According to a BA manager the disruption agreement states they only have to inform Bassa and explain the time scale. There has never been a requirement to seek their permission, obviously there has to be an obvious cause for the agreement to be used, like ash cloud or snow etc.

This is a quote from the disruption agreement and one of our managers
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"The IFS Operations Manager will contact the chairperson of each of the Trades Unions to inform them of the situation and recommend a timescale for which the disruption agreement will be required."

I can confirm that the IFCE Operations Manager did make the required contact prior to the Disruption Agreement being activated.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
So BA did follow the procedure correctly.

With regard transfers and part time, I can see what you are trying to say but don't quite see why the fact that Bassa have withdrawn from union processes that this would affect previous agreements. All along BA have been saying that they will honour our agreements.

Whether BA are in the right or wrong and so far they have done everything by the book, I will agree, it is still a strange thing to do if they truly want an end to all of this.

Although I find being at work fine now, I really don't want to go through all the stress of another strike and I would hope that my employer would do everything it can to avoid this for both the sake of our company and our customers. I do tend to come on here and post more when I am stressed about the situation at work, sorry if I am beginning to bore some of you!!! Because I am obviously stressed as I am on here all the time at the mo!!

But this is NOT the way to regain peace or trust. It really isn't!!

Another thing!

A lot of the strikers already hate those of us that signed the agreement !

Now they have a reason to despise us. Thanks BA.

It makes us look like brown nosers that just signed to get advantage!

Plus some people have been waiting on these lists for years patiently waiting their turn and I do feel very sorry for them.

I can see that the transfers, just before Christmas, went ahead because Unite promised to ballot all it's members and that was a sign of BA's good faith. It is probably because Bassa reneged on this, that this has happened but it is just going to make everything worse, it really is! Trust me!!

Err, but BA are. As the BASSA subs are collected directly from payroll I think someone might notice in Feb when the pay rise and union subs hit the same pay check!

Bettygirl, I find a glass of Pinot works better! Or maybe take up kick-boxing! You are right though, the whole thing sucks! Sent you a pm.

Unfortunately since the days when BASSA and the groundstaff unions used to rule the roost
the world has changed somewhat.Unions are there to look after terms and conditions of their members -not run the company.

misscanada
 

Bettygirl

Been feeling a bit down myself lately: would someone post some up to date ramblings from DH, as mentioned a couple of pages ago, so as to cheer me up. The real world can get a little tough at times but a little fantasy can sometimes brighten all our days.

If you look at the Passengers and Self Loading Freight thread a bit further down bellow all the cabin crew threads on the main page, it was posted a few days ago on there, post 1466. In the British airways-Strike-your thoughts thread.

Hope that helps. Not sure it will cheer you up though!!!!

Ottergirl, not all. I know a number of crew whose subs are by direct debit from their bank.

Only Amicus subs are direct debit, Bassa is payroll.
OG

misscanada
 

Thank you Bettygirl,

Oh the emotion: roofs raised, houses being brought down, horses clapping, men wearing Y fronts, (and externally). Duncan truly did bring the 'tears to the eye' emotions of an intelligent gathering of sane people seriously discussing their futures and the actions of their leaders to the fore.

Damn it, just realised what's going on here. European, post existentialist, super surrealist film script in black and white!

Honestly have made me feel better.

PS Still feel sorry for all the decent, though deluded, crew.

Stormin
 

Stormins post above summarises perfectly the dispute....and it will only end when Bassa realise that they are there to look after their members, not run their department of the company.

If BA produced an offer tomorrow to Bassa for a £20k pay rise, a Maserati company car (or maybe M3's hehe) and rostering only when they felt like working, but with full pay and allowances, they would still reject it and not put it to their members...and how many of their members would reject that offer? This dispute has never been about cc, it's always been about Bassa's power....

