PPRuNe is all about the truth, SP. Dirty linen is aired for all to see.

We pilots are used to having the voice recorder in the cab. Not so many in the galley though, perhaps that explains it?

FWIW, nuigini seems like a normal, nice person who would be uncomfortable with the CSD's statement.

I fly routes where the cc are regularly scrambling over themselves to finish the service to get rest. Even on a YYZ!

SP, why does someone having a different opinion of the levels of service from LGW and being proud of what they achieve equate to 'shopping your colleagues'?

To be honest, cutting the crew on a LH flight will mean that the meal service takes a little bit longer with less time in crew rest. Whoopy do. In reality most of the passengers in the current climate don't really care about meal services, what they care about is the cost of the ticket and if they think that an extra crew member is going to cost them more money then they won't pay it. Also let's face it most of the service levels on our LH flights from LHR have been dwindling in the past few years anyway.

BASSA have carbon copied the BALPA deal, which I seem to remember you quoted as a 'roll over and take it sweetheart deal'. Only, as usual for BASSA, they have cherry picked the nice bits and left out the nasty 20% allowance cut and the productivity and hours increases. Couldn't have those now could we that would utilise the 'give' word. Nasty, nasty word.

I am sure there is a compromise in there somewhere, to be honest I really hope there is a compromise in there. I don't think you will see WW taking up BASSA's 'productivity' proposals though as, oddly enough, I failed to see any that returned any significant saving.

The whole thing seems to look like the original 'we'll give you a pay freeze and maybe a small cut but that's it and we want it all back in the future' plan just a little better dressed with more fluff.

I feel the company will be rolling about on the floor laughing with this one.

Good job there's plenty of negotiating time left.

Oh, no, there isn't is there! :ugh:

From the newsflash:

What utter, utter tripe. Fails to take into account that flight crew have already taken on board most of BA's current CC wish list plus increase in hours with reduced allowances.

However, never let the truth get in the way of a good bit of spin eh BASSA?

The next week should be a barrel of laughs, haven't seen so much hot air since the Bristol Balloon festival.

:ok:

G'night all, I'm looking forward to reading all about the blow by blow account of how the great god BASSA is going to save the company with it's glowing blade the 'proposal of light'. :}

SP

That's what he said, but how do you know he wasn't happy with the 700 he got?

You have said it yourself (or it could have been PiB, you both sound so alike) that Walsh is the master of brinkmanship, just like right now, he wants £150mil, but would probably settle for £80 mil:rolleyes:

Rubbish SP. It would appear that many are quite simply BASSA brainwashed, and will accept anything they say.

1. In negotiations, things are supposed to be done on a give-and-take basis. Why then has the BA proposal deteriorated dramatically from the one originally put out by BA on 1 June? That is what we pay the union to do - improve on the deal that was already there, yet they have been unable to do that.

2. When a proposal is made, the counter-proposal should cherry-pick the parts we can accept, and tweak the rest. The BASSA proposal bears little or no resemblance to the BA proposal. Instead they have volunteered us for, amongst other things, a 2.61% paycut (that wasn't even asked for!) When did we give our authority for them to do that??

Just as a reminder to all those fool-hardy enough to swallow the BASSA line, here is the definition of trade union:

Trade unions are a membership-based organisation and one of their main goals is to PROTECT and ADVANCE the interests of its members in the workplace.

How the devil are they advancing our interests by offering a pay-cut that is not being asked for?? WW will be laughing all the way to the bank!

BASSA acted too hastily to formulate a proper counter-proposal. It is crystal clear that they have absolutely no understanding of negotiation skills or techniques. At best this is shameful misrepresentation, at worst they are seriously putting all of our jobs and livelihoods on the line.:*

I guess that's 3722 (almost 30%) of the 14000 crew that wont be calling for a strike!

This number added to the lack of support from Gatwick crew means Bassa will find it very hard to gain a majority vote in any strike ballot.

And that from a BASSA member :ooh:

Let's hope they protect, as not many people in this business are advancing at the moment :sad:

BA's own figures, sourced from the GPM results show a difference of 10 points between LHR LH and LGW LH. 10 points in LHR's favour. The effort is always to drive those figures upwards. Reducing crew will be counter-productive. If BA decide GPMs are nolonger important then fine.

