues given 52 weeks to find a new role * Surplus colleagues given preferential access to job vacancies * Pay protection run down over 52 weeks for those redeployed *Pension protection during last 5 years before retirement for redeployees * Voluntary buy-out of existing Personal Differentials When quizzed about the working of this on the BA forum, before it was closed down Bill's repeated reply was that crew have never been placed in Careerlink and he would not be drawn futher. 184 crew back on the aircraft is NOT impacting how fast New Fleet grows as far as I can see. It WOULD affect how fast part-time offers are made. The part-time contracts that make up the rest of the manpower adjustment with the bit of VR that was given last year have not been actioned. |
The redeployment agreement is contractual. It's use is is not. If the agreement is not renegotiated to make it relevant to modern business conditions then BA will simply make people redundant instead of redeploying them.
|
Reargunner
A genuine few questions, how long before they get "new fleet" up and running in substantial numbers?
How long has is taken for "new contract" crew to outnumber "old contact " crew? Do you really believe that BA would have large numbers of crew sat around for up to 1 year, which would by your figures would cost them 7.5 months pay per crew just to redeploy them to new fleet? If I strike, and it is not supported by a lot of cabin crew, then in June the company can terminate all cabin crew contracts and offer new ones with 90 days notice. Perhaps this set of proposals is just a "tick boxing" exercise on behalf of the company, so they can demonstrate later that meaningfull negotiations had taken place, just a thought:eek: PS Best one I heard to day in CRC.................. "I'm not even going to bother to read the proposals, I'm just going to vote NO anyway" Sadly this is the mentality that BA are dealing with:{ |
SR71,
Errm...we are taking a hit, as you put it...just like the rest of the airline our costs are being reduced. In fact IFCE is taking a bigger cut than most other departments. The savings to be made from New Fleet are not part of that saving. Did BA pilots think that they should accept Open Skies T&C or defend as much as they could of their contracts? Yet they accepted the commercial need for the airline to create a low cost base. |
IFCE may be taking a bigger hit than most other departments but then again it is much bigger than most other departments and has taken smaller, if any, cuts in recent years.
|
Reargunner,
I am no expert on employment law, but I would be very surprised if BA could recruit cabin crew on different T's and C's and then tell exisiting cabin crew that their job is redundant, and then continue to recruit more cabin crew. If they were able to do that I suspect some of the old contract crew would have been told they were 'redundant' many years ago. I would imagine that any new fleet could only grow through natural wastage or BA expanding. Perhaps an employment expert could enlighten us! Do I think you will end up with a worse deal by striking - short answer - Yes! |
Did BA pilots think that they should accept Open Skies T&C or defend as much as they could of their contracts? Yet they accepted the commercial need for the airline to create a low cost base |
Reargunner, with all due respect, you are mixing offers.
Please discard all previous offers, print this offer, read it, digest it. There is ABSOLUTELY NO mention of the redeployment agreement. To requote BF's statement in Oct about redeployment is false. Until we know what EXACTLY is in the redeployment agreement, then we cannot comment. BF also said in October that we would get a bonus, sharesave scheme and an extra Free Ticket. I don't see you quoting that anywhere because that has long gone now. BASSA, you, and everyone else, really need to move on with this. You are cherry picking reasons to reject it, that aren't even on the offer. And you are being led up the garden path. If and when a redeployment agreement is on the table, and if and when we don't agree with it, should we not discuss that THEN and NOT NOW? You also state: 184 crew back on the aircraft is NOT impacting how fast New Fleet grows as far as I can see. Understandably any new recruitment to facilitate complement changes will be into the New Fleet. BA will transfer 184 people onto OUR planes and those 5 routes (that have lost 184 crew) will then be operated by NEW FLEET. What purpose does having 184 crew back on our planes serve? - It is costing us because we have to give up more variable pay. - We have to FREEZE meal allowances - We have to FREEZE other variable pay - It starts New Fleet IMMEDIATELY Have you asked BASSA what is the purpose of putting 184 crew back on planes when we are operating quite well without them? We are paying a very HIGH COST for it, and, as you have demonstrated, nobody has noticed.:{ This is my own viewpoint and not that of BA. |
Reargunner
It's probably pointing out two things to you: Pilots have taken a significant pay cut as well as 'productivity' savings in the current round of 'save the company again' cost savings. As far as I'm aware the cabin crew were not required to take any pay cut whatsoever? (Though BASSA very kindly offered one!) Just a small productivity saving was required. Sadly that affected many BASSA reps.... :rolleyes: Secondly: BA pilots would have worked for Openskies with the terms and conditions being offered to external applicants. The company still chose not to accept mainline pilots! Very different circumstances I'm afraid! |
