Willy is not the problem
 

I think BASSA may be in danger of falling into the same trap that caught BALPA out during the frankly disastrous Openskies issue.

The mistake is in thinking that Willy Walsh has somehow overstepped the mark, and that when the Board realise how many enemies he has made they will throw up their hands in horror and sack him.

Unfortunately, this is not the case. Mr Walsh was specifically recruited by the Board after Rod Eddington left. He has not gone too far, he is doing what the Board recruited him to do. A strong ballot in favour of industrial action will not result in Mr Walsh being sacked. He is here to stay, at least until he completes the job that he was brought in to do.

I am still stunned how many of my colleagues, and apparently BASSA, think that the whole global financial crisis is either made up, or that BA is somehow immune from it.

Despite nearly non-stop news coverage of it in all media, blitzing in BA News, and numerous ESS messages, my colleagues still think they are immune from it.

.........and if anyone who doesn't have access to the CF forum wondered what things get said over there. here are a few examples:

"Theres nothing wrong with BA!! He knows it and we know it!!"

"I'd rather see BA go bust, honestly what is the point!"

"This is purely and simply a ploy to once and for all shaft the cabin crew!!"

Is there any non-nuclear way of changing their mind-set? Sadly, I don't think there is. The only way they will realise things are serious is when all of us Cabin Crew end up on the dole.

The one I like is:

Perhaps the point must be that all the other CC flying from non-BA airlines must be slaves, scratching in the dirt for the privilege of working.

The mindset and mentality of the BASSA hive mind is to hunt out, persecute and harangue the individual who dares to have an opinion against the 'brain'. For those that don't believe it just look back at the snow disruption in February and the BASSA hunt (name and shame it was called) for the CSD's that dared to reduce disruption rest for the good of the fare paying passengers.

Sadly, the mind set is implanted during initial training at 'Brain Crank' and is often set so deep that the average young, impressionable crew member will just jump when BASSA says jump without questioning why but just asking how high?

Hopefully, a peek over the ledge into the unemployment hell that exists in the middle of one of the worst recessions in living memory might jog people back into the real world before BASSA hits the meltdown button.

The rumours in the city are that this could well be a 'W' recession with us just hitting the middle at the moment. When growth doesn't return and the interest rates and taxes start to rise to cover the scandalous borrowing the Government have committed us all to, then we hit the second drop.

Surely it is better to be in employment (as slaves :rolleyes: ) than on the dole queue? Add to that the fact that by calling IA you are handing WW the opportunity to target the people who are causing him the most problems and hit you with a P45. Legal or not is it worth the risk?

It does amaze me when some people say WW wants them to work as slaves. Do they know anything about history at all? How ignorant of them to even remotely compare these issues.

They also say, pay peanuts and get monkeys. So all crew at LGW and pretty much all crew in the UK (various airlines) are monkeys then? When challenged, they say "no, no, LGW crew aren't monkeys, that's not what we mean". So what do they mean then?

I know quite a few would think I'm jealous or whatever of their money and therefore want to see them get "shafted" at LHR. Not the case at all. I just want to be able to keep my job, do it well and considering I'm able to live fairly comfortably on my LGW salary, I don't need to go to LHR to make ends meet. Yes, it means I can't go to fancy restaurants, I can't buy designer clothes, handbags and shoes, and I can't go on holiday to far flung places several times a year. However, I'm happy! Seriously, I'm happy with my lot. I've got a car that gets me from A to B (and sometimes C), I've got a lovely place to live, even if it is the size of a shoe box, and I've got really good friends and a lovely family. What more could I wish for?

So many people out there have lost their jobs, house, car etc. Think about it, Bassa folks who think it's all sunshine in the real world. I don't want anyone to lose out on a lot of money, but as I've said before, something's gotta give.

Gg

I am truly scared that I will lose my job, and my house because of the intransigence of Lizanne Malone, and the collective lunacy of my colleagues.

For those who state that Bassa did not turn up at meetings. The question has been asked and the chairperson of Bassa has replied today as follows.

why on earth would BASSA not turn up when there are 14000 crew patiently waiting for news that could change their lives forever, that would be totally irresponsible. Please only post what you can verify. I would much rather people just emailed me and asked .
Talks continue today to start at 1pm sharp at the companies request.Hence the reason I can post this morning.

Facts so far.

Talks are taking place and have been since february.
Bassa are turning up to talks.
No information is in the public domain because both sides are adherring to an information blackout.

PC767,

Is that the same way they 'turned up' to the pensions meetings last year? Oh, no they didn't 'turn up' until the day after and even then managed to jump on the back of the already agreed BALPA deal whilst crowing that BALPA had sold them down the river?

I'm sure the chairperson of BASSA would admit that they hadn't turned up, wouldn't they???