PC,

I should certainly hope WWLHR score better that LGW due to the fact that they always operate with at least 2 sometimes 3 more crew than we do. Can I ask when these results were published? As a lot of the time, LGW crew are the highest scoring crew around.

By the way, I don't want this to turn into a scoring competition...:bored:

Gg

Exactly Overstress, that is the only thing we can hope for under the current climate. However, having had a mandate in April saying No to Negotiations (:eek:), BASSA have now sold us down the river!:confused:

What's a huge worry is that the crew who cannot think for themselves and have to let BASSA do it for them, are posting on the ESS forum, en masse (after a battle call on other forums) saying how great the BASSA proposal is! So all WW has to do now is come back and say "OK - we'll take everything BASSA has offered - but we still want crew complements reduced and New Fleet"!:uhoh: Then where will we be? BASSA have left us wide open, with no room for manoeuvre.

Once again BASSA have said "Jump" and the only question being asked is "How high?".

I personally think there is a lot that could be done with the BA proposal - and it could have turned out to be not a bad deal. It seems that the SENIOR STEWARDS are at play again. They will take a 2.6% paycut because they can afford to, but they won't reduce crew onboard because, god forbid, that may mean that they have to do a day's work. What about the rest of us that cannot afford a paycut, and ARE prepared to work harder onboard in order to salvage something? Zilch.

There can only be two outcomes to this sorry mess now:
1. A strike - which will ruin us anyway or
2. A very POOR deal, handed to them on a plate by BASSA.

Some momentum is gathering on other forums as members slowly realize the seriousness of what BASSA have done here, but it could well be too little, too late.

This is shameful. Lalalady needs to retreat to Lalaland - fast!

GPMs
 

Those GPMs are one of the reasons that the myth of LHR service "quality" has been allowed to prosper. It would be difficult to imagine a customer feedback system more open to abuse.

The forms are handed out and collected by the self same crew that are the subject of the report. In other words they know exactly who has a piece of paper that could drop them in the do-do. They also have the opportunity to read the form before it is submitted to the company. The system can easily be "massaged" to give positive feedback.

A far more accurate measure of the "quality" of the service on board can be found in the various passenger chat forums. The picture there is far less rosy, with BA (and in particular LHR) scoring no better, and in many cases worse, than any other long haul scheduled operator. You know, the ones who get paid "slave wages".:cool:

Why do people here pontificate about things they have absolutely no idea what they are talking about?

On the inside of the four page A4 GPM forms, there is a tear off sticky strip so that it can be closed and the comments enclosed remain private. Virtually all GPMs handed back are stuck together.

The reason why Heathrow based crews score higher is because there is not the turnover of staff as there is at LGW. Crews are more experienced and professional. Reducing crew compliments will prove the point that the service onboard will be dumbed down to Gatwick satisfaction levels.

With 2600 less crew flying, I suppose someone here will argue that standards will improve. Gg has actually said that the reason why the service is better at LHR, is because on similar routes they have more crew.

RV: you are correct. Who is in charge of GPMs on board? The CSD, who is often very selective as to who gets one.

Completed GPMs are collected by..... the CSD, who conveniently has to visit the office shredder to dispose of the passenger list, so.... :oh:

At least BA's proposal will stop the boredom of the CSD I flew with recently who announced that he had nothing to do (a full far-East flight BTW) :eek:

Edited to add, as I just read SPs post: another reason could be that the CSD has time at LHR to massage the system as described? ;)

Do you mean SP, many of us here are perfectly well qualified to comment and contribute. We do so because we care about the company we work for and don't care to see it dragged down by.... :oh::oh::oh:

HiFlyer14,

The reason they have taken those figures is purely and simply that they have copied the BALPA agreement whilst failing to take into account that the flight crew have already agreed to most of the original BA proposal anyway 5 years ago.

Due to the ineptitude of BASSA and the ridiculous short time frame they left themselves with after all their posturing and time wasting they have, indeed, left you all wide open.

I cannot see BA accepting the counter proposal at all. Why do we have CSD's on LH flights who take no active part in the service? Surely they should be 'leading from the front' showing the junior members of the team what they should 'aspire' to? :rolleyes:

Also the main thrust for BA is to rationalise the bewildering array of 'payments' into a single, manageable hourly sum. As the BASSA agreement seems to attempt to sidestep this issue by carbon copying the BALPA deal (that, incidentally we were all called 'ar$eholes' on the BASSA forum for accepting but for BASSA it is a brilliantly wrought deal?) and agreeing a paycut to protect the LH, CSD block payments. How many 'lates' will a CSD need to make up 2.6% bearing in mind the differing tax rate? Could be far tougher for the workers on SH to make up the difference.

