I agree Tiramisu,

I do think BA has more chance of being here than Virgin.

I am not sure what the allowances are like at Virgin - compared to Mixed Fleet. The basic looks more though - infact more than a few years ago when I went to a Virgin interview.

It depends really if full time long haul suits you! Personally, I like shorthaul!

SlideBustle wrote: BA says that its intention is to ensure a fair and transparent distribution of routes to all fleets and to deploy new aircraft based on commercial need across existing and new fleets. These are medium-term objectives. It would be ridiculous for BA to guarantee a limited transfer of routes to MF, which is what many cabin crew are after. No company in the 21st century would tie its hands with such a 1960s type of agreement so beloved by BASSA.

Ultimately, all routes will be operated by Mixed Fleet. This will take several years, unless you hasten the process by striking.

As I said, you have the luxury of time to sort out your job and career. You are indeed lucky in this respect.

So, basically do you agree that in 15 years - even if there are some current crew left - Mixed Fleet will take over somehow?

Or do you reckon - it will be until the last person retires (which if they wait until 65 could be over 40 years!)

If it is the former, is this very fair? If BA was to start Openskies or some sort of New Fleet for pilots or maybe a new seperate group at other departments would it be expected that they should just ''accept their job is up (not redundant just given to cheaper staff) and look for something else'' - obviously jobs are made redundant and people lose their jobs, changes happen etc etc which if just the way of working life, HOWEVER to create a seperate workforce that takes work off more ''expensive'' staff is unfair.

...Goes off to plan career change! :ok:

I am not fully disagreeing with you - as you do make some VERY valid points and guarantees with jobs aren't always unfortunately given - just being devil's advocate. As you know I didn't support the strikes, but just want to see it from the point of view of strikers aswell.

SlideBustle, you seem to be using the word 'fair' quite a lot. BA's business isn't about 'fair', its about making money. BA will almost certainly not wait for even 15 years to start having MF take the major routes. Those routes don't 'belong' to current crew, so BA will likely switch MF to them when it suits their business plan. By that time the option will be along the lines of "If you really want to go to Narita, do you want to join MF, or stay where you are on your old Ts & Cs flying to Abuja?"

WRT staff travel seniority being returned on the commuting route, have a look at the link
http://www.pprune.org/5781206-post297.html

Which makes you wonder why bassa refused to discuss an hourly rate when balpa were having similar discussions with BA 4 yrs ago. :confused:

hmm and i always thought that allowances were paid for downroute living expenses :oh: and not to supplement basic wage. is it any wonder HMRC increased the tax on allowances?

Slidebustle - we can see how this will pan out by looking at GLA base. They were allowed to run down slowly until they got to the point of unsustainable. (If you remember, we were doing a lot of positioning up and down to fill in their gaps) Sooner or later, with no recruitment, it could be the end of the old fleets. The question is, "How long?"

If the basic wage was not supplemented, do you suppose we would be killed in the rush to earn 11K? In London? This has always been the way an airline ensures that it only pays the crew a living wage when they are working, think of the basic pay as a retainer! HMRC have kindly turned a blind eye to this for many years and have been threatening to redress the balance. It was no surprise they came calling in the current economic climate, we've been expecting it for a long time.

Other carriers, like Emirates and Gulf provide accomodation for their staff. Some get London weighting. Easy get higher basic. Some charters get shift pay or hourly rate. We get better allowances. Simples! Not pensionable, not paid when your off sick, pregnant, on holiday, not NI taxable. Thats a deal that many employers would like their staff to buy into. I'm sure BA would prefer to pay everyone on the payroll in the same way - now that really would be a saving!

Thanks Betty.

Some folks fly off the handle on here! Dam, I hope they are calmer and more measured if they are pilots, or indeed anything else.

The 'tentative' talks were 'thats what we are offering - take or leave.

To clarify, I do not for one minute believe I should be paid, nor deserve the pay of a pilot. The values are vastly different but the theory could be the same.

I went to ask for clarification from Francis' web chat, of how the top up payment will be calculated beyond 2011, and whether the payment will be incorporated into my contract. I've been beaten to it, the question is already posted. I will be interested to see the answer, alot sways on this answer.

On the point of how BA wind down fleets. I'm ex regional crew, we were not left to wither on the vine. Worse, friends who stayed with BACON on the understanding that there was two years to collectively turn the business to profit. Was it six or eight months before BA reneged and sold the lot to FlyBe. Those friends and I are now at LHR and are hearing the same words used about 'old fleet'.