Betty Girl,

I know it is stressful at the moment but it is important to keep grounded (so to speak!). I too am cabin crew and, I too left the union in disagreement of all that was proposed. At the time, the BA team were looking for ways to recognise those crew who had taken the hard, but morally correct action (in this particular instance), of crossing the picket line and coming into work. Now, prior to so doing, we all had to make a serious choice – to stay in the union or to resign? It was a bit of a dilemma for me initially, as I felt why should I resign from the union, when I was simply disagreeing with the way they were handling a particular issue? However, after much thought and discussion, I concluded that resignation was the only route possible – as I KNEW I would be coming to work. The reason that was the only route possible was that – as part of a democratic voting process, if the majority had voted ‘yes’ and I was a ‘no’ - then I would have been duty bound to follow the majority vote and strike – therefore there was no option but to resign.
Presumably, the people whom you very kindly feel sorry for, who are still in the union would have had to have done some pretty stiff soul-searching and would have been faced with the same difficult decision? HOWEVER, (and in that word it all lies, IMHO) their decision was to stay; having had all the ‘facts’, all the behaviour, all the dramas , all the rhetoric etc, etc, etc. So whilst I take on board that indeed there was an agreed procedure and in an ideal world this should be adhered to, sadly thanks to union antics, all bets are off. I have to say I cannot wholeheartedly disagree with BA choosing to recognise those who were prepared to stand up and be counted, incidentally not to ‘keep in with the company’ but out of moral obligation and personal accountability. I say all this without any knowledge whatsoever as to whether there HAS been any preferential treatment (indeed, my number on the list has not moved for over a year!); if, in fact, there has been, then whilst I am a strong protagonist of fair play (who isn’t?!) then, as I say, I can see where BA are coming from. I cannot see, despite pleas of ‘”we are staying in the union to vote ‘no’ “ where this school of thought is coming from? Unfortunately, It seems to have had no bearing thus far. I hope to be proved wrong!

I've been browsing these threads for some time and thought I'd sign up for my sixpenn'orth. OK so I'm not cabin crew. I'm an IT bod. Looking at the suggestion that as BASSA's records are in disarray, anyone could claim to have left the union by Dec 14th and get away with it, um....No. That date of Dec 14th coincides with the close date for docs to Pay Services. If you hadn't notified Pay Office by then, they would pay the subs to BASSA in the pay run. BA would know who had paid out subs to BASSA and who hadn't. They could not turn a blind eye as this would leave them open to charges of inducing members to leave the union. So far BA management seem to have been pretty canny in how they've played this dispute. Can't see them losing the plot now, particularly as HR is now under the same wing as Legal.

Does sound a bit like BA management are pushing the edge of the envelope though with the part time deal. Bound to inflame the union side. I just wonder if there is a change in tone from Unite's leadership though. They sound less strident in the past few days, having stated that strikes won't take place over the Easter weekend or Royal wedding. If so will they be able to rein in BASSA to play ball ?

Missyminx,
I left the union for the same reasons as you and I thought hard and long too.

I don't personally feel I need a reward for coming to work even though it was stressful and I like many am furious with the way Bassa and Amicus have used the mandate of our community and represented us all so badly.

However I feel the removal of staff travel as a punishment has only prolonged and made this dispute longer and more nasty and this next stage of treating people who signed up to the individual agreement different to all others is yet something else for people to feel hard done by.

It's a real shame that those that do accept these transfers will most likely feel unable to admit to being new to their new fleet, for fear of being labeled a non-striker and singled out on a flight. So unfortunately I feel it is not only the strikers that will be affected.

Anyway I live in hope that it will be sorted soon. After all the London Fire Brigade have finally got an agreement to new shift patterns and it only took them 6 years!!!!

Betty Girl

From what I have read about this dispute and previous ones, this is not the first time that BA management have removed staff travel from people going on strike. The big difference is that on the previous occasion it was returned fairly quickly as the dispute was settled shortly afterwards. This time around the stakes were raised, with BA saying that anyone who went on strike would lose staff travel forever. Harsh ? Maybe, but it was a very clear warning given when the strike ballot was set in motion. Having given that warning, BA management had to follow through or been seen as weak. Maybe the error was in issuing the warning in the first place, but what alternative was there ? BASSA were threatening to bring the airline to a standstill. If you hold a gun to someone's head you have to accept that they may hit back just as hard.