Pornpants1
Q1 I don't know. According to BA the rate of growth of New Fleet will depend on the rate at which they transfer work plus the rate of business growth. Q2. Yes I'm afraid I do. This proposal offers an existing ww main crew member his basic wage (£17,000) plus allowances plus £8,000 in monthly flying pay per year. So, to put him into Careerlink for 3 months costs BA £4,200.(£1,400 basic x 3) Giving his work to New Fleet in order to do that costs £15,000 to £17,000 (basic of £11,000 plus hourly flying pay). That is BA's estimated cost of main crew on New Fleet. So, even in the most expensive point of the process (the first 3 months) and ignoring all the more difficult to calculate sums about productivity and flexibility, it still saves money. Q4. I have been afraid of that being true since day one, that BA never intended to find any negotiated settlement. Q5. Not all of us. I try very hard to read every proposal (more than once) and to listen to other perspectives. Until the current atmosphere, where I became afraid to talk about work issues at work, I used to discuss it with anyone that seemed interested. |
Reargunner - a question for you. Do you think the redeployment agreement, as it currently stands, is fit for purpose, given that it can (and has been) used by redeployed cabin crew who have no intention of ever flying for BA again to sit at home on basic pay for two years before taking VR.
|
Thank you for some of you replies, the don't knows and the what ifs are the worrying part, I believe that had BASSA sat around the table like adults and negotiated, then alot of those "what ifs" could have been ironed out.
I note you took a basic cabin crew members pay for illustration rather than a Purser £26K-£34K or a CSDs max £43K, this would cost BA quite a significant amount more:ok: I don't believe the BASSA hype and do not think BA would utilise the "career link" for cabin crew in the arrangement you or BASSA suggest. As someone has said in an earlier post BASSA are using the "what ifs" to put the fear into Cabin Crew, at point some crew are going to have to take a step back and either try and put some faith in their employer or move on. Incidentally it has taken some 12 years for "new contract" crew to outnumber their peers in MPE:bored: |
HiFlyer
Yes this offer says they will put the crew on and recruit into New Fleet the equivalent numbers...on the same page as it says they will continue and give out part-time to all the crew on the existing list. I'm saying that the return of the 184 does not HAVE to be made up by recruitment it can be made up by a simple reduction in part time offers, but the company chooses this route. As I said, the reference to accepting the conclusions of the EPC within 4 weeks is on page 6. I'm sure you have read it and if you think the decision to change those elements of redeployment, grievance, disciplinary and pension protection of all contracts has changed from last year, then BA have opened a Q&A phone line, where I'm sure they will be able to tell us. 4486 and Hand S. Yes there is a difference in location. The way you express the BALPA objection to Open Skies is a tiny bit confusing to those of us who don't talk about issues that only affect pilots very often. I understood that they wanted all the new pilots inside the existing seniority list (making these new pilots part of mainline) to ensure they became, in effect, an extension to the existing pilot community, rather than a potential future threat. They weren't REALLY saying that pilots already working for BA would transfer to OS and their much lower T&C...they were saying that the new recruits can come in on the low T&C, but they should be part of the existing career pathway. When that became unachievable, because of some manipulation of existing laws, they settled for ammending the pilots MOA scope agreement to strengthen the protection of London BA pilots against work being transfered. Wobbly, I'm not either...an employment laywer...I serve tea and coffee! But, I think the I probably used the word redundant in the wrong context...when you are placed in a redeployment process, it isn't classed as redundancy, I don't think. I guess that's the whole point. Finally, 4486 the productivity & pay deal for current cabin crew amounts to 14% of our department budget and about 30-40% of the total airline savings to be made. That is not small and New Fleet savings are in addition to that. I'm afraid I have to go now. Out of time as always! I'm happy to discuss my opinion, but it gets very hard to reply to so many posts that seem to be directed to me. If I can I will come back and try again. Thank you for sharing your thoughts. |
So is staff travel part of this latest offer or not ?????
|
Reargunner
I'm afraid I have to go now. Out of time as always! I'm happy to discuss my opinion, but it gets very hard to reply to so many posts that seem to be directed to me. If I can I will come back and try again. |
Reargunner
Excellent posts. Much appreciated to get a cohesive view from the other side of the fence.
