New Challenges, New Dynamics, New Dimensions
 

We are facing the most crippling economic time that has faced the key world economies in at least two generations. There are fundamental reasons that has promoted this unbelievable threat to our day to day existence. A greater influence is our fear and hence the majority reigning in their expenditure. Business is just that, it is business. When I flew as cabin crew I used my job and employer to further my gain in life rewarding experiences and personal development for my CV. Business is not welfare. In tough climates a business has to survive and it is for those entrusted with the executive to motivate the business in a profitable aspect to maintain a level of growth and continuity. Gone are the days of staying with an employer for a lifetime to receive a timepiece on retirement and a pension. We must now reappraise our lifestyles to live within our means and not our false ideals so often flashed through advertisements. I have been through life threatening situations. I have had friends die, some violently. These traumatic experiences have taught me that regardless, if I am able to breathe, love and give joy to my nearest and dearest then nothing else matters.

So a unanimous NO to saving the 82 Million required. A unanimous NO to the creation of the new fleet. A unanimous NO to any further talks about this. A Vote of NO Confidence in Willie and Immediate Ballot for Strike Action should plans still be pushed forward.

Lots of constructive stuff there - so BASSA not sticking fingers in their ears and shouting NO NO NO then?

Guys, Girls tell your reps to go away and try harder than this pitiful 3 weeks of nil attempt at compromise - the posts I have read on the BASSA forum are so disturbing with the "I'd rather see the company fold than accept this" not being in the minority any longer.

Such a shame - I know the BA crew are great but feel they are being led up the Garden Path.

So BASSA says no to negotiations and Willie serves 90 days notice on their contracts. Gonna be another interesting summer.

Ouch,

Termination follows a summer of unrest as the company calls time on contracts and continues to recruit onto the short term, mixed fleet contract underneath.

It will, indeed, be another interesting summer. I feel there will be little sympathy with the CC when the details of these working practices hits the press in the current climate.

I feel there was a bit too much war drum bashing and not enough looking at the critical problem.

To be fair EYXW, the course of events and BASSAs reaction were/are entirely predictable ,you would be naive to expect anything else:rolleyes:

I am told that BASSA are aware there is little chance of stopping the new fleet with industrial action,but from the meeting this afternoon they seem not to make this entirely clear:hmm:

That's why BASSA were frantically trying to limit its (the new fleets)size and scope during negotiations last week:suspect:

Instead its BASSA knows best style of rhetoric along the lines of don't be concerned about the new fleet because no ones going to want to work on it anyway, in this they may be right that of the 1000 people already trained some may kick the idea in touch when they see the T&Cs:sad:

BASSA may now wish to play the long game when they meet with BA on Thursday, but with a resounding NON they are putting the time line firmly back in the hands of BA.

Predictable but, none the less, still frustrating.

I just don't think IA or the threat of it is going to win it for BASSA this time - can CC legally strike over the creation of a new fleet? Are people going to turn their noses up at a wage which although vastly inferior to the current BA one is also above the most visible (Virgin) competitors wages?

I think that it needs to be realised that CHANGE IS GOING TO HAPPEN, and failure to be part of it will just result in the old fleet's demise being quicker.

EYXW

Could the pilots have legally gone on strike over Openskies? I feel that will be the answer to that muse. Unfortunately for the CC here they don't have a Scope clause to fall back on.

Whilst the two disputes were and are fundamentally different, stand by for a backlash of 'well you did it why can't we'.

As I have said many times before I think the CC and BASSA have done extremely well to maintain what they have until this point. Now Willie Walsh has decided to take on those practices and is using this current cash crisis as a catalyst.

I, personally, think you would have to be criminally insane to strike over these matters, which amount to a re-jig of the current contract producing a more productive department.

Time will tell.

Call me a cynic but 100% support in a ballot does tend to be the preserve of Kim Jong-Il, Robert Mugabe and Saddam Husseins of the world!

bassa
 

with regards to some comments on here, yes bassa see that the new fleet coming in however what they are asking ba to do is sign on the dotted line to say that current crews will not be out of pocket etc, ba have verbally said this however when it has been asked for in writing ( which will legally stand up in court as advised by the lawyer at the meeting) ba have refused , therefore its this that the strike will be over this.
and as also advised willy is out for the crews allowances etc, as the union got over the 82k amount of savings with out even touching the terms and conditions of the crew,
mr walsh is out to make ba a low cost airline not a premium service airline like it is. he has no experiance in managing a full service airline and this will be his down fall.
also ground crew and maangers have also today agreed to ballot so it look like mr walsh may now of bitten of more than he can chew
have you seen the mirror today this says it all. he makes mistakes and has now made far to many.
think he best be booking his one way flight back to the emerald isle on fr, now

lgeflyboy - whilst I understand what you are getting at I don't think BASSA are going to achieve this by not talking to BA any longer over these cost savings, there is no precedent for the protection of CC's work within the UK like there is for the Pilots (SCOPE) - if you want it, you will HAVE to give something in return.

And no I am afraid I haven't read the mirror today......... prefer the, oh I dunno, Sun? :}

lgwflyboy,

Very eloquently put. I think?

Never run a full service airline? Aer Lingus possibly, long haul, full service? Yep.

If, and it's a big if, the passengers were still flooding through the terminal. IF the business section were not emptier than the House of Commons allowances payback room and IF the revenue and cash of the company were not being burnt at an alarming rate then I could, possibly, understand your viewpoint.

But, as we all live in a realistic, modern world where being paid to be late is not one of the rules anymore. Or delaying a service into a foreign country so that the 'box' times can be met just don't wash. Neither do a vast majority of the antiquated rules that brings BA to its knees whenever the CC throw their toys out of the cot. Snow disruption was a classic.

WW will, unfortunately, walk all over your contracts as he cancels them one by one and retrains cabin crew on the new contract. Once done, the airline will be on hourly rates, fixed turn arounds and less sitting on backsides in the CRC.

The savings will come. The CC T's & C's will be brought, permanently, into line with other departments and the whole show will go on. November I believe the new fleet starts. Now is your choice as to whether you are on it.

No, No , No- were the results of todays BASSA meeting......................

This is not the way to compromise,and at the end of the day, would you rather be out of a job or continue with this NO attitude? Lots of people over the recent year have been made redundant due to airlines folding, do you really want to see BA being one of them? And no, i can't imagine the uk goverment bailing them out!!
Mr Walsh is looking for savings throughout the business, not just cabin crew. And why is their such bitterness between flight crew and cabin crew? Yes the flight crew have been asked to save alot less , but their are also alot less of them for a start!

Its isn't nice to think of the financial implications, but there will be alot worse if you have no job at all!

So BASSA have asked BA to sign an agreement to stop any change in current crew pay etc, why would they do this? Surely this is where the majority of the £82m has to be made???

Like someone already stated, time will tell

So should I fly BA?
 

No I am not Cabin Crew so apologies for commenting on this thread, but as a fan of BA and as paying customer it worries me greatly.

You guys do a great job, I travel BA because I like the service, but these days you are not alone. Full service or no frills there's plenty of choice. Can BA carry on losing £2.5M per week, no. Will customers go elsewhere if talks of strikes hit the papers, yes.

My industry engineering, struggling with the rest through recession, 30 of our 130 staff laid of so far. All are struggling to find work with 30 or so chasing any job advertised.

If you think no one will work the new fleet, or if thats what your being told, think again, suspect they will be queuing round the block.

Yes or course you want to keep the status quo, and yes you should try to get the best, but be realistic times are more than hard.

So as someone who likes all that BA offers I hope you find a way through this without destroying what you have, and also without letting strike punish the rest of us relying on you for hard won holidays.

Oh really? Perhaps you'd like to check your facts with a pilot instead of relying on the BASSA brainwashing.

Current trainers are already training crew for the new fleet, and have been doing so for a year. They're called temps. When BA suspend the first of the trainers for refusing to train whoever BA tells them to will we see a show of strength, or will they all go scurrying back to Cranebank?

No one has been 'harassing' anyone over this. Constructive discussion can often seem 'harassing' when one has few or no relevant points to bring to said discussion. As to jumping on the band wagon? Well sorry but the 'BASSA' style bandwagon was the one that the flight crew got off a fair few years ago when they were benchmarked for pay and conditions and many, many pilots took a cut to support those on the bottom who avoided redundancy. The re-negotiated terms and conditions are there for all to see and, apart from offering the company a fixed accountable value for hours flown, they are working well and allow the spreading of trips thus experience without the 'honey pot' trips being grabbed by the biggest gorilla in the tree.

Once the transitional pain has been achieved and the company survives the current downturn THEN the re-negotiation can start with 'well, we gave you this when the times were tough, now it's your turn.'. Not ideal by any stretch but better than the current 'we would rather bring the company down and loose every ones jobs to get WW'. Who, I am sure, is probably visibly shaking at the BASSA vote of no confidence from the 1500 out of 16000 that could be bothered to turn up.

Good luck, I pity our passengers and don't look forward to another round of 'traveller misery' headlines which will damage our cause no end.

Hi guys,

Believe it or not (and I accept that the default setting might not be to believe it in these times of strife) but per capita we're being asked to save more than twice the amount that each individual CC member is being asked to save. We've actually been asked to save £39 million over 2 years which, when divided by a smidge over 3000 pilots works out a lot more per head than IFCE have been approached for. Yes, percentages might well be different but it's not as simple as BASSA would wish to paint it for you guys. Union representation is important (especially in a sprawling, immovable monolith such as BA) but it's genuinely hurtful when another lie is spat at us in the flight deck in order to whip up the troops. The reps aren't there to deal with the fallout of these untruths and CRM spirals into nothingness. Oh, and by the way, we didn't nick the pension of the CC, BALPA found the NI loophole that helped preserve NAPS in much better health (BASSA failing to turn up to a number of meetings) and we didn't precipitate the loss of the 30 yr ticket. That was on BA's radar from the get-go of the ST2009 negotiations. The fact it appears to suit BASSA's agenda to badmouth all around is, as far as I can tell, as much a part of the historical fabric of BA as is the inability of management to meaningfully engage staff.

Anyone who thinks HMG won't let the airline founder in the current environment may have an unpleasant shock coming. They've emptied the purse rescuing the banks and airlines aren't that vital to the fundamental economic infrastructure in the UK in the same way. All the carriers would easily soak up the loss. It'd just be a bonanza time for LH/AF/KLM/UA etc etc as their routes in and out of LHR/LGW/LCY/MAN/ etc etc suddenly had the load factors we're all praying for right now.

Oh, and in case anyone thinks this is the spiel of a BA pilot who is enjoying some malevolent schadenfreude at the upcoming melee, I can assure you it's not. My household will suffer greatly in the near future if BA get exactly what they want. Between my partner and I we're going to lose a great deal of money thanks to WW/IFCE/Flt Ops desire to hammer our T and Cs. But I don't believe for a moment that the bellicose untruths that BASSA spit out can take away from the fact that the world is seriously ill at the moment and sticking our collective fingers in our ears and hoping it's all going to go away will do any good.

It's more than feasible that the airline could collapse and HMG wouldn't, couldn't and don't need to do anything about it. We're just not that important. I wish it were otherwise.

Mr B (with a genuinely sorrowful intent, I promise you)

Don't forget the flight crew actually moved over to the hourly rate a while back, and from what I have been told, is a fair way of doing it. So if it works for them then surely it can work for cc.

No probs,

We've been asked to save £13 million in year one (approx 4% pay cut) plus £26 million in year two (A further 4% on top of the first year). These savings would be permanent if BA were to get their way, as would those made by IFCE. Anyway, don't want to hijack a thread in the CC section so, my apologies if I've overstepped the mark, etiquette wise.

ATB

MrB

Just to add in the bit about the Daily Mirror. Unfortunately this is fairly standard custom and practice with large corporations.

By bringing individuals back as consultant they are effectively bringing them on board as 'self employed' personnel with no contractual obligation and a shelf life as long as is needed to achieve the task. No pension requirement, no medical cover etc. etc. In the short term it is an excellent way to bolster your managerial staff levels and experience without having to commit to long term contractual obligations.

But that would have been explained by BASSA as well wouldn't it.

lgwflyboy, your postings are hard to read (try paragraphs?) and show a poor grasp of the facts, however I think you'll find that WW will stay until he is 55, you will not get a fresh CEO anytime soon.

You might get notice on your contracts though if BASSA continue with their brainwashing and intransigence.

From The Sunday Times
May 21, 2006
Comment: Matt Cooper: Walsh was no robber, but Ahern's dithering may lose airline millions
Last week’s attack by Bertie Ahern on former Aer Lingus boss Willie Walsh was so bad-tempered you’d think he had advance knowledge of Friday’s disastrous opinion poll findings. He didn’t, of course, so the precise reason for a verbal assault that would have resulted in a libel suit had the taoiseach made it outside the Dail remains a mystery.

Ahern accused Walsh of trying to “steal” the assets of Aer Lingus and of planning to “shaft” the workers, just because the airline’s chief executive indicated two years ago that he was prepared to front a buyout of the business.

Ahern has had plenty of opportunities since Wednesday to withdraw these extraordinary allegations, but the best he could manage was a mealy-mouthed excuse from a spokesman that he didn’t mean to say “steal”. What he did mean to say remains unexplained. Mary Harney offered the view that he probably meant to say “strip” but I’m not sure if her attempt to decode her boss’s use of the English language has been entirely successful.

The taoiseach’s claim is absurd but has proved a nifty exercise in distracting attention from the real scandal: Ahern’s dithering on the future of Aer Lingus and the likelihood that it will end up costing the state hundreds of millions of euros.

In his indecision on Aer Lingus, the taoiseach has turned prevarication into an art form. There were only two choices to sort out the airline’s future financing requirements — state investment or a sale of shares to the public. The decision has been dragged out so long that the company’s viability may be at risk.

The attack on Walsh was all the more remarkable given that it was the former chief executive that saved Aer Lingus as it plunged into financial turmoil in the wake of the global aviation recession prompted by 9/11. While the workers deserve credit for agreeing to a massive programme of redundancies that halved the workforce to 3,500, it was Walsh who fully appreciated the scale of the problem and had the guts to demand the level of sacrifice required.

He realised saving Aer Lingus was not enough. The airline had to raise money to expand if it was to protect itself against further cycles of economic downturn. He asked, he begged, he cajoled but all to no avail. Conscious that trade unions were opposed to privatisation, the taoiseach wouldn’t say yes. But neither would he say no.

Walsh let his frustration get the better of him and made a critical error. He tried to call Ahern’s bluff by publicly offering to buy the company along with two other senior executives, Seamus Kearney and Brian Dunne. That’s buy, not steal.

There was a predictable outcry at the prospect of company insiders trying to purchase an iconic state asset. The taoiseach and his socialist buddies in the unions denounced the move as inspired by greed, but the overwhelming emotion was envy.

I doubt that Walsh really believed a management-led buyout of Aer Lingus would be allowed, but his naivety on that front, together with the continued refusal by the government to face up to a decision on financing, meant his days as Aer Lingus boss were numbered.

Walsh quit in late 2004 and is now sitting pretty as chief executive of British Airways. His success is a slap in the face for Ahern. It is a constant reminder that the taoiseach’s inaction allowed Aer Lingus to lose one of the most talented executives in the aviation industry. Could it be that this realisation was part of the reason for last week’s outburst?

The suspicion that the Ahern/Walsh showdown was personal deepened when the government sanctioned the sale of Aer Lingus in March. “I’m glad those individuals went on to prove their worth in the financial markets, but I’m glad they didn’t do it at the expense of Aer Lingus,” said Ahern last week.

So we are left with a puzzle. Selling Aer Lingus to a group of individuals who did the state some service by protecting a valuable asset when the world was in turmoil is not acceptable. Selling Aer Lingus to a group of faceless institutional investors is acceptable — even though there is no guarantee that they will pay more than Walsh, or be any less aggressive when it comes to slashing jobs and costs.

The beneficiary of Ahern’s obvious disdain for Walsh is Dermot Mannion, the new Aer Lingus chief executive. He returned from a more glamorous job in the Middle East on condition that he could raise money for expansion by selling shares to the public. So two years after Walsh made his proposal for private equity, this is now deemed an acceptable idea.

But everything else has changed and that is why Ahern’s dithering has been so dangerous. The government intends to sell 60% of the airline for about €600m and will try to conclude the deal in September. But the conditions for such a sale have altered dramatically since Walsh’s plan was first hatched in 2004.

Stock market values around the world, however, are falling as inflation and interest rates rise. Soaring fuel costs following the explosion in oil prices means that investors are largely shunning the aviation sector. One German airline has already been forced to reduce the price of its shares in order to ensure flotation on the stock market.

In this harsher environment, any money that Aer Lingus succeeds in raising from investors will be at greater risk than it would have been two years ago. New routes planned by the airline, to be serviced by aircraft purchased with the sale proceeds, may be difficult to establish. Aer Lingus has already been forced to slap a €70 “fuel surcharge” on the price of long-haul tickets. While no such measures are planned for its British or continental European routes, the principle has now been established and could come into play if profits are threatened.

All this means there are serious commercial reasons to question the financial rationale for a sale of Aer Lingus. Any disposal now is likely to be on the cheap, compared with the price that could have been achieved six months ago, never mind two years ago. The trade unions have not relinquished their bid to “save” Aer Lingus from the clutches of private enterprise. But having lost the ideological objection, Ahern’s indecision means they can now cite economic ones.

Regardless of opinion on this debate, Aer Lingus still needs cash. It has a €200m hole in its pension fund. It requires new aircraft, if not necessarily the €2 billion worth of kit planned by management. If it can’t raise money from new investors, then the state is going to have to stump up about €500m. Would the government like to clarify which essential service or project will have its budget slashed to meet this bill?

If the company’s advisers decide that changed circumstances no longer make the airline an attractive proposition for the private sector, then the state will be forced to pick up the tab on the basis that nobody else wants to. Try selling that to a sceptical public when there are so many other demands on the government’s funds.

And what happens if those same advisors recommend that the sale should be at a much lower price that reflects the difficult external environment?

These dilemmas would not exist if Ahern had acted decisively and swiftly. But while Nero fiddled away, something even more annoying was happening out in the real world. Ahern has made no secret of his dislike for Walsh but you can be sure that it is nothing compared with his (unreported) views on Michael O’Leary. Unlike the Ryanair boss, Walsh has never taken out full-page newspaper ads lampooning the taoiseach and branding him a “ditherer”.

O’Leary, the bête noir of the trade union movement, has been uncharacteristically quiet on the future of Aer Lingus, maybe because the stalemate at the state company has played right into his hands. As Aer Lingus waits in the departure lounge, Ryanair has become the primary provider of air travel into and out of the country, mostly at cheaper prices. Having turned its back on developing new flights out of Ireland during the Walsh era, O’Leary has taken advantage of the Ahern-sponsored difficulties affecting his domestic competitor, to soup up his Irish operations.

The taoiseach, by playing footsie with O’Leary’s enemies in the trade unions, has delivered the lion’s share of the Irish aviation market to Ryanair. It’s not what he intended, of course, but the irony won’t be lost on Walsh. He, surely, is enjoying the last laugh.

We go down, we all go down
 

BASSA must act to bring down the company if necessary, the only way to solve this crisis- and it is a crisis of people's lives, is to threaten mutual assured destruction, as the USA and USSR used to play in the days of the Cold War.........come on some of you must remember that....

The outcome of MAD was the downfall of the USSR through Reagan's policy of a technological arms race. Do you see the analogy?

MAD-ness
 

Well the outcome of MAD was in fact never certain, hindisight is a wonderful thing.

The fact is that BASSA can wield enormous power and end these problems in an instant. If they strike, then BA is a lame duck.

Even better would be a regular strike once a month, then the punters will turn away from BA as being unreliable. Let's see what the shareholders say to mr Walsh then.

People in this country have been brain-washed by Thatcherism for 30 years, organised labour CAN win - look at Waterford Crystal in Ireland- an amazing victory.

BASSA - you can win- and you can keep a decent life and a decent wage for people- don't be afraid- you will win.

Mincer,

Let's chat again in 6 months!

So BASSA bring BA down? Then what? i can go back to engineering. What are you going to do?

MAD
 

Ham,

You are failing to see the big picture which, should you wish, I am willing to explain tonight, as I have little else better to do. Once you allow these capitalists to take an inch they will take much more. These reductions of 'Columbus' (although the 'Columbus' label is hardly apt, as Columbus 'discovered' somewhere, he didn't destroy it), are supposedly due to 'economic circumstance'. I ask you, will the Ts&Cs be restored, once we leave the recession?? Of course not....

Mincer,

Brilliant! I'm sorry I misunderstood the deeply ironic humour in your posts. No-one in their right mind could complain about capitalism whilst working for a stock-market listed company without having a finely honed sense of humour!

I know feelings are high at the moment, but honestly possibly not the best to challenge cc, most are quite highly educated at BA.. I have had the offer to 3 interviews within a week and money a little higher than BA paid me this last tax year.. just a tip don`t take it the wrong way. Ex teachers, Biochemist, nurses, chefs, managers of various professions.

Ham,

Perhaps you are a pilot, I don't know- but I don't want to go into nonsense about the contradictions of the world we live in- do you suggest that I live from my allotment?

Ham- we should not be fighting each other- you are also only able to offer your labour and are equally expendable, you should remember that.

