I certainly hope their staff travel is not given back, unless they repay in full the revenue BA lost as a result of their foolish action.

PERHAPS the majority of non-striking crew want the strikers to get their staff travel back because they are worried they will be bullied whenever they try and use their staff travel. That in my opinion is no reason to give it back to the strikers (who are lucky they haven't been fired anyway!)

Ottergirl
 

Yeah you are right - I myself only ever used it once a year to take the kids to Orlando, so it's not that greatly missed - and your are right in what you say that there will be an ongoing damaging them and us attitude unless some form of compromise is met.

This dispute needs resolution sooner rather than later

I have flown with many crew who came to work but are still members of BASSA. The reasons are generally either that they are scared not to be a member of a Union in case they need representing in a dispute with BA or because they still want to be able to vote NO whenever asked. There have also been one or two bullish along the "Why should I resign?" line. It makes it very hard to know who will be supporting any further call to IA.

Oh dear, it was all going so well :rolleyes:

Welcome to the 21st century - people can't be fired for taking part in lawful industrial action

Yawn!!
Or maybe we realise that life is too short to be bearing grudges and, since we have a life outside work, that it really isn't that important in the general scheme of the world we live in!

It seems to me that the only reason ST has been an efective weapon against this particular group of employees is precisely because the strike had such marginal support. If there had been solid support from ALL those who voted "Yes" then the return of ST could have been a precondition of a return to work.

The fact that the strike was called on such a flimsy pretext, and given the predilection of BA CC for being long on words but short on action, once the numbers of strikers were known it was a no brainer that the withdrawl of ST would be permanent. None of those who went to work were ever going to risk their own ST to get back the ST of the strikers. That remains the case to this day and UNITE, BASSA and WW know it.

As for numbers, BASSA may have a headcount of, say, 9,500, but don't forget that a significant number of tnose people are part time on 50% or even 33% contracts. It stands to reason that one recruit onto MF could potentially do the work of 3 'legacy' crew, which only further undermines the industrial muscle of
BASSA.

And can I just add that, for the umpteenth time, you CAN be fired for taking legal (protected) industrial action. It will just be automatically deemed 'unfair dismisal' and attract a statutory payment, but you will be out of a job never the less. No amount of 'I know my rights' BASSA BS will change this fact. If you take part in unprotected action you have no such recourse.

Ottergirl
 

I think there will still be the majority who went out last time who would go out again, they have the attitude of 'what have I got to lose as I have already lost it'.

To be honest though if Walsh lets this dispute drag on to another round of strikes then in my opinion there would have been a massive failing on behalf of BA to it's customers, shareholders and other staff members. Unite would have recommended the offer if Walsh had granted ST back - BA would have what they wanted, Unite would have had their strikes, and strikers would at leats have their concessions back. As it stands though Walsh wants to rub their noses in it at almost any cost.

This dispute needs to end now so we can all get back to doing what we are employed to do.

No15,

To use a war time analogy so beloved by BASSA if the British had surrendered at Dunkirk or the RAF had decided that the Battle of Britain wasn't worth the trouble then WWII would have been over by Xmas 1940 and no British cities would have been bombed. I am sure the Germans would have been delighted but sometimes its worth standing up for what you believe in.

While you have every right to strike, others have every right to go to work if they want. To then blame, and in some cases intimidate (I am not refering to you personally), those whose views are different to yours is childish and petulant. The failure lies in the union leadership in not anticipating the effect, or lack of, the strike. The value of strikes just like nuclear weapons lies in their deterrant value. Once the strike takes place the value and advantage of them is lost. It just leads to Mutually Assured Destruction its MAD.

All the best

bloomin cheek wheelie my boeing! I'll have you know that my action is never found wanting!

numberfifteenplease - most who went out on strike will be back at Bedfont I'm sure but I bet many more will find a reason not to. There will be the "I've already done my bit" camp to the "Whats the point, we can't win" lot and not forgetting the "I've got a great Xmas trip, days off for the party of a lifetime, etc". The longer the wait, the more people go off the boil. The crew who don't bother with forums, don't read the BA stuff, groan when a text from BASSA comes in, these guys are fed up with the whole thing and are not reading enough propaganda to get whipped up again. It's not looking too good for Unite.

Backing BA
 

I totally respect your stance as that is indeed your right.

What I am uncomfortable with is the way that BA are almost victimising crew who went on strike. I have personally not witnessed any bullying of non-strikers but have first hand knowledge of the way BA are treating individuals who went on strike.

Lets face it, this dispute will finish at some stage and then we will have to get on with our jobs - however the current management regime is behaving in an extraordinarily heavy handed manner toward some people.

No 15,
I really do hope for all your sakes that Bassa does not take you out on strike again.