As far as not returning staff travel goes, there are many outside of cabin crew who are frankly livid at how one group of workers have been seen to undermine all the sacrifices that 30,000 others have made. I'm not sure whether cabin crew are quite aware of the level of cuts that other departments have gone through. My department shed staff and we have seen no pay award for the past two years. Other areas of BA have made staff reapply for their jobs, only there aren't as many of them now. A scale staff have also had a pay freeze. In real terms that means we've seen take the buying power of our home pay drop by 6% . We all made managed to reduce employee costs in real terms. The best that the cabin crew unions could come up with was a loan and that was after months of prevarication. BASSA and CC89 have done cabin crew a huge disservice.

I do have admiration for those who did not go on strike and left the union. It is a pity that BA management are unable to make any gesture of appreciation as that would be immediately snapped up by Unite as discriminatory.

Bettygirl said

Bettygirl, I don't know how well you know DH, but I can tell you straightthat if ST had been returned in full, he would have seen it as a foot in the door and would then simply move to the next agenda, eg; that all the sacked nd suspended are reinstated. If that was agreed, he would then move to the next agenda etc, until HE and his cronies were back in charge. Remember, the 5 issues that Bassa have put down for a strike this time are according to DH just the starting point ie, these 5 points MUST be FULLY agreed by BA and then and only then will Bassa start talking to BA on everything else. I can tell you that whoever has briefed WW ( I think I know who it may be ) has known what Bassa and particularly DH have been up to for years. They know that if you give DH an inch, you are setting yourself up for a bigger problem in the future. That is the way his mind 'works'

I have to be honest that I was amazed WW gave the strikers anything back on the ST front, but have to say I believe it to be the right decision. Back in full, no way, sorry

DH has no interest in ending this dispute. He is in the rather bizarre position of having no jepoardy as to the outcome whatsoever. His track record with Unite is not the best and, as such, he has a rather sadistic and self centerd interest in prolonging the dispute to cause as much harm as possible to his former employer.

As has been said before the moderate CC seem to be the victims in all of this and I hope it can be sorted out soon.

Ops & Choice.....
 

I think missyminx your suspicions regarding preferential treatment being given to non strikers may be correct? A thread was started last night on the BASSA forum merely stating that the poster (a striker) had received an email from BA offering them p/t. This morning this post has been removed?

It's possible that the quote DH used in his scaremongering was apparently from a crew members CTM, maybe simply a case of an ill-informed manager rather than IFCE's new procedure to punish strikers? Who knows, but after all the other lies BASSA have told I will reserve judgement until there is solid proof one way or another.

bemused
 

From having a quick look at the recent posts,it appears that Bassa are solely the ones to blame in this dispute.However from speaking to many c/c (strikers and non strikers), the general feeling seems to be very different.
For starters since 1997 c/c have significantly participated in cost reduction by reluctantly accepting the creation of a new contract with a basic pay scale ranging from £8000 to £15000.This alone generated a substantial savings for the company, I also understand that part of the 1997 agreement was the removal of certain payments.Long day and box payments were awarded after a substantially longer duty than what it used to be, petrol allowance was removed to name but a few.
In 2001 many c/c with Bassa's approval accepted a permanent contract reduction moving from full time to 75% or 50% contract.
In 2008/2009 VR was offered and not everybody who asked for it was given it, the same with part time many people have been waiting patiently to be offered it, assuming that the economic downturn would give them the opportunity to reduce their hours.In most companies this alone would be perceived as a collaborative workforce willing to help their employer in difficult times.Yet, these facts are completely overlooked and the blame is strictly apportioned to Bassa.Why?

There is your answer...
 

There are currently 116 pages in this thread, and prior to that there was another thread with over 100 pages.

Until you've read it all and not just "had a quick look", you cannot really make the statement you've made with any foundation.

If you go back further you will find many balanced posts from both pro and anti BASSA angles, and many neutral observations.

I was commenting on "recent posts", not the whole thread.

MM you might be slightly confused between a " collaborative workforce " and BASSA ! :eek:

You need to read more...
 

But you're asking a question:

about how you think they are being perceived, and you want it answered, what only on the last 10 comments? There is much balance on this thread, and it is well moderated, but you can't just be selective about posts when you ask a very wide reaching question.

All the cuts I have mentioned above have taken place.Have they not?Many of them negotiated by Bassa.To depict Bassa as the NO union is a bit unfair I think.Perhaps it is also their role as a union to protect what little is left from their original T&C's.Otherwise what is the point?

