BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tomkins:
Ah yes, let's leave that to those sage and diplomatic individuals wearing Mr. Walsh's visage on their bottoms.
With all due apologies I'm more of the opinion that at times it takes individuals operating outside of the vacuum of a situation to see circumstances clearly.
and I would suggest that if you are not BA cabin crew or management,then you are really not in a position to criticise or even make an INFORMED oppinon on this subject.
With all due apologies I'm more of the opinion that at times it takes individuals operating outside of the vacuum of a situation to see circumstances clearly.
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Dubai
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tomkins
Tomkins,
This ia a popular thread and attracts many diverse posters because many many people are passionate to see our flag carrier prosper and get back to being the world's favourite airline....which its not at the moment.
Many of us posters aren't employed by BA but, as above, are passionate to see it regain its former glory (and we are not SLF or PAX - we are customers that pay BA staff's wages).
Until 5 years ago BA enjoyed most of my business - then the CC service became unreliable, some flights great, others had sour (read, customers are a pain) crew and rubbish service. I then switched to Emirates and what a wake up call, superb service every flight, no inconsistancy of service.
I would love to give my business back to BA (and it's significant business) - I hope the resolution of this dispute will persuade me to - many CC posters on here have influenced me to re-consider my staff travel policy once the dispute is over and the
have either left or realise the customer pays their salaries, not the airline.
So, gather your colleagues and PLEASE make BA an Emirates beater.....
This ia a popular thread and attracts many diverse posters because many many people are passionate to see our flag carrier prosper and get back to being the world's favourite airline....which its not at the moment.
Many of us posters aren't employed by BA but, as above, are passionate to see it regain its former glory (and we are not SLF or PAX - we are customers that pay BA staff's wages).
Until 5 years ago BA enjoyed most of my business - then the CC service became unreliable, some flights great, others had sour (read, customers are a pain) crew and rubbish service. I then switched to Emirates and what a wake up call, superb service every flight, no inconsistancy of service.
I would love to give my business back to BA (and it's significant business) - I hope the resolution of this dispute will persuade me to - many CC posters on here have influenced me to re-consider my staff travel policy once the dispute is over and the
have either left or realise the customer pays their salaries, not the airline.So, gather your colleagues and PLEASE make BA an Emirates beater.....
Paxing All Over The World
The wording, mood, style and ethos of the memo posted by wascrew, is that of the 1970s and 80s.
I do have sympathy for those whose working conditions are being held and may, it seems,. decline somewhat. I have been there. I have had my conditions changed, I have lost work that I thought was going to continue into the future and so on. BUT.
One of the best examples of the way in which the world has changed is the Greek financial problem. If their melt down continues into the other countries being talked about - then Europe will be in the next Depression. Arguing about the tiny detail of your ex-job will pale into insignificance.
I do have sympathy for those whose working conditions are being held and may, it seems,. decline somewhat. I have been there. I have had my conditions changed, I have lost work that I thought was going to continue into the future and so on. BUT.
One of the best examples of the way in which the world has changed is the Greek financial problem. If their melt down continues into the other countries being talked about - then Europe will be in the next Depression. Arguing about the tiny detail of your ex-job will pale into insignificance.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
baggersup:
I'm sure they will be posting the offer in its entirety.
It would be absolutely inane for BASSA to ask their membership to vote on an offer they have not seen, both from a responsibility to their members and public relations view.
As I don't have access to the BASSA site I can't speak with certainty but I don't believe they have posted the offer in full as of yet. BASSA is aware that many of their members look to them to keep them fully informed and I find their reluctance to address the entire offer a disservice to their members.
I'm sure they will be posting the offer in its entirety.
It would be absolutely inane for BASSA to ask their membership to vote on an offer they have not seen, both from a responsibility to their members and public relations view.
As I don't have access to the BASSA site I can't speak with certainty but I don't believe they have posted the offer in full as of yet. BASSA is aware that many of their members look to them to keep them fully informed and I find their reluctance to address the entire offer a disservice to their members.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wascrew's linked union letter is disgraceful. They are treating their members as fools.
The union advises its members to reject the deal because of a lack of trust in BA, illustrated, they say, by BA's intransigence is restating ST and dropping the pending disciplinaries. So basically they are saying that you can't trust BA because they are doing what they said they would do, instead of going back on their word!
The union advises its members to reject the deal because of a lack of trust in BA, illustrated, they say, by BA's intransigence is restating ST and dropping the pending disciplinaries. So basically they are saying that you can't trust BA because they are doing what they said they would do, instead of going back on their word!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's up to the members to either take the recommendation or vote to accept. This is where it becomes a folly to leave the Union in some kind of protest. All those who don't agree could be in there campaigning and voting to accept.
Does anyone know if the Unite have given the details of the BA offer to their members yet? Or do they simply expect their members to vote solely on the basis of their recommendation?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 76
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fron Unite's website
This is from Unite's website, courtesy of HiFlyer 14. Thanks you!