Also why should the company, running the business for the investors and the customers have to 'request' activation of disruption clauses with the union? Who the hell runs the company anyway? Get aircraft back to base, get customers as quickly and efficiently to their destination as possible and THEN sort out disputes. BASSA DO NOT RUN BA NOR WILL THEY EVER RUN BA.

There is a long, long way to go in the negotiations and only 3 days left to do it. By WW statement if an AGREEMENT has not been reached by the 30th then standby for full activation of the BA measures.

BASSA have, once again, sold you all down the river and tried to window dress it by 'negotiating' exactly what BALPA negotiated over a hard 4 months. Seems remarkable similar to the pensions deal where BASSA were heard to say 'we want what they got'. Pathetic.

There is no doubt that some twit a**e licking CSD's did chuck out bad GPM forms in the past, frightened and intimidated that if their personal scores dropped because the IFE packed up or the aircraft was delayed, that somehow they were responsible for it, and would get 'managed' by their CCM over it. A couple of CSD's were sacked over 'GPM fraud.'

Most CSD's put them all in as they wanted the bad comments to reinforce the problems they encounter on every flight. Of course in spite of the constant evidence from passengers, BA never corrected what passengers most complained about.

Strangely BA put huge stock in the GPM's following trends when in fact the results were not always accurate, as the passengers who really should complete them would often refuse. For a long time now the forms can be sealed by the passenger.

That comment in itself illustrates perfectly why things have to change at LHR. In what way, exactly, are the crews at LHR "more professional" than those at LGW? They all receive the same training, pass the same tests. Indeed the same could be said of any other airline in the UK. Many charter operators have uniform and SEP standards that put BA to shame.

Or does "professionalism" mean getting the service done as quickly as possible to maximise bunk time? Or taking 2 local nights in a hotel before returning to base following a diversion? Please enlighten us.

Experience can be a good or a bad thing. It can bring a heightened awareness of the needs of the passenger, and an ability to "read" people, all leading to an improved service. Or it can bring a lazy indifference, leading to minimum effort and a poor service. It is a two edged sword.

The INDIVIDUALS in BA cc have been let down by a union totally divorced from both the membership and the employer. The "indispensable" mantra leads to comments like the one quoted above. I am thankful that it is not the opinion of the majority.

I do know that the BALPA reps are not surprised at the way this is playing out, especially after the tagalong behaviour of BASSA over the pensions deal (refusing to attend meetings, benefitting from BALPA's ingenuity then selling it to the members as though BALPA had stitched them up :eek: )

Any knowledgeable observer could have written the script.

To be constructive: BASSA members should now urge their reps to engage as much as possible to thrash something out ASAP. Time is running out.

I think it was PiB (or SP, can't tell the difference) who, a few pages ago, said that the 30th was an 'artificial deadline'. As opposed to what, exactly? A deadline is simply that, and it was announced long enough ago to have got a deal. Everyone else has managed it.........

Absolutely Wobbleplank - and thanks for your reply. This is truly the only forum where we can have serious and well-informed discussion.

The huge question now is how do we get it back on track? Everyone I speak to onboard says that they are happy to work harder, but don't want to lose money. The BA proposal could, with a bit of tweaking, achieve that. The BASSA proposal could not.

So little time and so much to do, ....

SP: I couldn't help picking up on your It seems to me, and this might be thread creep, that (and please don't take this personally as I am generalising) there are a lot of instances of the word 'intimidation' cropping up in discussions to do with crew, BASSA, IFCE etc. This, purely as an observation, is not something that flight crew tend to experience, in our environment an open and honest culture is promoted.

BA has a robust anti-bullying at work policy as you are well aware. Surely those CSDs could use that if they felt intimidated? The question could be asked: is there a culture of 'institutional bullying' in the BA cabin crew world? (IFCE mgt, DOMs, BASSA, on board)

SP

I find that comment incredibly condescending and patronising. All this coming from one set of CC against another? I don't ever recall flight crew calling LGW flight crew dumbed down or not as good as LHR flight crew? We all do the same job to the same levels with the same skill set irrespective of whether we fly out of LGW or LHR.