I have a friend who has just done her SEP last week and she saw her manager dressed as crew doing aircraft training as a VCC. Her manager, who she is very friendly with, told her that she had been pushed into doing it. She said that she had been trying to avoid it but all Crew Managers were being told that they have to do it now. Firstly to support BA in case of a strike but also so that they can be called upon in other disruption situations to assist BA. As they often fly with there CSDs and Pursers on line anyway it will be easy for them to stay recent. Anyway she went on to say that there are still loads of VCCs being trained up.

I have had a number of VCCs fly on my E/F flights to maintain their recency also and many are flying on LGW flights to maintain the 777 licence.

I worry that you lot will all strike again and he will just sack you all and then fight it in the courts. You see you still do have something to lose, your job. You seem like a really good crew member, please don't put your job at risk.

Bettygirl
Is this true? I wonder if that can be legal? It seems to go against all of the EU principles. I can see that they may get away with that for temps (and even that seems harsh) but to do it to permanent staff is highly questionable. I've just recommended my friends daughter who is at flybe to have a look at our new website - she'll kill me if she leaves flybe and finds she is out of a job at BA as well!:ouch:

No 15,

I agree that it it will eventually come to an end and everyone will need to get on with each other again. I can see that from a strikers point of view that BA may appear to be heavy handed, but in return will you conceed that to some who went to work the use of yellow pens and XXXX baggage tags appear intimidating and bullying. As you will know form diversity training it is how the intimidatee feels that is key not what the intent of the intimidator was.

all the best

VCC training
 

Betty girl wrote: There are no more people being called up for VCC training. I don't feel able to disclose the number of VCC in a public forum, but let's just say that it's probably a lot higher than Unite or BASSA would ever have envisaged.

I have little doubt that, using a combination of non-strikers, VCC and temps, BA will be able to operate 100% of LH flights should there be another round of strikes.

Well ottergirl I have spoken to three temps going to mixed fleet and one new CSM, who was main crew until a week or so ago, and all four said that, that was in the contact.

It has amazed me too. These crew are going to be earning even less that LGW crew and we all know that many of them say they struggle on their pay.

Gatwick crew get a breakfast voucher at some destinations and this helps them with their meal bills but these new crew will not get that.

LGW crew also get dry cleaning vouchers and these new crew do not.

Both us and LGW have our Visas paid for, Mixed fleet do not.

Both us and LGW have our vaccinations paid for at BA health services and these new crew have to pay for theirs!!!

Yes it is definitely only one weeks notice but they have to give 4 weeks if they want to leave.

There is definitely a clause that says in times of over crewing they can be stood down on NO PAY or asked to carry out ground duties and ground duties can be forced on them at anytime the company wishes if the company needs ground duties undertaken. This includes working in the terminal and the hourly rate would be paid.

Also there is a clause that says if there weight does not stay in proportion to their height they can be dismissed.

The three temps I talked to were very worried and totally fed up of how they were being treated by BA. All of them said they were basically going to give it a go for a few months and see how it panned out but all of them were worried that they would not be earning enough and one basically said she was going to do it, just, until something better came up.

The crew member that got CSM was a bit more upbeat but then she is getting rapid promotion and a pay rise but she was worried about the stand down clause but reckoned that as it was an expanding fleet it was unlikely that, that would happen. Well for her sake I hope she is right because she was a really nice girl.

No 15,

Perhaps it should be me welcoming you to the 21st century: you can indeed be sacked for taking part in lawful industrial action. The moment you go on strike you are in breach of contract and thus can be sacked. I am not going to explain to you what happens as I'm sure you have read it all in the previous pages on this topic re the protection involved.

Phil Rigg
 

Phil, I think you have shown by this paragraph alone that you have no great knowledge of the why's the wherefore's or the outcome. Bye, bye.

Never happens though does it? And it will never happen in this case either

I don't get that one either? The BASSA leadership team are way past their elected tenure. Time to change and get the militants out.

That is because the company do not wish to do so. For all of the black painting of the company by a certain member of BASSA who is no longer employed by BA (because he couldn't be bothered to turn up for the work he was contracted to do) they do not want to use such heavy tactics which would damage them into the future.

The truth of the matter is that there are no real protections, all you gain is the automatic right to an unfair dismissal hearing.

BA has been extremely patient in this matter.

Au contraire, No15, he has identified the nub of the problem the strikers face. Frankly'da management' don't actually have to do anything right now. They are making massive savings through MF and the fact that a large part of their workforce has turned down a pay rise thanks to their 'representation' via BASSA. The threat of a strike is empty since it has already been shown to be a dud, and will in any case jeopardise the livelihoods of any who participate.

For WW the dispue IS over . He has far bigger fish to fry - IAG, tying up with AA, acquiring other airlines etc. BASSA are just a sideshow now, with no power to even influence the transfer of routes to MF much less actually wring any concessions from their employer. No amount of huffing and puffing is going to change that fact.