However, can i just highlight the following: Finally, 4486 the productivity & pay deal for current cabin crew amounts to 14% of our department budget and about 30-40% of the total airline savings to be made. That is not small and New Fleet savings are in addition to that. The dept i work in probably shaved 15-20% off its budget last year. A lot through natural wastage (VR), granted, and voluntary reduced working hours/BRS, but it still amounts to that figure. Seems 10-15% is about the going rate i would have thought. |
Reargunner
Wobbler...do I think I will get a better deal by striking? Do you think I will get a worse one? As far as I can see, accepting this deal means I will keep my existing T&C until New Fleet is fully operational then I will lose all of it. I will be told there is no work for my existing job and put into Careerlink. The redeployment agreement I will have just accepted gives me 3 months on full basic to find a new vacancy. Then 3 further months on 75% of that basic and then a further 3 months on 50% etc. So, if New Fleet is still growing and recruiting I can apply for a job there or leave. If I strike, and it is not supported by a lot of cabin crew, then in June the company can terminate all cabin crew contracts and offer new ones with 90 days notice. As far as I can see, there is very little between the two threats to my livelihood. Reargunner, given what you say above, I guess it's down to which possibility you personally find most likely to happen. Nothing in life comes with a guarantee and sometimes you have to fight the battles as they happen, rather than fight them based on what MIGHT theoretically happen. For me, given my experience over 28 years of BASSA's conspiracy theory/scaremongering style of drumming up support and subsequent proof of it all being a lot of twaddle, the first scenario seems less likely than the second. However I can't be absolutely 100% sure. What I can be sure of is, there's unlikely to be a better deal, and BASSA have had their chance to nail down the detail over the last year or so, but they chose to squabble with Amicus, fight the wrong fights, tell porkies and generally act unprofessionally, so I'm afraid I'm just gonna have to take a chance. |
Way Forward Agreement - 6 April 2010
For some reason, people are debating debating an offer they have not read. So, here it is.
The Way Forward – British Airways formal offer to Unite This formal offer is made by British Airways in a genuine attempt to resolve the dispute in the best interests of our customers and our cabin crew. We all agree that the airline needs to make permanent structural change to its cost base to ensure its long-term survival. Both parties acknowledge that the company will only be able to afford this agreement if there is a stable industrial environment, without any further revenue loss or reputational damage as a result of industrial unrest. In doing so, the airline continues to recognise the professionalism and skill of its cabin crew. Pay Increments Incremental pay rises will continue to be applied. Fixed Monthly Travel Payment A new fixed monthly payment will be introduced which will be increased in line with future pay awards. Basic Pay The company has offered a two year pay deal, effective from 1/2/2011 as follows: • Year one 2011/12 the company will increase base pay based on December 2010 RPI and capped at the average of the independent forecasts for Q4 2010 published by HM Treasury in April 2010 • Year two 2012/13 the company will increase base pay based on December 2011 RPI and capped at the average of the independent forecasts for Q4 2011 published by HM Treasury in April 2010 The next pay review will be effective from February 2013 Complements The company will re-introduce a level of complement equivalent to a total of 184 full time crew into Eurofleet and Worldwide, the distribution of which will be determined by the company. Understandably any new recruitment to facilitate complement changes will be into the new fleet. The level of flying remaining in Worldwide and Eurofleet will be determined by the number of flights which can be covered with existing crew and complement levels. To enable the re-introduction of complements, further savings have been jointly identified; • Removal of early day report rule from Worldwide • Removal of telephone allowance from Worldwide and Eurofleet • Removal of language allowance from all fleets • Non flying variable pay maintained at current levels, reviewed Feb 2011 • Crew meals aligned to world traveller specification • Overseas meal allowances maintained at current levels, reviewed Feb 2011 Complements remain non-contractual. New fleet There will be a separate mixed flying fleet for new crew, with separate terms and conditions and bargaining rights. There will be a separate negotiating body for the new fleet, which will not discuss the terms and conditions of current crew. Assurances for current crew Crew on existing fleets will have the following protections; • Terms and conditions for current crew – A fundamental principle of this offer is that crew will have a firm commitment from British Airways in respect to their terms of employment. Current crew are assured that their existing contractual terms will be maintained for the future, unless amended through the agreed NSP negotiating procedures. • Part-time – The company will continue to honour commitments to make part-time offers to all crew on existing lists by March 2011. The offer will be on existing fleets, terms and