MF earn more than £12k. That's the basic salary and then they are paid an hourly rate for the duration of their trip and receive bonuses for attendance etc.

Soundings are that a lot of the union concerns are more to do with the rostering and rest periods rather than pay itself.

It seems that calling a strike on Christmas Day and Boxing Day is more to do with putting PR pressure on BA rather than causing disruption. A very reduced schedule operates on Christmas Day in any event and BA seem pretty confident they can cover most of the schedule, including all long-haul flights.

"Most of the schedule" won't be good enough for some customers. They will be making their travel choices on the basis that BA's schedule could be disrupted. Some shorthaul flights will be cancelled before the strike days. This will already be costing BA money.

Bear in mind the recent 'Which' survey in which BA are slipping down the customer satisfaction tables. That's BEFORE any industrial unrest!

It might be reasonable to ponder why????? Or who is responsible??

I imagine T&Cs on mixed fleet, might be a reflection of something much more significant for this particular company??

Yep, I may well be one of the old 'grumps' who did the job during the best of times, but...

We were payed very well but we stayed and made a career of it. We knew the job inside out, we were fully conversant of the menu, the wine etc. in F and J. We called PAX by their titles and had great conversations with them. In those days we were sent on wine and cookery courses in order to improve the service. We went on paid language courses, I learnt both French and German. All in order to improve service in our job. We were proud of our job and, I think, gave great service. Oh, and we also saved a few lives and delivered a few baby's too. I agree, BA is pretty poor these days, Quantas and Emirates are better, but I am not surprised. Treat you staff badly and it's no surprise they are poor, it's not a career anymore it's a job to do for a year or two then leave when you are burnt out. That is the point I am trying to make. Treat your staff with respect, pay them a good wage and give them a career structure. Then, and only then, will you get CC doing a great job and bringing repeat business.

And one last point, it's not like other jobs as some are trying to point out. It's physically exhausting. You are working at altitude for hours on end, the relentless jet lag plays havoc with your body. You are away so much you have little private life, you are a barman, waiter, security guard, nurse, travel agent, nursemaid, tour guide, handyman,, translator etc. All rolled up into one. Most folk get to go home every night to their families and friends. They don't. They work longer hours than most, at constant risk of disruption and to do that whilst treated poorly? I don't think so

BA, Swissport and the trains, not working whatever the cause a typical holiday period for UK PLC!

I am wondering about the £3 per hour flight pay. This is not something I am familiar with but it was being discussed before I hung my wings up.

It was supposed to be for the entire itinary not just the flying hours. So on a 3 day nightstop it would be from check in to debrief.

Can anyone confirm this?

Confirmed.

MF are more expensive to send on some routes, mostly India.

Their T&Cs are poor. Santiago from LHR, night stop then back with 2 days off. Beyond tiring.

'They knew what they were getting into when they applied for the job.' Perhaps like everything else these days it was all fluff and no substance. Much like BA flights, the reality rarely matches the promise.

Most carriers who pay flight pay use block times and not reporting times. So if you have a 2 hour delay for what ever reason with pax on board you don't get a penny for it, even though you might be selling scratch cards or whatever.

With BA short haul charging for food starting next month, will the crews be getting commission of those delectable M&S filled sandwiches?

But to alarge degree it comes back in all these situations to a general feeling of unhappiness. And most of them have a point to some degree .I don't for example notice anyone on here saying why are VS pilots talking about striking after all planes fly themselves these days and therefore the job is very easy and doesnt deserve better pay and conditions and as for this fatigue bit well you try doing a ten hour day with 2 hours on the M25 at each end blah blah blah...

No the problem is that close on ten years of dishonesty and unethical and often useless managements (and the Union management are included in that) focussed only on increasing their salary , bonuses and stock options has gradually begun to catch up with UK Plc with far too many people earning inadequate salaries for any sort of life especially if you live near or commute to LHR. People have learned that in todays world you get paid not what you are worth but what you can screw out of employer-hence TFL drivers get big money because no tube no London. Also people in these age groups have seen city folk bring the country to its knees and yet still earn big bucks because in their case as has been demonstrated for the most part they lose our money not their own.

Its like the invisible Surrey and Sussex Tory MPs who never said a word about the Southern Trains fiasco but as soon as the Union really do put the screws on its ban strikes and curb union power.

And as I have said before I think it is sad and pretty hypocritical for many on here to lambast people on very low wages who mostly doa decent job and most certainly are not part of that section of BA CC who we have all experienced at times who may by some measures may have been overpaid

i dont see any difference between my comment on being over paid and yours, I just didnt know where they were potentially being over paid and by what measures . All you did was essentially explain where so I am not sure whay i lost youat that point.
And if we look at the last 70 years it is a failure of British management -as I pointed out I include union management (leaders) in that by mixing politics with member issues in the same way that instead of building sustainable and positive relations with employees owners have taken every opportunity to make their life worse .Its a sorry tale on both sides

My experience... FWIW is that Management tend to get the Unions that they deserve, and vice versa.

