I don't think anyone has a problem with the chain of command.The capitan has ultimate responsibility/say ,in any matter on board,but how can someone who is responsible for the flying of the aircraft become involved in the run of the mill day to day opperation in the cabin that is why the responsibilty of running the service is delegated to the sccm. CabinCrew see very little of the flight crew during a flight thus for them their manager is the sccm,however they know that the person at the front is the capitan of the ship and has ultimate say.
I would say that it is appreciated by all when the cap.comes to the door to say goodbye to all the passengers.

fruitbat, as you experience either cockpit or cabin crew (you don´t specify whom you're referring to) not always coming to you soon enough, you may well benefit from looking into a fairly straightforward yet very effective management tool called 'situational leadership'.
Rather than managing everybody the same way, you adapt your style to the individual.
Ascertain where your crew member is in the following diagram, and use the appropriate management style.
It works.

Link


Now please everyone, do step away from the willy waving and return to the subject of industrial relations.
Thank you-

Where is this going now?
 

As flapsforty suggests, can I try (even as a very infequent poster) to get us back onto the subject of the ongoing IA dispute?

So we have the deadline of midnight 15May but an apparent agreement that everything needs to have been sorted between BA and whoever-it-is by Tuesday evening. BASSA will then have a meeting where it seems highly likely that a decision will be made on a show of hands.

Where is this likely to go?

I heard a 3rd hand rumour that later this year the company will be offering voluntary redundancy to current crew (i.e. not MF). Anyone else heard this?

It seems that if it is true, BASSA's continued resistance is futile. May I say again: Is Mr Hollly on WW's payroll? And why do people still pay monthly dues to BASSA an organisation that seems to have outlived it's sell by date.

TorC
 

The way its likely to go is the 'USUAL' way it goes, when there is 'a show of hands' in a Bassa auditorium. I really feel that DH literally lives in the 70's with this type balloting of his members. It is literally incredulous IMO. He has ONCE AGAIN engineered a situation where HE will get what HE wants. I know a number of you here want to believe that Bassa, and in particular DH, wants to really try and find a way forward, but as I've said on numerous occasions here, this man is a 'despot' who wants to very sadly carry this charade on for as long as it takes.

On Thursday, noone will dare to go against the status quo and DH knows that. The peer pressure itself in these meetings is total. The last Bassa meeting I attended ( I won't be attending any more I can tell you) DH announced the ballot by a show of hands as to whether Bassa would negotiate with BA in the future ( Nov 09). After a resounding show of 'yes' hands, his actual words were, I quote - ' Is there anyone brave enough to vote No - I thought not' - Unquote, I would be very interested to know what Litebulbs feelings are on all of this.

As VintageKrug as said on the pax forum, the show of hands on Thursday is a foregone conclusion and that in lots of ways Bassa going to a strike option will hopefully put this sorry situation to bed once and for all.

I imagine that some sort of VR package is/always has been a possibility. But there's not a company on the planet that offers it just to be nice ... it's only offered when there's a serious need to offload people, and when all other possibilities have been exhausted. (It has, I know, been recently offered and taken-up, in others depts).

If a strike comes along, then it's highly likely IMO, that a few hundred CC will in fact offload themselves anyway. So I can't see BA being in any rush at the moment.

Let's imagine (as JT rightly indicates above) that a show of bassa hands results in a strike taking place. It'll be ineffectual as has been shown before. A few hundred might find themselves out of work, or maybe not. But at the end of it, what will have been solved/settled? Absolutely NOTHING.

Bassa have, by their own actions, driven themselves and their members into a very tight cul-de-sac, and there's nobody to help guide them out of it.

Surely BA (or even Len!!)will insist on a proper ballot? BA have been very patient and accomodating in the past weeks, what with extensions to deadlines etc.

I thought that the outcome of talks was announced on Thursday 12th, not the 15th.

Re redundancy....I have heard this too. I expect that it will dependent on a number of factors including take up of part-time, growth of MF, growth of future route network etc. We do have too many Pursers now so I wouldn't be surprised if this group were offered it as a stand alone group.