From my perspective, every time I have operated out of LGW, I have found the crew to be a breath of fresh air. Less bitter than some LHR crew and more willing to get the job done to the best of their abilities whilst operating at crew levels that would make LHR crew run crying to mother BASSA.

In fact, on many occasions I have had passenger comments on the positive performance of the crew as the passengers disembarked. Something that I have very seldom heard at LHR.

SO, to put this to bed, surely you should stop sniping at each other and get your inept, lazy union to do some proper representation before it all hits meltdown? Surely that would be a better channel for your, understandable, frustrations.

Stallpusher, your postings are verging on schizophrenic. One moment you state:
and then 12 minutes later:

Make up your mind! The use of the phrase 'no doubt' is an admission that this was (is) common practise. :hmm:


Not that long, surely? It was only a few months ago that I saw a CSD ripping up completed GPMs, before they had the facility to seal them! And a completed GPM, from a passenger who a CSD or crewmember has had 'issues' with, can still easily find its way into a bin or shredder, sealed or not!:rolleyes:

And I'm sorry, but I can't let

go unchallenged.

It is precisely because so many of us DO know what we are talking about that we are happy to challenge the assertions of BASSA. Many of us have worked for other airlines, both in the uk and abroad, in both charter, scheduled and freight. We KNOW how cushy life is for cc in BA and we KNOW that service standards are just as high with other operators.

Any cc in BA who have worked for other airlines will confirm this. A recent quote, here on Pprune, was that working full time in BA was akin to "semi-retirement" compared to it's competitors. Far too many cc in BA do not have this comparison to make, and so have been brought up on an unremitting diet of "you are the best, your service is indispensable", a message repeated ad nauseam by both management and union.

Now it is true that, in a service industry, a well motivated customer contact workforce is a big asset. But such considerations have to be tempered by a morsel of economic awareness, and this is where BASSA have let their members down most of all. By refusing to negotiate changes in the past to reflect the changing fortunes of the industry, they have caused a massive disparity to build up over their members pay and conditions relative to others in the same industry, and within the company. As such a massive correction is not only inevitable, but well overdue. The time has now come for that correction.

Having read many posts I have read with intrigue as to what is happening - i was once BA crew at the "Golden Runway" that is LHR. I used to be amazed at how much i would earn for what i thought was very little work...i loved the job but i saw things were changing and decided to jump before it got too bad. I used to commute fro a few months from Auckland and the service with BA was sometimes disgusting - very short, rude crew who would rush just to get to the bunks. It was sometimes an embarrassment - people have a choice and i for one have found crews better with other airlines who o seem to care. Now there are great crew with BA who are up there with other airlines. However, any business has to compete and at the moment they are suffering and saying that you would rather see the company go bust than change terms and conditions is just ridiculous. Now i know that some of the statements from Mr Walsh may be over exaggerated but with PWC looking at the accounts for the pilots and leading to the pilots making a deal would suggest that the company does need to change. I have read that there is some "clever accounting" being done to reflect a huge loss - rubbish. All accounts are audited and an auditor has to review the accounts and agree that thery are a true reflection of the position of the company. BA is answerable to it's shareholders and will back the board to make changes - that is a fact.
As for BASSA - i left bassa following the last 96.1% strike threat...what was achieved? nothing - they blinked and backed down - why not negotiate before it is too late. I have many good friends that have a lot to lose and would hate to see them suffer - i really would but the stance and the propoganda that BASSA produce does not give people the chance to make an informed decision...unions have their place but BASSA has been weekened and i am afraid are in for a shock. At the moment BA could afford to have a strike - people have mortgages, credit card and bills to pay - how long will they be on the picket line? maybe a mass bout of sickness or swine flu with a few days at home!! I would support the union whole heartedly if it was a legitimate fight but what will the argument be - we will see. Good luck to all of those out there that may suffer - i hope the unions back down and if not other airlines will be rubbing their hands to pick up the pieces.
As for GPM's i remember many a CSD and Purser on short haul cherry picking the good ones and binning the others.
I will leave my long post but i will await for some to pick it to pieces and wait for the "you don't know what you're talking about" routine.

A brainwave.....
 

In fact it has just occurred to me! As BASSA are so impressed with BALPAs negotiating skills, why don't BALPA open a Cabin Crew sub-branch, and let them be represented directly? I suspect they would get rather better value for money!