conditions. Future opportunities will continue to be available. • Access to route network – It is the company’s intention to ensure a fair and transparent distribution of routes to all fleets, based on commercial need, which will be discussed with Unite. The distribution will be reviewed at the end of each season and will be considered as part of the broader TUC review process after twelve months. Clarification of route access is contained in a side letter to Unite. • Monthly travel payment – To provide increased security of earnings, both parties have agreed to introduce a monthly travel payment that consolidates existing variable payments for Heathrow fleets. The payment will be based on the average of the 2008 schedule (see appendix A). The company will adjust the monthly travel payment each year, in line with base pay. • Allowances to be paid – Meal allowances, daily overseas and a number of other allowances will continue to be paid see Appendix A. • Access to aircraft type – It is the company’s intention to deploy new aircraft based on commercial need across existing and new fleets. New aircraft will be introduced on a fair and transparent basis across all the company’s fleets. Existing crew terms, conditions and fleet agreements will apply when new aircraft are operated on existing fleets. As new aircraft are introduced across all of the company’s fleets, crew will be trained in order to receive the necessary licenses as required by regulation. • Career structure and opportunities for current crew – The career structure for current crew within current fleets will continue on the basis of existing practice, unless amended through the agreed NSP negotiating procedures. The company confirm that where there are opportunities available, existing crew will be promoted on existing terms and conditions on current fleets. • Honouring current and future agreements – Both parties acknowledge the importance of honouring agreements and are committed to working together to create a climate of effective industrial relations. The best way of guaranteeing this is through the successful completion of the industrial relations review, which will include the appropriate application of cabin crew agreements. • Ability to transfer fleet/base on current terms and conditions – As with the current process, there is no guarantee of achieving a transfer. However, the company has committed to continue with the current practice of transfers at Heathrow between Eurofleet and Worldwide, and to find a mechanism to aid limited transfers from Gatwick under current terms and conditions. All current crew will have the opportunity to apply for all roles on the new fleet if they choose. This will provide promotion opportunities for many current crew. All crew joining the new fleet will have separate terms and conditions. The company will recognise Unite for the purposes of bargaining in the new fleet. Opportunities for Gatwick crew It is accepted that restrictions within the Gatwick Fleet memorandum of agreement limit the long haul route network. It is agreed that discussions will be held with a view to removing these restrictions to provide the best opportunities for growth in the long haul network at Gatwick, for the benefit of the business and our people. Disruption agreement In order to minimise the impact of disruption to our customers and our crew, the following points will remain, or be incorporated into the Disruption Agreement • The definition of disruption remains unchanged • The double night will be removed for Worldwide diverted inbound services to anywhere in the UK and Europe, and a minimum of 15 hours off-duty will be achieved if the aircraft is unable to continue to its original destination • When disruption takes place the IFCE management team will advise duty representatives and crew colleagues when and how the disruption agreement has been applied. A review will take place of any disruption at the next joint meeting Working together The parties are committed to beginning the process of restoring and improving relationships at all levels. With this in mind, it is important that there is no victimisation arising from the dispute and both parties will work to ensure that any issues are settled in a mature and professional way. Where there are disciplinary or grievance cases, the intention is that these will be resolved quickly. Where behaviour is found to be serious, any resulting action will be measured and proportionate. For the benefit of our crew, customers and business and in support of our objective of making IFCE a great place to work, the company is keen to develop a positive working relationship with the trade union to enable effective industrial relations. The delivery of this agreement is dependent on a radical change to our working relationships. In order to achieve the necessary change a third party organisation will be engaged to support a fundamental review of the company and cabin crew trade union relationships. Future IR framework It is acknowledged that the existing arrangements for industrial relations for cabin crew need to be reviewed and made fit for purpose, for both the company and the union in the 21 st century. The union will re-engage with the existing facilities agreement. Negotiations will take place between the company and the union nationally, with a view to reaching a mutually agreeable framework within 12 weeks of completing this agreement. The union have noted the company’s intent as outlined in the covering letter of 6 April 2010 from Willie