Oh, these glistening pearls of wisdom! ;)

If that nasty McClunky had meaningfully negotiated with BA during the last dispute there may not have been a mixed fleet or one that looks very different. Because of their intransigence and poor leadership from BASSA it just got imposed by WW. So imho he and BASSA are partly the architects of this.

I do think these poor b*ggers from MF are being used in Unites and McClunkys bigger political game and could be left high and dry.

I can't see Willy backing down he can still operate a big chunk of the network and knows the MF crew can't afford to stay out long as they are not on the inflated salaries of the 'old' crew.

My only fear is the other crew who are part of BASSA could be encouraged for a 'sickout' (they have form in this area) to save Unites face.

Does McClunky learn nothing about public support when you plan industrial action at Christmas (all the negative headlines last time).

If only they had negotiated meaningfully last time - Unite you reap what you sow.

See they are going to ACAS tomorrow now.

I feel for these crew represented by these muppets.

The other side of the coin:

1.Work harder at school;
2. Choose a different career; and
3. If you must strike don't choose the Christmas period.

Striking at Christmas does nothing to further your cause and gives management the opportunity to gain the high ground ...

i presume there'll be no BA advert running showing lots of happy families meeting and greeting over the Christmas period.

How times have changed - I always thought the ambitions of cabin crew were to travel the World and marry a pilot ... now they want a decent wage as well ... there's no pleasing some folk

Tongue in cheek ... I know more cabin crew with master's degrees than in any other profession ...

However, the travelling public must be your first concern over (selfish) self-interest ... ways and means, but I don't think Christmas is it ... :)

There's enough trouble already with small boys playing with big trains ...

Just to clarify that Willie Walsh (as CEO of IAG) will not be involved in this. Industrial relations are the responsibility of the operating airline CEOs.

Alex Cruz is now CEO of BA (who is an unknown quantity as far as response to industrial action at BA is concerned) will be leading this.

BA's response to the strike announcement on Friday (making it absolutely clear the strike would fail) actually sounded far more combative than when BASSA was intent on driving the airline off a cliff.

MF do have legitimate concerns around some of the rostering (witness the very different response to other workgroups in the airline to the BASSA dispute of 2009) and hopefully this is resolved without industrial action.

Trust me he may not be leading the negotiations but he is involved and knows the history that Alex does not.

BA has said today that they do not plan to cancel any flights during the strike period.

They may be correct. Let's hope they are, then no customer will be disrupted. A good outcome for all.

In the meantime, BA can't be certain which of it's crew will turn up for work/call in sick etc. Contingency plans will have to be put in place, which will undoubtedly cost money, even if they are not used.

"We reject Unite's claims about Mixed Fleet's earnings and have offered an independent audit of our pay data over the last 12 months to support our statement that Mixed Fleet cabin crew working full-time earn more than £21,000 a year.

"The pay data shows that the range of earnings paid out to full-time Mixed Fleet crew between September 1 2015 and August 31 2016 was £21,151.35 - £27,356.30."

British Airways 'to deliver full Christmas service despite strikes' | London Evening Standard

Standard practice for Unite - plead poverty! I remember the same tosh coming out of them during the 2010 dispute and I know 100% fact that back then a CSD on WW would earn around £65k all up. If you took married rosters in to account that would produce a joint income well in excess of £100k pa.

I suppose it's possible?

However, that's just like saying, co-pilots in BA earn in excess of £100k. Or a household income in excess of £200k should they, (like your CSD) be married to a similarly qualified spouse!

That's not because it's 'market rate', (it isn't!) but just because that's what's agreed between the employer and the employee. (via their unions)

So what's your point???

Of course new SCCMs now earn half your CSD's figure, and have more onerous office duties/responsibilities! Why shouldn't we just accept pilot's pay going the same way?

After all, 'market rate' should apply to all employees shouldn't it?

4468, I think the point being made was that it is Unite's standard practice to considerably understate the salaries of its members in order to attempt to gain public sympathy.

I think most pilots accepted that over a decade ago! The entire reason why BA mixed fleet exists is because BASSA didn't accept that ever. They were just saying no right up until the end, which forced BA to completely halt recruitment onto the old terms and conditions; setting up mixed fleet with the step change to market rate they'd been attempting to achieve gradually for well over a decade.

4468 I didn't say it was wrong I was, in fact, a recipient of those salaries. The point I was making was explained by GSA in his post it's Unite's standard gambit tell everyone that BA crew are living in almost Dickensian poverty, sleeping in their cars and living on tins of cold baked beans.