BALPA brokered the pensions deal on behalf of pilots and CC and now it looks like BASSA have just used BALPA's negotiations again so perhaps BALPA is already, indirectly, representing the CC!

I would add that LGW crew are an absolute pleasure to work with. Professional, friendly and good fun too without any bitterness or malice.

Interesting to see that a forum member has raised the question about the "Fixed Monthly Duty Payment" and how much it would be but is being completely ignored by the Chairman of BASSA. Very professional!

The "fixed monthly duty payment" if negotiated well ;) could be to our benefit. We are always complaining about "losing money when we take leave, go sick etc" and this would compensate for that. Would also help with pension etc.

BASSA have simply put forward their own (Senior Stewards) agenda, with little regard for anyone else. There is a lot that could be done with the BA proposal - but it would take intelligence, level-headedness and negotiating skills which appear in short supply at the minute.

So yes, perhaps we should procure the services of BALPA. Best idea so far and we would have absolutely nothing to lose.:D

Any BALPA reps interested? I would happily and am sure there's a few others on here that could be the CC reps under your umbrella.:ok:

Rubbish, having worked at LHR I am perfectly qualified to point out that on nearly every flight I ever did I had the standard line "which passengers are the nice ones so I can give them the survey". To imply this is a minority is too false.

Or that LGW don't have the time available on board to cherry pick the recipients of the GPM. Both bases have people below par (a minority thankfully) and to imply it is unique to Gatwick is either naive of you or just plain ignorant/rude.

So the one thing that BA have asked for from LGW BASSA is happy to give up without a fight whilst attempting to protect themselves at LHR as much as possible. Little wonder there is a waning support for the BASSA front at LGW. The BASSA/Amicus reps worked hard to have a purser reinstated at LGW on the 777 and now the senior LHR reps seem happy to forfeit that achievement.

The more I read the more I am stunned by BASSA's stance. The trouble is the only victims will be the staff many of whom are good friends and I really worry about in these hard times.

Totally agree with high flyer that a simple fixed payment could be beneficial for crew. It would stop the feast/ famine with salary and crew would get paid similar each month.
If i was bassa I'd be strongly negotiating for bidding on ww - the reason BA`never vagreed to it in the past was cos the allowance structure would lead to everyone bidding for the same work. If BA is going down the simple payment route, BASSA can now make a strong argument for work/ life balance and choice for crew.

or have BASSA left it too late to negotiate as time is running out?

Also i have to say that all my recent flight from gatwick have been great, i love the enthusiasm and attitude of the crews there.

It could be beneficial and would also stop crew not showing up for certain flights because they are "charity trips" and not worth coming in to work for. Crew "not doing Indians" because they're not worth anything or the LAD (5 no show's on my last trip there a couple of weeks ago - coincidence?). BA will never agree to bidding system under excisting terms and conditions.

VS does it and also allows crew to swap trips online as long as they are keeping an eye on their 900 hours. If they are out of hours after six months for swapping to far too many longer trips it's their own fault. LH also does it but they are also on different terms and conditions.

Having looked superficially at the BA proposal, I feel that there is quite a lot in there that could be worked to our advantage.

Reduction in Crew Complements.
Can't really complain. Yes we will work harder, but under today's climate that is the least we can expect. By agreeing to reduce crew, we give BA a large part of what they want, and in return it gives us some negotiating power (ie. Fixed monthly duty payment).

Increase in ground based productivity at base and downroute.
Contrary to popular opinion on other forums, I don't think this means working on checkin.:hmm:
The proposals could be tweaked so that we work longer days, in exchange for keeping days off (aka the Pilots!)

Disruption Agreement
No real hardship there so should be agreed.

A separate mixed fleet heathrow
The sticking point. However I have strong suspicions that this could be a bluff by the company. Give them the other stuff, they may forego New Fleet - it's already dwindled to only 500 starters.

UNITE Proposal
We will have to concede the payfreeze (as we offered it up!) and it will have to be permanent. Loans just aren't on the agenda.

Fixed Monthly Duty Payment
This has been written in the Package side of the deal, so the company have to offer it as a benefit. Huge negotiating tool - give them the crew complement and wack this up as high as possible.

All in all, I think there could be a win-win deal in there. The BASSA counter-proposal that simply introduces MORE factors into the equation is ridiculous.

Discuss....