Whilst talks may be 'ongoing since February' they seem to have stalled as BASSA advised that the company wants to discuss 'New contract, New Fleet' but BASSA are unwilling to move on from redundancies as they see that as the highest priority. Talks maybe, progress, possibly not, too late? certainly.

This was posted by BASSA on the 24th after a meeting on the 23rd. The meeting with the company was scheduled for the input of counter proposals with BA on the 25th. BASSA did not attend on the 25th.

wobble2plank.

I'll leave it to you to question the truthfulness of the chairperson of Bassa in writting. A question was asked, as had been suggested on this very site, and an answer given. You don't like the answer, and why should you, so you spin it out and question it. Did bassa attend the meeting? Yes.

Again, I wasn't there, I don't know what has been discussed in meetings, and neither I suspect were you.

I do know that now BA has informed the Goverment that 90 days notice has been provided for compulsary redundancies, BA now have a legal obligation to discuss with workers representatives the handling of the redundancies. They may prefer to discuss 'New Fleet' but surely you can see that the order of discussions needs now to be how job losses can be handled before any discussions on how new jobs will be created.

None of us have the facts re new fleet, but on the information we have there surely is a legal question of how a company can make 2000 cabin crew redundant one day, then re-employ 500 cabin crew the next day.

Did Bassa not attend a meeting on the 25th? I quote from the head of IfCE.

From: Bill Francis, Head of IFCE

Date: Thursday, June 25, 2009

RE: Talks update



It is just over three weeks since I wrote to you with details of the proposal and package to deliver the permanent savings for the airline’s survival plan.

Since then I have been in discussion with your unions and I know many of you are keen to know how these talks are going..........

.............Unite has today tabled its first written proposal.

That makes two of us.

I think there's been a gigantic mix up here.

As far as I understand, the company needs to get rid of 2000HCE. Therefore, VR and PT has been offered. The only time CR would come into the equation is if there isn't enough for VR/PT.

The 90 day notice comes into play if no agreement can be found in negotiations, and that's where CR would come into play.

New fleet will happen regardless, and there are plenty of people swimming in the hold pool, chomping at the bit.

Surely, it is possible to discuss/negotiate several issues in one session? Especially when the deadline is so close. Even if this isn't possible, I'm baffled it's taken this long for all this palaver. It's putting our jobs on the line, and I (and I suspect a lot more cc) do not want to lose my job because of a few die-hard non-negotiators.

Gg

Unite? or Bassa? who is negotiating here? Or are we seeing BASSA reigned in by Unite?

BASSA were to table the proposals but they didn't turn up, Unite did. So who is representing the Cabin Crew?

Who will make the decisions this time? Will BASSA be the usual headstrong child and have to be dragged screaming and kicking to the table by the parent union like the pensions discussions? Or will the parent union allow BASSA to discuss things themselves?

It really would be nice to know.

No mix up. You are correct GG, BA would prefer VR, but if there are not enough volunteers then CR will occur. To be legal the company has submitted notice to the goverment of 2000 job losses. If 1000 are by VR then 1000 will be CR. Having started a legal process BA now must engage employee representatives in discussions for upto 2000 HCE job losses. You will note that the VR relies on an agreement being reached by 30th June. Beyond that, at this time, VR will be withdrawn and the redundancies will be compulsary.

I suggest, if you didn't see it, yesterdays Channel 4 news has a good item to view.

Default Viral Title Player

GG

Not what I heard at Cranebank yesterday. In fact recruitment is going very badly indeed, with on some days up to 50% no shows, of the ones that turn up few are suitable, and even when they are, the candidates are leaving with no information with regard to pay and conditions.

BFs figure of about 500 may be the ballpark, BASSAs claim of 2000 is very wide of the mark.

If people leave the business through VR, the company are free to recruit, if however people are forced to leave through CR then it opens up a new set of legal questions, that I am not qualified to answer.

My take on the last few weeks is that BASSA must be seen to be doing the dance with BA.

Come to an agreement too early on in the negotiations and the members would not be impressed, drag it out, spew forth poison rhetoric, wind all and sundry up, then snatch an agreement at the last moment, which on the face of it does not seem to bad, given that all that was threatened by BA...................... oh and of course claim a victory, all the while the company is busy counting the £82 million saved:rolleyes:

My opinion is that both VR and PT are used as a sweetner to make the TU:s and their members to accept the deal. If not agreed both VR and PT will be wiped out and replaced with CR.

Don't forget that 2000 HCE means anything between 2000 and 4000 actual people.

As for the hold-pool I have heard there are over 1000 people waiting. Recruitment earlier this year was fuzzy because they couldn't give any information whether it would be on temporary or permanent contracts or on which fleet they would be recruited to.