In reality BA crew are well rewarded. However from my knowledge of the Mixed Fleet agreements they work hard for it and improvements to their T&C's would be preferable to a small,increase in BA's 2% pay offer.

vctenderness
I'm sure you will educate me if I've misremembered, but I don't recall CSD's salaries being mentioned by Unite, during the 2010 strikes. Though I imagine BA may well have referred to them??

In any event, there are precious few parallels between that disagreement and this. Those personnel and these.

Cabin crew salaries in general were a major part of the dispute.

Lots of support being shown around LHR for the strikers from other staff and passengers, I would say BA's claims of "All planned flights will be operating as normal" are a little far fetched!

I imagine it takes quite a bit of courage to take part in a strike with this much publicity, but when you have very little to lose it probably makes the decision easier. I hear that the strike pay of £60/day the union are paying them will probably put more money in their pockets even after losing 2 days pay for stirking! (surley this can't be true?)

Just like the last strikes, the cc are like WW1 canon fodder being used by Unite's Red Len as a weapon against both UK industry & the government. As sure as eggs is eggs the cc will be the only losers; after all they knew what they were signing when they were recruited. :ugh:

It's such a shame because they are a smashing bunch of girls & guys who carry out their duties perfectly & in the unlikely event of an emergency will be essential to their pax' chances of survival.

Our flight to CPT next month is a mixed fleet route & as always I hope to be able to thank the cc for a pleasant, trouble free journey.

Yes, they knew what they were signing up for, but now most of them have decided to show they have the backbone to stand up and ask for a totally justified improvment to these paltry terms and conditions. And It would appear they have the support of most BA and other airline staff groups and their own passengers! The voices against this particular dispute seem to be very few and far between.

Given the huge disparity of pay between the new and old contracts, this group of staff were always going to one day get organised and cause BA a problem. This is a dispute entirley created by greedy BA management, and I would argue it will be all of BA that suffers from the negative impact and not only the CC, who sadly, actually have very little to lose.

Not sure about long haul but BA have subcharted Titan and Vueling for some short haul routes.

No this dispute is a result of the lower pay of MF crew brought into being as a direct answer to BASSA's intransigence and thinking that the cabin crew, at the time, were somehow immune from producing the same cost reductions as the rest of the company. BASSA's primaddona attitude is why there exists an A and B scale and is not because of the standard 'lefty' shout of 'greedy management' or 'fat cats'. I'm no management lover but blame needs to be placed at the correct door and, in this case, BASSA is the culprit.

I have just seen from yesterdays Travelmole website that BA have offered an Independent Audit showing that ALL MF Cabin crew earned more than 21K in the last 12 months!
Perhaps the striking MF members should attach their pay slips to their placards to refute this - me thinks that BA statement is far more accurate than Unites!

Well if they have so little to lose, why did they join in the first place, surely they are not that stupid!

You can't possibly be suggesting that Unite could be telling porkies?

A certain feeling of deja vu old chap!!

It is worth noting that when a Cabin Crew member, Flight Crew member or any other individual that travels for purposes of employment and receives meal allowances for the time they are away at their employers behest, goes to a bank for a mortgage, the bank will exclude any down route meal allowances from their gross salary calculation, and this typically (and correctly) means they have to reduce their declared salary by 6-8K per annum. Some airlines (in agreement with HMRC) will not even show these allowances on a payslip as it is agreed by all parties (unions, employers and HMRC) that meal allowances are not part of your salary as it is spent down route on meals etc.

So BA's claim that all MF crew received over £21K in the last year is a little disingenuous. New entrant basic salary is around £13K. They “might” qualify for a small quarterly bonus totalling another £1K. They do the job because they like it and are generally very good at it. The BA brand is attractive to customers and employees alike and they all want it protected and enhanced. You cannot denounce a group of people for wanting to improve things or simply just asking for a fair days pay, for a fair days work. Currently BA are just not paying this staff group fairly. I haven't even looked at their rostering practices yet, but I hear they are not very fair either!

I think this dispute, as always, will turn into a battle of words and wills, just like the last one. And yes, perhaps BASSA did not cover themselves in glory back then, but but neither did BA. I would also argue that BA never ever play with a straight bat, and I would believe unite over BA any day! The claims by BA that all planned flights were flown, no CSM was on strike, 70% of MF crew turned up for work and MF crew all take home over £21K, can ALL BE PROVED FALSE with a little digging. I do wonder why unite are not (to my knowledge) highlighting these untruths to the media, but perhaps they are just concentrating on making sure their members are aware of the facts and not worrying to much about public opinion, as strikers are almost always seen as wrong in the eye of the great British public.

The big question is; how long before we see Mixed Fleet Unite and BASSA "really" working together. And I don't mean onboard the aircraft.