Are they not "custom and practice" rather than an actual rule? Anyway the CSD is the most senior by definition, yet is the only one who doesn't have a choice of working position. At briefing allocate the junior positions first, then decide where you need to be so you can do IFA's (so they can't subsequently avoid you!) and the pursers then choose their position.
I think it would be good to shake up the system a bit, many are too used to working in one cabin all the time.
I think your time would be valuable in WT as well. They are all customers!

Getting back on track...
 

What do folk think will happen if, as seems highly likely, BASSA and CC89 reject the deal they have been negotiating with BA by a show of hands at the upcoming emergency meetings ? More particularly, what do you think might happen if Unite then refuse to call strike dates ?

You see, the trouble with the way in which the branches are putting this, they have left themselves no back stop if the attendees reject the deal. They have no way of establishing what will be acceptable - that question never seems to be asked. So they have nothing to go back to the table with. The option being put forward seems to be 'accept or reject the offer', with rejection implying that the consequence is announcing strike dates.

As soon as strike dates get announced, there is a 7 day window to prevent them from starting. If the past 28 days has not secured a deal, it is highly unlikely that a 7 day pressure cooker is going to miraculously solve everything. Moreover BA is likely to want to spend that time putting its continency plan into operation. We then revert back to a 12 week period of strike action (assuming that any strike action is 'protected' under TULRCA), and nothing happens until it is over.

But what happens if Unite say 'No' to announcing strike dates ? What happens if Unite announce dates but tell cabin crew that the action is unprotected and that they will be liable to dimissal for breach of contract ? Oh and breach of contract does not carry with it any notice period or severance pay ?

Rejecting the deal???
 

Is it the general feeling on this forum that any deal will be rejected by this "show of hands?" :eek:
I thought that now that BASSA were back in talks with the company, there would be a recomandation to accept by the reps. I don't have access to other forums and was wondering if a rejection of any deal was thought the most likely scenario on those forums too.
I had thought that this whole sorry saga was about to come to and end this week. :sad:


Barbosa.

Views in my post are mine and do not represent the views of my employer.

I think the point about a "show of hands" is that the union reps running the show on the day can sway the vote in any way they want. The "is there anybody brave enough to vote No" type comments can be asked first to gain a Yes vote, or the opposite "is anyone silly enough to vote Yes?" The point is that the show of hands is essentially an exercise in the dynamics of large groups and is open to manipulation - it is not a democratic process.

The people that are likely to turn up at such meetings are those that are politically aware and active. These are the same ones that are likely to vote No, as they are the same group that is invested in maintaining the power of BASSA. Historically this has been an entirely sensible decision, it has delivered enviable T&Cs, so maintaining the power of the union is not (in isolation) an unreasonable stand point.

So even if the offer is reasonable and would be acceptable to the majority of BASSA members, it is entirely likely that the whole meeting on the 12th will be used to prolong a dispute that most just want resolved. Essentially the issue is that a few politically active union members will manipulate the situation to force their opinion on the majority (whose opinion on the offer we will not be allowed to know as there will be no democratic vote).

Juan Tugoh
 

You have summed it all up perfectly. When, not if, there is a call for strike action on Thursday, then surely, Unite or BA will have no choice but to step in and end this NOW. This is now just plain boring and quite frankly someone with power - LM or KW has to now deal with it. Let these people go please and put them and us out of our misery.

My option would be to let them strike KNOWING it was unprotected. Lets see who follows the 'tomato king' then:ugh:

The other bizarre thing about Thursdays meeting is that Bassa and Amicus are having seperate meetings to vote on the same thing!!. A lot of the Bassa members seem quite happy to allow no more than 10% of the membership vote by a show of hands. Those that cannot attend are saying they trust their fellow strikers to ' do the right thing', whatever that may be, and anyone not happy will, we are sure, stand up and say so. Its incredulous the whole thing.

Redundancy
 

Happy to be corrected here, but is the view of the DWP, not that a company cannot make 1 group of (expensive?)employees redundant whilst recruiting into the same role at a cheaper rate?

secondly, BA recently issued an HR1 form to the DWP stating a possible intention to make 80 employees redundant within the band 2/3 grades. Nothing was mentioned for any other grade.