I suspect they'd have been better off going through the BA proposal and saying what they dont like and why they dont like it. BA could then chuck some sweeteners in and start sensible negotiations re the new payment, which as you say needn't be a disaster. After all, with flexibility in MBTs and no premium trips BASSA could easily then say, well how about you give us a bidding system and then we'll think about it. Of course the new payment also means new fleet is not nearly such a threat with no premium trips to pinch.

Just coming out with uncosted polar opposites is never going to work. Whatever the final solution I suspect it will be an amended BA proposal rather than an amended BASSA one. Accept that and get negotiating!

Quick question
 

Have BASSA said how much their proposal will save?

And what is the amount that BA need IFCE (or whatever the department is called!) to save ?

Zebedee - BASSA have given no statistical evidence of anything. Wouldn't that require a GCSE in maths?:hmm:

So, let's take a look at their Senior Stewards (CSD) Protection Scheme - oops sorry BASSA Proposals.:suspect:

Pay
Offered 2.61% pay cut (where have we heard that before?)
CSDs/Seniors can live with that so it's ok. Stuff the rest of us.

Productivity WW
Disruption Agreement - held autonomy on that, so no change there.
Back to Back - throw this one in because it will generate MORE allowances
Supervisory Reduction - Premium cabin purser introduced - presumably at a cost?
(Omitted CSDs actually working - phew got out of that then!)

Productivity SFG
Let them take the hit at LGW by losing a purser

Productivity EF
Send 767 to EF (WW hate it anyway and it'll be gone soon)
Single supervisor - doesn't benefit Pursers, but helps out poor CSDs who are struggling for work.

Productivity Cross Fleet

VR in seniority order - to help yes you guessed it
VR Max of 75 weeks - to benefit who? Oh yes Seniors

LTIP
Well we have no idea about how a share incentive scheme would work, but we'll throw this vague sentence in in the hope that we get a deal that will benefit...yes those seniors again.

There is no financial breakdown, and if we build in cost for B2B and Premium Pursers, I fail to see how it can get anywhere near the required amount.

However the one thing that BASSA can do is wind up the members - they have raised the call to arms on other forums and now they are flocking in their droves to post on ESS what a great proposal it is. Can they read? Do they not speak English? Can they not see the writing on the wall? What they should be asking is what's in it for Joe Main Crew member - answer zilch.

It is like something out of a movie about 3rd world dictators - except this is our living nightmare and our livelihoods depend on it.

Oh, and one finally point. Whatever happened to "Temporary solutions for Temporary Problems". What a waste of :mad: stickers.

an excellent point, but i bet you're picking it up before the BASSA negotiators or at least seeing its benefit before them.

Middle Eastern B2B's must be one of the laughable suggestions ever. How are they supposed to save money by introducing additional ones when they are actually rostering fewer of B2B'S because they are expensive and not as effective as they once were?

B2B's to the Middle East would be with current B2B payment in addition to DOA, UK allowances, LHR accommodation and 4 MBTR. How much would it save the company as opposed to roster them two separate trips to the Middle East?

A 6 day B2B with 4 MBTR is 9 days in total. Some B2B's would probably be 7 days as some trips to JED and RUH are 4 days.

Two separate 3 day trips with 3 MBTR is 10 days in total.

With two separate trips they wouldn't have to pay B2B payment, allowances for UK (or DOA) or provide accommodation in LHR.

What am I missing?

Nothing, it was just there to fill the enormous void where BASSA's ideas should be. Approximately 1/3 of the document is based around this complete waste of time.

They even added this nonsense paragraph to waste even more space.

Global linear marks eh? Clever bunch these reps.

Its just laughable.

But not as bad as

The Branch chairman ensuring customer focus.... I had to check my diary to see it wasnt April 1st.:rolleyes: Note to BASSA leadership, you dont run the airline. Willy does.

And whats the Director of Customer?

This document was put together in the pub on thursday night during the quiz wasnt it? Its the only way it makes sense.

I don't even know what it means but having looked in my atlas, 40 degrees East and 20 degrees North seems to be in the middle of the Red Sea?

Are we in the 1970's here?!? So to keep a focus on the customer the airline that owns and operates the aircraft has to have a Director go via the union where any other sensible way of operating in disruption is to just get on with getting the operation back on track rather than getting involved in pointless red tape! I think they might think it is a communist style Government organisation, surprised they haven't said the board should be convened for such an occasion!