Interesting link PC767.

As has been said No one from the company then?

The reduction of the basic salary didn't take into account the proposed flying pay and TAFB allowances either.

2000 job losses puts BA into line with Delta, United, American Airways, AF/KLM and Cathay Pacific, all of whom have cut the CC workforce far more drastically than BA propose. Add to that the pilot job losses and the ground staff job losses plus the management cull of 400+.

One 'city analyst' verses the company position and Price Waterhouse Coopers independent analysis of the companies position coupled with the drastic share price roller coaster.

Touch one sided the article there.

As to lambasting personnel for taking voluntary unpaid leave or work, why? Surely when something is voluntary it is the remit of the individual to assess their personal circumstances and their personal appraisal of the companies position. We don't need some union 'muppet' telling us all it's out of order do we? I personally think it shows the depth of worry that many workers within BA have for the future stability of their jobs.

Wobble2plank.

Continue your debate about meeting attendance elsewhere. I believe, from the chairperson of Bassa and the head of IfCE that Bassa were present. I wasn't there so I can only rely on this information. You are adamant that Bassa did not attend. Why? were you there? who is your source? Finally on this item, consider that cabin crew have two unions, who this time are in agreement and working together, Bassa and Amicus (nee CC89). They are sub-branches of Unite.

And to the holding pool. Many ex temps are in the pool. They are there until something else comes along. They are keeping their options open. Depending on the details of new fleet, many will not return if the fleet goes ahead as discussed in the company's 32 point consideration list. The issue isn't just about money, it is also about working to scheme. Alot of ex temps are working for other airlines at present. It may not be worth their while re-joining BA. Source. My wife and her friends and facebook friends who are all ex temps. There may be 500 ex temps in the pool, but I fear there could be a high attrition rate.

PC767,

I think we shall agree to disagree on the attendance. Personally I believe the source I have and, as this is an anonymous, public forum, revealing that is not really cricket. I also choose not to believe the BASSA chair person. My choice. I too am very aware that being 'sub' unions is the only thing that has kept BASSA afloat over the last few rounds of negotiation by, occasionally, providing some negotiating professionalism.

On that I am quite happy to draw a line under the attendance issue.

4 more days and then we will see what miracles BASSA has wrought.

As to the temp issue, I wonder why, in the current cabin climate, the attrition rate could be high? Possibly due to animosity within the work place? If flight crew are getting lambasted on the BASSA forum for having a differing opinion what chance do temps have in the cabin?

Wobble2plank.

I know of no lambasting of temps in the cabin. That is both mine and my wifes experience. The temps were a joy to have and they enjoyed themselves. They know how we operate an the current terms and conditions. Should BA ask them back on the same T&Cs then attrition may not be an issue. But to be asked to do the same job for less terms and conditions will be a different matter. Most of the temps in my wifes social circle are working. They are not sat at home awaiting a phone call. They will study the details of any new offer before considering a return. Alot of temps have worked for other airlines, and now all temps have had a true appreciation of the job. They know that it isn't all glamour. If they want to work to CAP 371 and different T&Cs then they may as well stay where they are. The incentive to work at BA was a higher salary and different T&Cs. Incentive gone. Holding pool depleting.

Of new recruits in the pool. They have no commitment to BA. They may be employed elsewhere. They have no idea of T&Cs nor salary because BA has not provided details. When the details come will they still be willing to give up what they have an join? That depends on those details, but what we can summise is that they will not be as currently offered.

Re BA giving 90 days notice to the government.
 

Re BA giving 90 days notice to the government.

Companies legally have to tell the government if they are planning on making VOLUNTARY and/ or compulsory redundancies, so BA giving 90 day notice does not mean that WW is definitely going down the compulsory route.

Hopefully you will be able to make your headcount reductions through voluntary means like part time and severance or by more efficient working practices and changes to allowances.

Sorry, I didn't make my post very clear. I was trying to perceive a future where there has already been a catastrophic shift in the CC t's & c's and then the influx of temporary crew who might have been working over the term of a dispute.

I have a feeling that many who would like such a post may also be thinking of that scenario.

I agree wholeheartedly that the temp contract crew were/are a pleasure to work with.

No arguments zebedee.

But Walsh has said that 2000 hce will go from IfCE, whether that is by VR or CR. The VR is offered at a once only best offer, so hopefully it will be worthwhile to 2000 hce crew. It is a win win situation. Should the offer not appeal, then there should be legal consultation with unions for CR. I also believe, though I do not have the full legislation with me, that to make crew compulsarily redundant then employ new crew within a specific time frame (2yrs?) would not be possible.

That being the case, then Walsh & Co will also need an agreement soon to allow new fleet to go ahead soon, as VR depends on an agreement being found.