I hope people do not have their hat hanging on the 'pay me and I'll leave' hook.:oh:

Perhaps it is not 'redundancy' that they are preparing for?

Bassawitch, are you going to bedfont on thursday?

I think what everybody has said is spot on about the show of hands and the reps know it.
Maybe time to get the SEP books out for a refresh just in case.

I believe it is true as well ref Eu employment law, however much BA would like to replace its senior crew with less expensive MF newbies. Mr Walsh wants to turn BA into another Wal-Mart, a company renown for low pay, poor working conditions and strong anti-union policies. The only good thing about Wal-Mart is that working a 34 hour week, employees can expect to earn $17,874 per year. This is considerably more than BA will pay MF junior crew.

Yes BA may achieve a high turnover of employees from the Mixed Fleet, but surely that will be merely an indication of an unhappy workforce? Perhaps that is not a great achievement in a business where your cabin crew spend so much time with your customers?

It seems that there are some on this forum who have pushed a certain agenda along, and now they can see the MF is taking away their livelihood. A bit of an own goal I would say.

Oh dear another person who seems to have forgotten that Mr Walsh is no longer the CEO of BA, it's Keith Williams. Mr Walsh is CEO of IAG. No matter. Presuambly the claim re the desire to turn BA into a WalMart can be substantiated . No ?

There is also the misguided assertion that high staff turnover equals unhappy staff. It could be due to the fact that the people who are likely to be the main cabin crew in the future may just see the job as being a stepping stone on a different career path. Something that is fun to do for a few years - an opportunity to see places that they wouldn't normally be able to. If the government stats are to be believed the likelihood is that 50% of the upcoming generation will be saddled with stonking student loans to pay off. So they won't have the same opportunities to travel that previous generations did. So a job that pays them a modest wage, keeps them below the theshold where the student loan repayments kick in and also affords them a chance to see a bit of the globe is pretty attractive. But not something that you might want to do for a lifetime. It really is time to wake up and realise that the newcomers may not want to be serving chicken or beef for 20 years, even if you paid them current maincrew wages. Not only that, but employers cannot guarantee that there will be a job serving chicken or beef in 20 years time.

The other dubious assumption is whether customers will want the same degree of contact with cabin crew. In an age when passengers may opt out from an airline meal, on board drinks etc, in a bid to shave a few more dollars off the ticket price, the degreeof contact with cabin crew will diminish. The major reservations systems are already geared up to allowing tailoring of the ticket price dependant on the extras the passenger wants, over and above a seat on the plane. So if Jo Public is on a shorthaul trip of a 90 minutes he/she may just want a seat, be happy to bring on board a sandwich from the terminal plus a drink and leave it at that. What customer contact will they have from the cabin crew aside from the safety demo and the hi & bye ?

I believe the advertised wage for MF on the BA recruitment web site was £17000 - £20000 per annum. This included allowances and a productivity percentage. This equates to $27200 - $32000 per annum at $1.60 = £1.00.

This is considerably more than than the Wal-Mart wage you quote. Yes some of the allowances will be spent down route but what is the value of the other benefits relative to those offered by Wal-Mart i.e. staff travel.

Rumour has it that the talks are continuing and will still go on tomorrow.

On a separate note. The old 'show of hands' thingy is fine when you have an overwhelming majority one way or the other, but what happens when you have a split decision. Who goes out and counts the votes ? Who makes sure that someone hasn't put up two hands or voted twice ? Who validates that the count is accurate ? On something that will affect 8,000 other folk, surely there has to be some sort of governance ? Or is it just that the meeting will be held but Unite will determine the next steps, regardless.

I can remember the strike in 1974 where we had a meeting at the Alexandra Palace and voted whether to accept an offer then. That was done on a show of hands with about (apparently) a 55 - 45 % split. This was "measured" by the floor manager of the Palace and we went back to work with that result. Strange how some things never seem to change with BASSA. :ugh: