Bassa has repeatedly used the Disruption Agreement as a weapon against BA.

Can you really blame BA for ignoring Bassa now? What are they going to do, strike?

PC767 - How was the agreement not adhered too last time?

Having read the Disruption agreement I saw no mention of VCC's or MF crew - this as I understand it was an adhoc condition placed upon BA by the Bassa chairperson. So as I see it BA followed the 'correct protocol', it was Bassa that chose to vary the agreement.

Now that the Strike has become political, (No doubt the SWP wants to win this battle at any cost - probably even the closure of the airline), I really hope that crew members vote no to the strike. It's no longer about staff, its about a socialist world. socialist workers dont want negotiation - These are the guys that stopped the negotiations in may by storming ACAS - when the dispute could have been settled.

http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2010/...05_468x317.jpg

Perhaps crewfriend could explain how this benefited cabin crew? It didn't SWP aren't interested in protecting cabin crew, but overthrowing the government and replacing it with a far left one.

Would you care to share the losses as well?
 

BA is a very correctly audited organization and in 2008-09 it made a loss of £401 million, that was compounded by a loss of £531 million in 2009-10.

That is a loss of £932 million over two years. A loss of £932,000,000 and we have approx 57,000 employees.

Our individual share would be minus £16,350 if you feel this is a good option.

Thought not. But it does illustrate very well the magnitude of the problem that we face.

My understanding was that the ballot was ruled illegal because union officials openly encouraged ex-members and those about to take VR to vote, knowing that they were ineligible.

The union has to make 'reasonable efforts' to keep the ballot to current members, I think it was suggested that a note with the ballot paper explaining the rules would have been sufficient.

Still being a member following cancelled payment, numerous phone calls, 2 letters, 1 of which sent recorded is not reasonable effort, it’s no effort whatsoever.

Info from 'another place' -

I think we can all see that a NO vote to the strike call means that BA, the Company, wins and so do the staff. However the malcontents remain.
So what about a YES vote to the strike call. It only needs a majority of voters not a majority of CC. There may not be many voters so perhaps only 3000-3500 possible strikers.

I suggest that BA might ignore the strike call. The Company might say that it has taken legal advice and believes that this proposed strike is a continuation of the previous strike and the strikers are not protected in the same way from dismissal.

1. BA does not instigate any Court action.
2. BA advises the strikers that it contemplates dismissing them.
3. BA now has sufficient trained staff to crew the cabins on a very large number, perhaps as much as 90% of its flights and certainly 100% of the higher revenue earning flights.
4. The strike goes ahead, probably poorly supported.
5. BA dismisses the strikers.
6. The strikers have to take action against the Company.
7. The company refuses to re-employ the strikers.
8. BA offers a modest sum to each striker. This will hardly matter to the Company as expensive Legacy CC have been replaced by cheaper MF CC.

Will Unite fund the striker's legal action? I doubt it. The malcontents are gone and the cabin is a nicer place to work in.

This seems like a very fair appraisal of the situation.

For the deluded, the commies, the unwashed SWP 'types', the fantasists and general malcontents - TAKE NOTE!!!

"UK snow: British Airways judged best at keeping passengers informed"
 

Here is a little article praising BA's efforts at keeping pax informed during the snow disruption. As an aside, it contains a couple of comments (shown below) pertinent to the subject of this thread. Direct and to the point!Full article at: UK snow: British Airways judged best at keeping passengers informed - Telegraph

Crewfriend
 

Crewfriend - and there lies the problem. You have been hoodwinked majorly and I'm sorry to say so have the other believers in this cult called a union.

Please try and do your own research rather than rely on Bassa - speak to pilots and ask them if they've left Balpa to join Unite, for example. Go back and look at the timeline of the "negotiations" (inverted commas because you actually need to attend to negotiate)

Make up your own mind by acquainting yourself with facts rather than hearsay and spin

@ Crewfriend
 

Regarding your statement that BA Flight Crew are joining bassa, can you explain this, quoted from • BASSA• About us

"The British Airlines Stewards and Stewardesses Association (BASSA) is a branch of the Transport & General Worker's Union (T&GWU) exclusively for British Airways cabin crew." (my bold).

?

Or on the basis that no bassa supporters listen to/read anything that BA publishes/says, maybe they don't bother to advise anyone?