How can we really trust BA's intent.

Thanks Ottergirl and PC767,

Of course - meal allowances theoretically are for downroute living expenses - but try living on 11K in London which is the starting basic! Also we get allowances for doing there and backs. Why is that if they are for downroute? Fact is, it would be very hard to survive in London on 11K... There was a recent report actually which has stated that wages in the UK are too low, like the minimum wage is etc.

I do think an hourly rate would be quite a fair way of paying it to be honest. The longer you work the more money you get. However, downroute, some destinations are more expensive than others. Also £2.10 an hour/£2.40 an hour would be a paycut!

PC767
 

You can't expect to 'trust BA' any longer than a future pay deal lasts, one year two year etc..

BA is run as a hopefully profit making venture, for shareholders and ALL staff, not just cc. The available pay allowance pot will vary as the financial performance varies in any given period.
In the present financial climate any agreement with a pay rise and a promise of no drop in allowances has to be good compared to staff in other depts.

BA run the airline not BASSA , and route structure, a/c allocation to 'good routes' etc is their decision not 'yours.' This would have been less of a problem with a negotiated hourly rate as per f/c. The hourly rate would have been the same as f/c. As Bettygirl says, we all eat the same. (perhaps some more than others!)

Because of the failure to negotiate it is obvious that the A380/B787 when introduced will be Mixed Fleet, could have been different perhaps, with a bit more 'give and take'

Good luck in the next few weeks.

PC767,

Welcome to the real world. BA Connect was losing too much money - £1 per minute every day. So, BA sold it. Actually, it was more like a give away as BA had to pay Flybe £130m to take over BA Connect (except the LCY operation).

Even then, 15 routes got axed because, low-cost as Flybe is, these routes could never become profitable.

I've just had the electoral reform services paperwork through, with 28 pages of "info" from unite. Strange, as I left the union quite some time ago (even had a letter a couple of days ago from unite acknowleding my lack of payments).

I was under the impression that unite was supposed to stay "neutral" in regards to this vote, by not stating their opinion? It's pretty obvious to me that there's nothing "impartial" about this paperwork. Apart from ONE page stating "the good" (out of 28 pages), it's all doom and gloom and scaremongering. Anyone with some form of business sense will have a giggle (better than crying) at some of the statements.

For those who aren't sure how to vote on this, please read the proposal from BA thouroughly (on ess, not the unite version). Put business head on and think realistically. It's obvious the offer won't get better if you vote no to this one. I'm voting yes. Not sure if this has any legal ramifications as I'm not a member. Does anyone know?

MIDLGW,

The legal ramifications of invalid ballots could be an injunction brought by BA to stop a strike as the ballot was illegal as happened when crew voted even though they had left BA. However, the circumstances are different this time.

MIDLGW
 

MIDLGW

I suggest you contact the Union to confirm that you have left. My partner is having all sorts of issues trying to get them to acknowledge the fact that she left in February currently so she can qualify for the BA offer...!

I suggest you dont return the vote however, you are either a member, or you aint...

Thank you for the clarification, Caribbean boy. Snas, I have sent 2 letters. One when I stopped payment and another when I got 8 reminder letters in one day. The same reminder (stating I hadn't paid), same date, 8 copies sent. Not sure what else I can do? I still have these letters to show I haven't paid the union fees since I stopped payment. Also have all bank statements and payslips to prove I'm not a member.

MIDLGW
 

If you choose to accept the offer, all you need to do is return your acceptance to BA from the offer letter sent to you by BA.

Unless it hasnt been sent to you as the Union still has you incorrectly listed as a member...

Unless it hasnt been sent to you as the Union still has you incorrectly listed as a m
 

In which case, contact BA (HR and/or your manager) and send them a dated copy of your resignation from the union. Then you will be in a position to sign the BA agreement even if they haven't sent you one yet - because you can prove you had left Unite before the 25th June. If you want to, that is.

I think we will all get the BA offer because BA has no way of knowing if we are current members or not. They are leaving it up to us to sign if we left before 25th or not sign.

I am pretty sure that you could sign the BA contract if you were still in the union because it would only be your word against theirs about when you left. BA have just given this date of 25th June because legaly they are not allowed to offer inducements for us to leave the union. If they ended up going to court about the vote again, BASSA could use it against them if they hadn't said you can only sign, if you were not a member at the point the offer was mentioned, which was 25th.

MIDLGW. The union don't know it's your vote because it is enonomous. Really you shouldn't do both but who can tell that you have if you do!!!!