Mildly Militant
 

If only the recent posts are relevant then things done in 1997 and 2001 are totally irrelevant. You cannot just take a snapshot of events and make a reasoned judgment of the situation from that point. None of these events stand in isolation, the history is important if one wants to have a balanced understanding of the situation.

Mildly Militant:

Petrol allowance, box payments etc are an outdated concept. Many companies have cut back on these types of payment over the past 10 years, not just BA.

With BASSA's approval? You mean crew that wanted to go part time were allowed to, 'with the approval of the Union'? :ugh:

BA is not alone in looking for VR during the economic downturn. Like every other company, they ask for volunteers, then match the posts those people are in to the business need. If the business need states that only 'x' amount from a certain grade/fleet can be released on VR without affecting the business, then there will be people who do not get it (VR). It is standard practice, not some nefarious BA tactic.

As for 'assuming' that you can go part time just because of the downturn; this shows a lack of understanding as to how the business works, and is as good a reason as any why BASSA should stick to looking after the CC, not trying to run the company.

Your examples do nothing to prove that the workforce are collaborative; they are just examples of exactly what most other big companies have been doing over the past few years.

What they do show is an obviously ingrained belief from some CC and from BASSA that they should be able to tell BA how to run the business :ugh:

JT, without entering a debate on the semantics.Comments on a forum have little to do with the financial performance of the airline.
I was merely pointing out that since 1997 C/C have accepted changes and reduction of income.

Anotherthing
 

Thank you for your thoughts, nevertheless it is undeniable that these changes have taken place without Bassa's interference.So to claim that C/C are not collaborative and resist change at all cost is simply not fair.That at some point after many T&C's have been eroded they put their foot down may be justified.

To all of you.

I understand why he removed Staff Travel.

I understand partly why he is going ahead with transfers and part time because he told people if the agreement went ahead he would make transfers, so he has done some for those that signed.

I did not strike as I have said many times.

My point is that all this is just hardening the strikers into thinking Bassa is right and that the strikers ARE being bullied. I am just trying to explain it from THEIR perspective and it IS making them more militant. Is that what we all want or do we want a settlement.

If you read the individual offer it is fine, it guarantees our terms and conditions, it gives us a pay deal and it promises to be fair with route transfers.

However if you look at the one the union are required to sign it is a lot different. It has a lot of things in it that I feel NO union would want to sign up to and this is the view of a moderate person, me. So it is just not as simple as many of you make out on here. Unfortunately many posters on here are not fully aware of all the facts and unfortunately see things in black and white.

Lets hope for all our sakes that both sides make an effort to be reasonable and actually try and end this. BA have actually got ALL the savings they wanted and for them, they actually need to do nothing, but maybe having got all they want in savings and a new fleet on lower costs, maybe now the icing on the cake is the destruction of the union.

I know many of you will think that is good but I can assure you it would have a detrimental effect on all other unions in BA and all other departments including ground staff and pilots. So please try and take a broader view of things.

MM
 

So have all other sections of the company, CC are not unique in that respect.

I am not sure what you mean about comments on a forum having little to do with the financial performance of a company. Apart from stating the obvious it does not move the debate forward.

All sections of the company took reductions after 9/11, many companies went to the wall. That has nothing to do with the current situation. BASSA did pass a resolution at one of the racecourse meetings before the first strike ballot to enter into no negotiation with the company. This is a matter of record. Since then they have not exactly made a serious attempt to reach a settlement with BA. They are the only section within the company that has failed to reach agreement with the company.

I am sure that a pointless discussion about blame could go on forever and reach no conclusion. Blame is irrelevant, the issue is ending the dispute, concentrating on who did what to whom is counterproductive and infantile.

JT, without entering a debate on the semantics.Comments on a forum have little to do with the financial performance of the airline.
I was merely pointing out that since 1997 C/C have accepted changes and reduction of income.

They have not, they simply agreed to a restructuring of their income with in many cases an increase in their pensionable pay and the introduction of new contract cabin crew with different pay scales.
Even the lucrative box payments introduced at the time was resisted by bassa and it is only still available today due to a superior negotiating skill of the cc89 team.

fly1234

What do you believe has contributed to a rise in pensionable pay? Only cabin crew basic pay is pensionable, in fact, the new payscales for main crew which, were awarded after the 2007 dispute, are only pensionable upto a point

The fianl three scales are not pensionable, this means that pensionable pay stops somewhere between £15k and £16k.