Walsh. The company proposes the introduction of a broader business consultative approach across British Airways, to engage our representatives and our managers in a wider debate about our business performance and needs of our customers. An example of items for discussion at the forum is the allocation of routes. Prior to the start of each season the company will discuss the allocation of routes with Unite. Both parties are firmly committed to the effective application of company procedures, which are currently the subject of negotiations in the Employment Policy Committee and BA Forum. Policy Changes to corporate policies that apply to all colleagues across the company and covered at the BA Forum and EPC have been subject to discussion. It is the intention to conclude these discussions within one month of completing this offer. Summary This formal offer maintains the contractual rights of cabin crew at their current level. The offer does not reduce or extend them from where they are today. Both parties recognise the assistance the TUC has given in securing this agreement. The application of this agreement will be reviewed annually with the TUC, at twelve, twenty-four and thirty-six months from the date the agreement is signed. Appendix A Fixed Monthly Travel Payment We have provided protection for security of earnings, having agreed a new monthly travel payment, that consolidates existing variable payments for Heathrow fleets. The payment will be based on the average of the 2008 schedule. The company will adjust the monthly travel payment each year, in line with base pay. How much will the payment be The amounts have been calculated by fleet and grade and are as follows for a full-time crew member. These rates are based on the 2008 schedule. FLEET GRADE ANNUAL EQUIVALENT Worldwide CSD £9,676 Worldwide Purser £9,258 Worldwide Main crew £8,085 Eurofleet CSD £2,470 Eurofleet Purser £2,470 Eurofleet Main crew £2,266 Part time crew will receive a pro-rata amount of the above monthly sums. If part time crew are absent, the daily deduction rates will not be pro-rated as the sum deducted relates to a single working day. Fixed Monthly Travel Payment This is a fixed payment to be paid on a monthly basis via 12 equal instalments and will replace specified variable travel allowances currently earned by crew (see below for specific details). The objective is to provide greater stability of earnings for current crew in Heathrow Worldwide and Eurofleet to mitigate the concerns over pace and mix of work transfer to separate new fleet. Included within the Fixed Monthly Travel Payment The Fixed Monthly Travel Payment will replace the variable allowances below, which will cease to be paid: Worldwide Eurofleet Long Range Premiums (LRP)/Box Payment Long Day Payments (LDP) Back-to-Back Payment (B2B) Excess Time Premium (ETP) Destination Payment (DES) Base Early Report Payment (BER) Excess Time Premium (ETP) The following categories of allowance will continue to be paid in the same way as they are today and are not included within scope of the Fixed Monthly Travel payment: Meal Allowances Daily Overseas Allowance (DOA) Nightly Incidental Allowance (NIA) Time Away Allowance (TAA) Line Trainer Payments Willing to work Rest Day Working Exceptional Payments from WW Disruption Agreement (One-Down and Zone Closure) Deductions As this is intended to directly replace current variable flying allowances, daily deductions at the normal rate for your fleet will be made to cover periods of non-flying duties from the following list: Sickness Unpaid Leave Trade Union Activities Grounded Maternity (**) Line Trainer Duties (*) (*) Current Line Trainer payments will continue to apply (**) Current Grounded Maternity Allowance payments will continue to be made |
Redeployment Agreeemnt
Reargunner said:
Also previously described by bill Francis Oct 23rd as part of "our package of changes to IFCE"....he says "we added to our package an offer which includes a new monthly travel payment, proposed changes to the disruption agreement and our proposed new redeployment arrangement" and that this is * Surplus colleagues given 52 weeks to find a new role * Surplus colleagues given preferential access to job vacancies * Pay protection run down over 52 weeks for those redeployed *Pension protection during last 5 years before retirement for redeployees * Voluntary buy-out of existing Personal Differentials When quizzed about the working of this on the BA forum, before it was closed down Bill's repeated reply was that crew have never been placed in Careerlink and he would not be drawn futher. In my previous department, I knew one person who was in CareerLink for two years until she took VR last year. I also know of 10 others who were placed in CareerLink in July 2008 and have failed to find a job (though not for want of trying). So, it's not surprising that BA wants to change the redeployment agreement and limit employees' stay in CareerLink to 12 months. It's fact that most companies don't have anything like CareerLink. Indeed, if you were to work for a US carrier looking to get rid of, say, 500 crew, they would just chop the last 500 who joined. Tough though it can be in CareerLink, it's much preferable to be internally unemployed than externally unemployed. If you keep going on strike, you may well bring forward the day when you become externally unemployed. |
The Online Poll
Just got of the phone with a friend of mine, apparently the "online poll" is simply a link from Tony Woodleys' letter to crew.