Would you be happy if your lifestyle came under attack? Would you?

There we go then.

Yet with a 96% vote in support of strike action last time they capitulated to BA. Why? Because they are very good at whipping the troops up into a frenzy but very bad at explaining the consequences of such. Because when people realise that the consequences are days without pay, missing that lucrative box payment trip or maybe even losing their job they don't want to go through with it. Because when people realise that whilst they can spout off anonymously on internet forums about what they intend to do, to actually do it would lead to close personal scrutiny from the company, they lose their nerve. BASSA can wield enormous rhetoric but their power has long since gone.

Well, Carnage has hit the nail on the head of course. Capitalism has us all turned into self-seeking surburban-living, microwave food eating, SKY + watchin nothings. Carnage is right and there is nothing I can say. There are some marvellous characters in the air as cabin crew, really great, NORMAL, ORDINARY people, who don't want £50K a year and a BMW X5 to polish at the weekend, but, there is a division of labour, we see the same person maybe once every 10 years, and this, a lack of community, a lack of purpose, makes us different from the miners of the 19th century, and this lack of coherence and a modern day love of material possessions will see Carnage's dastardly prediction come true.....

If Ham is a pilot, I assure you he is far less expendable than if he were cabin crew as his replacement will take an awful lot longer to train.:rolleyes:

Depends- they can be done in six months- but yeh, there are less of them.....

cabin crew of BA unite- you have nothing to lose but your chains....

Channex - thanks for the summary.

An army is being assmbled as Channex types his message at The Rivers.

BA crew- heed this warning and act on it in your interests as you feel best.

There are many 1000s of people across the world, who, Channex correctly points out, that believe that they are going to enter the world's favourite airline on the world's best conditions.

They will be disappointed when they find out that they will only recieve an 11-month contract, which by no means will be renewed.

Why renew an 11-month contract to someone who might have caught wind of willie's game, when there is a fresh face ready to take over, naiive to the machinations of the senior management's ploy?

BA CREW - ATTENTION ATTENTION

There are 10 people EVERY DAY at The Rivers being offered temp contracts to work at BA.

10 X 5 = 50 per week
50 X 4 = 200 per month
let's say 1000 in 6 months

thats 2000 per year.

We are 14000 cabin crew approximatley. Therefore, the entire fleet can be replaced in SEVEN years.

OK- so you whinge about it and complain- willie can sack you.

OK- employment tribunal - months and months of messing about- and what do you get? Maybe a £30 K or so- big deal- that's in his plan- he can stomach that for the savings he's made on all you bloated CSDs and pursers out there...GAME OVER

This is happening RIGHT NOW- I say again- RIGHT NOW.

However- there is something you can do about it.....watch for my reply....

I think it's called

'endemic corruption'

National Flag Carrier - Channex101
 

Oi, hang on a mo.. ! NATIONAL FLAG CARRIER.. I think your thinking about a BA from a long time ago..

Time to wake up form that time warp you've been in for god only knows...Because if you do not - you may wake up to to find you've no job. Change is on it's way. And from readng your posts, your going to find it very hard.

Its comments like that which make me realise you really don't know what you're talking about and this will lead to yet another BASSA collapse. £500 per month? Even I'm not being asked to lose that, and may I remind you I'm being asked to lose a lot more than you. Go ahead and believe the BASSA nonsense if you will, but when your colleagues realise that much of there target could be reached simply buy changing work practices rather than losing pay I think you'll find yourself on a very lonely picket line whilst your colleagues check in at a temporary CRC.

Grief above,

BASSA lie 1 : There is no tragic economic downturn that requires these savings.

BASSA lie 2: The Flight Deck Crew are an evil army of people created by WW to hate and destroy CC.

I could go on forever but the inaccuracies BASSA come out with are never ending.

I have some very good friends employed as CC at BA, and I don't wish to see them lose financially but this attitude of bringing down the company rather than compromising on an out dated pay and work structure is lunacy.

Many BA Cabin Crew are highly educated, but many are not (despite being very very good at what they do) but in the current climate it won't matter a jot as companies are not recruiting at the moment - may I suggest you would be wiser trying to save the jobs you do have by offering to work as efficiently as possible and taking some tactical cuts, and then, if it is unbearable when things pick up, do as I and many before have done, leave your cabin bag behind and go out and find a new job that you enjoy that pays to a level you need/want.