Bep. 1997.

Mildly Militant
 

You mention events from 1997/2001 and 2008/9 where CC made changes "without BASSA's Interference". Well for starters in 1997 BASSA called a 3 day strike and cost the company the tune of £120 million! CC89 my union of choice at the time negotiated the current long day payments, box payments ETP triggers after longer duties etc. After causing the distress to our customers and it's members BASSA backed down to these requests from the company and once a settlement was agreed, staff travel was reinstated in full. Oh yes, and the salary band for the post '97 starters was up to £18K and in recent times has been increased by a further £4k (albeit non pensionable) as a good will gesture by BA in 2007, when we had the strike called off at the 11th hour.

In 2001, along with unpaid leave many crew grabbed the opportunity to take p/t or even take unpaid leave for up to 18 months. As did ALL other areas of BA under the business response scheme. As well as this other departments were restructured and many had to reapply for their jobs.

In 2008/9 CC did take VR as did other departments, again these departments made significant cost savings which included a complete restructure and loss of headcount which resulted in people moving into jobs they would not normally choose to undertake.

It's nice to see a new poster on here, and whilst I clearly have a different take on the events you mention. One thing I will agree on is that BASSA are not solely to blame for the mess we find ourselves in.

@PC767. I believe the main increase in pensionable pay was being able to opt to NAPS2. This reduced the abatement rate and effectively increased pensionable pay.

Not quite a good-will gesture from BA actually. It was paid for by moving the annual pay 'cost of living' rise from October (when most BA employees negotiate) to February thereby giving 1/3 of our annual 'pensionable' pay rise back to fund a non-pensionable increment! It was another of BASSA's monumental failures that, not only did they not cost out whether it was a good deal but they didn't ask us whether we were okay with it either. So you could see it as a goodwill gesture to the pension fund from BASSA because it has reduced the pension liability.

Mildly Militant,

You are badly informed.

As Chigly mentions, BASSA actually WENT ON STRIKE in 1997 over the new entrant starter rates.

As for cuts in some variable payments like overtime? Misleading, because, apart from the car mileage payment (of which we were the only work group left at the airport still receiving it at the time), most, if not all the other cuts in variable pay, were actually added to our basic.

BASSA went on strike then, because letting BA employ new crew cheaper was seen as "the thin end of the wedge" and these "cheaper crew will be a threat to your jobs" (sound familiar).

Betty Girl

I agree with you totally re part time/transfer lists. Few people are more critical of BASSA than me, but if true, it's a mistake by BA as it gives BASSA a great opportunity to crow about BA walking over agreements.

Dear Beagle
 

I apologise for not making myself clear.You are right Bassa did go on strike regarding the introduction of the new lower basic pay back in 1997.However a settlement was agreed and the new basic was introduced.Regarding the different allowances included into your basic, it is my understanding that they only lasted a few years before being completely removed.
More importantly the point I was trying to make was that C/C did make a significant financial contribution to the business since 1997, and to claim that they have not is slightly ...biased.
I hope this clarifies my previous post.

Mildly Militant wrote: I think that it's you who needs to get your facts right. It's my firm understanding that everyone who asked for VR did get it - all 1,003 of them.

As for part-time: Bill Francis has committed to granting by March 2011 a part-time contract to all 5,594 who requested it, including a new 33 per cent arrangement.

Carribean boy I believe my facts are very accurate indeed . I actually have 2 friends of different ranks who were not released for VR. Around 1500 crew confirmed their VR offer and as you say 1003 were actually released.As to the part time offer crew have been waiting for years to take it yet many are still waiting despite the alleged severity of the financial situation.

You can always rely on BASSA for the truth!
 

you can always rely on BASSA to tell the whole truth:rolleyes: remember the claim that only 40 of the old cabin crew 89 members went on strike? It appears to be debunked in the latest UNITE news letter.


Also BASSA claim to represent over 10000 crew seems false it appears their membership numbers have fallen by over 1000

full article here . LATEST NEWS UPDATES