It takes you to another page on the BASSA forum where it is simply a YES/NO vote, so here is the rub, they would have voted YES;) but are too afraid to do so, because you log onto the forum using your staff number (and password) and therefore they feel they could be tracked by BASSA.:confused: |
The Online Poll
According to a colleague, Amicus members can't vote at present as they don't have access to the BASSA website.
Apparently on crew forum, the individual who runs it is saying the Monthly Travel Payment is all they'll get on top of their basic salary and telling them to wake up and smell the coffee!:ugh::ugh::ugh: Unbelievably, there are still crew who have no idea what the MTP is. I guess it's what happens if you press the 'delete' button or choose not to read your emails and make an informed decision.:rolleyes: I'm BA cabin crew and the above are my personal views and not those of my employer. |
Amicus and BASSA members can vote on the uniteba.com website.
Webform is there along with all the documents for all to see. You have to include your membership number for the vote to be valid. How else can they do it though? |
I think it is acceptable! Not brilliant but that is mainly UNITE's doing as last year we could have negotiated away New Fleet with last summers proposal!
But anyway why on earth reject this? And then strike? Can a BASSA rep/UNITE official or any ''BASSA 100%'' supporter please tell me why I should reject it? As I feel like accepting it! Do you honestly think the next proposal will be any better. What do you want? |
The Way Forward offer
Posted by Ottergirl At the moment, the proposal is only to ballot CC union members which is currently about 60% of the work force. Many of the NO voters have resigned and a large amount of the strikebreakers were not union members so the vote will be somewhat biased. I'm delighted that we all now have an opportunity to vote on the offer in an email sent to all of us from Willie Walsh late this evening. If you are not a member of UNITE like myself, you can do this via a link on the ESS homepage under IFCE, The Way Forward - Have your say on your future. I have voted YES to accept the offer.:) |
Tiramisu,
Oh that is FAB! As I was worried it would be biased aswell because of most of the votes would be NO! Great News! |
The offer really is far more generous than I had expected. I do hope that people actually READ the proposal for themselves though and make an informed, adult decision on the basis of facts. You can end this dispute now and look to the future on your current T&Cs. Isn't that the best solution for everybody?
|
Tiramisu,
Is that vote for non-union members part of the official poll, or just BA trying to show the overall picture? |
I do hope that people actually READ the proposal for themselves though and make an informed, adult decision on the basis of facts. Just as importantly, Tony Woodley has written, in a letter dated 29th April: .... any agreement is only as good as the integrity and sincerity of those putting their names to it. By their actions and behaviour throughout the dispute, and continuing to this day, it is impossible to take BA management’s words at their face value. So, if a vote (and let us be honest, an online poll is fraught with the possibility of meddling) is made to reject the proposals, then what? Can any BASSA or Unite supporter explain that? Where do you go from here? It is a tacit admission that you have failed and have nowhere else to go! You can't negotiate with BA, because Tony Woodley says they cannot be trusted, in any from! You're up against the buffers with nowhere to go. So how do you extricate yourselves? It can't be done, can it. It just hastens the demise of those who seem to think they can bend BA's will. Dangerous thinking - be warned, many will be without jobs at all, never mind jobs they aren't happy with. |
Does anybody know when the BASSA poll begins and ends?
To answer a previous question, BASSA will only be interested in their own poll and not BA's. I wonder how many days it will take before BASSA declare the BA poll a stitch up?? BA are obviously doing this to capture the sentiment of the non-members, which will no doubt be used in future communications, but won't have a direct impact on the BASSA ballot. As an aside the language about not trusting the management was used by BALPA during the Open Skies debacle. It was one of the defining points for me when I knew BALPA had totally lost the plot. Unfortunately, it's been clear for some time that BASSA have never even been aware of the plot, so this is just confirmation of what we already know!! |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 16:54. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.