I can't remember now, but has there at any point been published by the company that New Fleet would operate to scheme and CAP371? Or was this an assumption made by unions and crew?

Gg

pc768

Do you except that BASSAs claim of 2000 crew in the hold pool is accurate or not?

In an email answer from a friend of mine,(HR Director, large High Street Bank) "recruiting people after making CR is possible but fraught with difficulties and open to legal challenges"

In redundancy the job that the employee is doing "disappears". You can still take on new staff but not to do the work the redundant employee was doing.

However, if business conditions change, ie if BA increases flying capacity or suddenly needs more crew, they are legally able to start recruiting crew again. There is no time limit set by law, they would just have to demonstrate that the need for more crew had arisen.

Zeb (studying employment law at uni!!)

No. Assumptions made by unions and crew who constantly keep saying minimum rest downroute. How are you supposed to have minimum rest in Entebbe with a thrice weekly service or in Nairobi with a daily service?

In Europe it will most likely be minimum rest at most destinations but almost every airline does it and don't keep their crew downroute longer than necessary.

The reference to scheme was originally made in the 32 points for discussion revealled in March 2009. You are correct that current details are not know. The point is if the new fleet works to scheme and pays the same as other companies, where is the incentive. I await the 30th to see actual facts before any further discussion.

Da Dog, that is correct and it may be that BA has built the cost of compensation for unfair dismissal into its accounts for new fleet. Of course an individual would need to take BA to tribunal in the first instance.

I would however note that such an obvious abuse of legislation could be a public relations disaster, more so than Walsh telling the world BA was going bust, and also could be legally taken further. The legislation is to protect workers, not to allow companies to refinance change.

Anyhow this is all speculative. Roll on the 30th and hopefully an agreement.

I seem to remember from my dim and distant past the there was a 6 month moratorium on employing personnel into a previously compulsory redundant position.

As Zebedeee has said, if the company can come up with extenuating circumstances as to why the time frame should be reduced then they can apply to the Department for Work and Pensions for dispensation.

As has been said, hopefully an agreement will be reached by the 30th and we can all get on with our work.

Zebedee is correct. There is no time limit now.

Here is an interesting point though. The company is planning new fleet now. Planning how to employ new crew on new terms and conditions. Before it removes 2000 hce from the books. Thats fine if the 2000 reduction is voluntary, but how can the company ask for any dispensation from legislation if it makes 2000 jobs compulsarily redundant. The argument that business takes an exceptional upturn in the later part of the year cannot be pre-announced. If so why legally lose the jobs in the first place.

There's always the possibility of if it comes to CR, that the company could turn round and say to the CR crew "you can keep your job if you join New Fleet". It doesn't make it compulsary to join New Fleet, but the company would give them a "choice".

For the record, I think this would be a sneaky way of doing it, but it wouldn't surprise me.

Gg

So why lose the jobs in the first case? Because some of our colleagues cost twice as much as Virgin!

Even if found illegal, the maximum compensation for wrongful dismissal is 1 wks basic salary per year served (1 1/2 per year over 41). Which BA will have saved more than that in lower wages anyway. They may also give punative damages if not reemployed but even these have a lowish limit and will take several years to get. Its not pleasant but if theres one thing Willy doesnt lack its ruthlessness.

I suspect he'll get near his 2000 VRs anyway.

They could sack crew and, before BA begins any additional recruitment, ask them to come back on new contract and fleet. If they say no it's their decision and they can't claim anything from the company as they had been offered to come back.

Sad times ahead of us but I do think BA has everything figured out.

I think that might come under the heading constructive dismissal.

Fair enough.

Getting fed up with this and if the members vote for a strike, which hopefully should be illegal, I hope crew who don't turn up for duty are sacked. I'm still going to work!

Ditto, I am going to work, and hope any strikers get sacked.

nuigini and Andyismyname,

What you really mean is that you hope illegal strikers get sacked. :ok:

For all those who play the 'sick note' game, well they may face disciplinaries if the company finds a a crack to get its crowbar into. In any event, sadly for you folks, the chickens are coming home to roost, finally.

Lets also not forget that the VR that is on offer at the moment is based on the fact that BASSA negotiates a cost cutting package by the June 30 deadline. It is a one time offer that will be taken off the table without a negotiated settlement. So those of you hoping to see what happens and then take the VR and run, it just won't happen. 2000 crew will be going either on a nice VR package or on a much reduced enforced CR basis. Good Luck!!

We have already been told that if any IR, any sickness will result in disciplinary, ie losing our job. Obviously, if someone can get a hospital letter or whatever for an urgent operation or similar, then that would have to be taken into account, but the ones claiming any sicknees otherwise will get their P45 in the post.

Gg

Constructive dismissal it is, but the compensation is so small WW may want to risk it.