Reluctant tho' I am to do his work for him, Crewfriend did say that pilots had left BALPA to join UNITE, not BASSA, clearly not the same thing. What branch he claims, who knows? Likely to be true? In infinitesimally small numbers I would imagine. I mean there's bound to be a few extreme left leaning pilots, who might feel that this current pan UK and pan European mobilisation of "the workers" against capitalism is for them.

On another of his points, I find myself (despite it being almost impossible for me to be more diametrically opposed in all other views) agreeing with him.

One of BASSA's "excuses" for their appalling handling of this, is that when BA returns to decent profits, "The managers will be getting their big bonuses". It seems to me that Unite and the unions representing other staff when negociating cost savings during the Company's financial crisis, have missed a trick. Why did they not negociate a change to any future Profit Share Scheme, in that instead of it being calculated on a person's salary, it's just a straight equal share? ie. £10m pot divided by 40,000 staff. No complicated formula that's costly to administer and a very real incentive to deliver excellent customer service (and not to strike! - maybe that's why they didn't suggest it!) for the front line staff that often receive some of the smaller sums under the current scheme.

This would have been a great coupe for the unions to say to their members - look what we've achieved for you - you'll now recoup some of what you are having to give away in cost savings, when BA returns to profit

The senior managers would, of course get their own bonuses, as now, which are part of their contract, and there would be some losers (many on here, I'm sure) but maybe much more robust profits, because the sum involved is a genuinely incentivising sum that people would work hard to achieve.

The rest of what Crewfriend says, is of course, fantastical, deluded and frankly quite disturbing nonsense.

Beagle9,

This rumour did the rounds a while back and, like so much BASSA detritus, it gets resurrected on a regular basis (vis the alleged look on WW's face every time he receives a ballot result. Clearly the impact has shocked him to the very core each time. But I digress). It certainly used to, and I'd imagine still does, say on the Unite website that they are not the national representative body for airline pilots and redirected one to BALPA. No more than hot air from CrewFriend. But they knew that already as they trolled on here I'm sure.

MrB

Logic has been missing from the bassa militants since the beginning of the dispute, once again there will be a substantial yes vote for strike action (why change an habit of a lifetime?) and it will be very interesting to see what the company reaction will be.

The logic is: BA are so close to busting our trade union. This has been their goal since the onset of this dispute. The majority of crew have seen and witnessed their underhand tactics, and are savy enough to now know that cost cutting was never the bigger picture. The reward through busting Bassa, will give them a free hand to work us to the bone for the minimum pay. They are now steam rolling through our agreements on a daily basis, and it will only get worse. Our only option is to fight, or we lose any remaining employment protection.
In fact, my prediction is we will all be working to a new fleet (scheme) contract within 2 years, if BA succeed. You only have to look at other airlines who have had their union busted to see what the future has in store.

mohitomaster, the union is doing a perfectly good job in destroying itself.

Mohitomaster

What BA are busting, is BASSA's STYLE of unionism. ie resistant to the very smallest of change, objecting to the tiniest thing (hot towels in WT+?), agressive, misrepresenting company offers by spreading completely inaccurate rumours about them, not turning up for meetings, refusing to negociate (unless it's on their proposal, on show of hands at a union meeting), making offers worth less than a third they claim (either laughably incompetent, or criminally dishonest) and employing the most purile childish rhetoric in their communications.

If BA have been trying dirty tricks, it's because they have to play hardball with a union that they know will spin things shamelessly to win support for their real aim, giving Walsh a right royal kicking. (Oh, and it seems now, sticking one up for the British worker in solidarity with the SWP).

All other areas of the airline, including other Unite branches traditionally pretty anti BA managed to get a deal with BA without being "busted".

The best thing you can do to protect your terms and conditions and prevent what BASSA claim will happen, is settle. Fast. Then rebuild a decent union, with which the company can work by having a complete clearout of the current BASSA and Amicus leadership.

I say this as a fellow cabin crew member and former union member.

Sorry, but if they succeed in busting Bassa, A new union would be far too weak to protect it's workers, by which time our agreements will be in tatters. I don't see it as an option. Whilst I agree that Bassa has in the past been a bit quick to say "no" to changes, negotiated change is the right method. I do not believe that they should be discredited and cut out the loop at every opportunity. Union busting is big business, and I think BA's cabin crew will be used as an example of how to bust a union for many years to come. No doubt Balpa will be next, or certainly when they disagree with a new company policy/ pay cut in the future.