Hmmm....sounds like we have 'son (or daughter) of Holley' with us.

I feel for the boys and girls of MF, but, imho, they are being led up the garden path (once again) by Unite for Unite's and the TUC's political struggles against the Tory government - just look at the strikes going on right now - they are all being coordinated imo.

The boys and girls of MF are inexperienced in the ways of IA and have no understanding of Cruz/Walsh and their mentality. The second set of strike days are most likely going to fizzle out and Cruz will likely look to recoup the cost of the strike from MF, just like after Holley's last self-aggrandizement scheme.

In the meantime, MF will have lost staff travel for holidays and their quarterly bonus while the fat cats at Unite will feather their nests and gain kudos with the TUC for being able to deliver lambs to the slaughter for political gain.

Originally posted by virgin mary: I disagree. As a very regular and loyal BA customer with two trips (one business, one leisure) booked during the 19-21st I am currently in the process of cancelling and rebooking with another operator. Along with the Southern Rail and Tube strike this week, the disruption the Unions have caused to fellow commuters over the past month or so in London has been unacceptable - at least I'm fortunate that there is competition on my routes from LHR. The BA brand is only attractive as long as the cost is acceptable and service is reliable and despite the Christmas disruption not happening, I made changes to travel plans then as well. Although I fully appreciate that my custom means almost nothing to BA and that should the flights operate, the seats I had booked will be occupied by someone who will have undoubtable paid more than I have, industrial action damages a brand and unlike the railways in the UK, air travel often provides alternative choices (as often reminded during the on board PA's). BA short haul out has already undergone some brand adjustments this month which are not in my favour and I question the wisdom of Unison electing to call action now, other than to contribute to the other industrial action mentioned thus generating additional publicity and adding to the impression of a union activity bringing transport infrastructure to it's knees at a time when the economy needs to strengthen in anticipation of invoking article 50.
I see one of the picket boards in EGLD's image quotes Richard Branson: Can someone remind me what Cabin Crew at VS are making these days?

Opinions.

Aren't Opinions great? We can all have quite a lot, and normally they are free!!

I think that things have moved on since the BASSA strike. Firstly, the megalomaniacs who ran BASSA thought they also ran BA. They also thought that everyone owed them a living. That's why so many other Unite Branches voted to work on, cross picket lines, and be trained up to replace the CC, some of whom took a day or two's holiday.

In my opinion, this strike is very different. It is not lead by Unite, but by the staff. Further, when BA spoke during the last strike, I was inclined to believe them rather than BASSA and the Socialist Worker clowns that performed with them. Now, however, the culture in BA is very, very different. They appear to lie whenever it suits them. Lots of evidence over on the BAEC thread on another website. The whole BA customer service ethos has gone from many of their staff- taken from them by daft management. The last letter BA sent me was a lie. I no longer believe what they say to me or to the press unless it has completely independent verification. They know that no-one trusts them - that's why they know they need verification of their own numbers. However, when those "numbers" allegedly relating to income include stuff that you and I would call expenses, we all know it is no more than spin.

When you say you and I, do you say that as a crewman or woman? I have never considered my allowances to simply be expenses. They are part of my salary. I choose to spend them as I wish, and most of the time that is on shopping or paying for entertainment whilst on my days off downroute. I don't expect my employer to cover these costs as expenses. Sorry, but I think the people spinning the numbers are you and Unite.

I don't really care who is right over the figures, what really counts is can the strike actually achieve anything. BA seemed to cope last time reasonably well. Yes, there were cancellations and sub charters, and yes, to achieve what they did BA had to go to some abnormal measures to achieve it, but they did. What does anyone think will be different about the next strike? Why will that succeed rather than make BA even more entrenched in their position? Why will the unions efforts be more successful in forcing BA's hand this time?

I support MF in their attempts to get better T&C's as the original promise was industry standard plus 10%, which they are nowhere near achieving. I'm just not convinced that they will achieve anything better than the inflation busting offer of 4.6% that they have on the table. Whatever they achieve will be the baseline minimum ask for ALL the other workgroups that exist within BA for their next pay round, so you cannot view this one dispute in isolation wrt cost.

BA will be factoring in the cost of the additional salary to ALL work groups that will inevitably follow any bigger settlement with MF. This additional cost will be BA's war chest to cover the extreme measures they need to put in place to beat this current strike.

Even with 2900 UNITE members who all strike, (an unlikely situation), given the c150000 cabin crew in BA, how truly effective can this strike really be?

It is good news though for EF and WW, as MF have just clearly demonstrated that having 3 distinct work groups as CC can effectively blunt any IA from a single group. Has anyone else wondered why the mutterings and rumours of the demise of EF have declined in parallel with the increasing severity of the MF dispute? Coincidence or a realisation from BA that perhaps EF and WW are valuable as a foil for MF?