All of us within British Airways were hoping to be in a position, to be able to recommend, at long last, a deal that would bring about a welcome return to normality for our airline.
This has not been possible. After a sensible pause for reflection from both sides since the last days of industrial action, talks resumed directly with our General Secretary Tony Woodley and British Airways CEO Willie Walsh.
These concluded late yesterday evening and were unsuccessful.
Though the dispute was over imposition, British Airways insisted that any settlement must include several new areas.
* New fleet
* Changes to the disciplinary, grievance and redeployment agreements
* A complete renegotiation of the trade union facilities agreement
* Two year pay freeze
* Two year capped pay deal
* Introduction of monthly travel payment
* Future promotion
* Route transfer procedure to new fleet
* Ops and choice
* New disruption agreement
Though not ideal, with good will on both sides this could have formed the basis of "A way forward"
The words were fairly broad and not particularly specific or detailed, as it would require a huge leap of faith to entrust or guarantee the rest of your flying career to "good will."
Your union was prepared to fulfil our half of the bargain but in the end what was missing was the complete absence of any " Good will" on behalf of British Airways.
Without that, it would be impossible to have the required faith in what are essentially just words.
Actions speak far louder. A systematic insistence of zealously pursuing an increasing number, now over fifty, dispute related disciplinaries and applying disproportionately harsh sanctions - for trivial reasons. Alongside this an obvious desire to permanently "punish " all those, who participated in a legal and lawful strike have become the stumbling blocks.
How could we recommend, in good faith acceptance of a set of words, the spirit of which has already been broken before the ink is dry on the paper? We would be misleading you and were just not prepared to do that.
British Airways customers must ask why there are still on going threats to their travel plans, essentially over punitive decisions our CEO opted to take. If he had not chosen to take these actions, this dispute could well have now been resolved.
It would be wise to reflect that for many in higher management the focus appears to be on crushing cabin crew, rather than the business of running an airline and carrying passengers. There simply is no sensible business rationale to insist on enforcing decisions that will affect between 4000 and 5000 people permanently, unless it is over pride or a desire for revenge. It simply does not make sense.
There will of course be an on line ballot to ask your views in the next few days, but to be absolutely clear, we have no other choice but to join both Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson in recommending that you join us in rejecting this proposal .
This has not been possible. After a sensible pause for reflection from both sides since the last days of industrial action, talks resumed directly with our General Secretary Tony Woodley and British Airways CEO Willie Walsh.
These concluded late yesterday evening and were unsuccessful.
Though the dispute was over imposition, British Airways insisted that any settlement must include several new areas.
* New fleet
* Changes to the disciplinary, grievance and redeployment agreements
* A complete renegotiation of the trade union facilities agreement
* Two year pay freeze
* Two year capped pay deal
* Introduction of monthly travel payment
* Future promotion
* Route transfer procedure to new fleet
* Ops and choice
* New disruption agreement
Though not ideal, with good will on both sides this could have formed the basis of "A way forward"
The words were fairly broad and not particularly specific or detailed, as it would require a huge leap of faith to entrust or guarantee the rest of your flying career to "good will."
Your union was prepared to fulfil our half of the bargain but in the end what was missing was the complete absence of any " Good will" on behalf of British Airways.
Without that, it would be impossible to have the required faith in what are essentially just words.
Actions speak far louder. A systematic insistence of zealously pursuing an increasing number, now over fifty, dispute related disciplinaries and applying disproportionately harsh sanctions - for trivial reasons. Alongside this an obvious desire to permanently "punish " all those, who participated in a legal and lawful strike have become the stumbling blocks.
How could we recommend, in good faith acceptance of a set of words, the spirit of which has already been broken before the ink is dry on the paper? We would be misleading you and were just not prepared to do that.
British Airways customers must ask why there are still on going threats to their travel plans, essentially over punitive decisions our CEO opted to take. If he had not chosen to take these actions, this dispute could well have now been resolved.
It would be wise to reflect that for many in higher management the focus appears to be on crushing cabin crew, rather than the business of running an airline and carrying passengers. There simply is no sensible business rationale to insist on enforcing decisions that will affect between 4000 and 5000 people permanently, unless it is over pride or a desire for revenge. It simply does not make sense.
There will of course be an on line ballot to ask your views in the next few days, but to be absolutely clear, we have no other choice but to join both Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson in recommending that you join us in rejecting this proposal .
Unless I've missed it, we don't seem to be any nearer to getting an answer regarding ST. Has anyone, seen anywhere, any official documentation stating that BA will reinstate ST for strikers from October 2010 as has been previously suggested?
No mention of ST in the BA offer shown on the "official" thread.
PS: Fin, that Union message you posted has already been posted on this thread by Wascrew a few posts back. Hence my earlier comments regarding its contents.
PS: Fin, that Union message you posted has already been posted on this thread by Wascrew a few posts back. Hence my earlier comments regarding its contents.
There is an interesting insight into the mindset of BASSA supporters on the other thread.
BA's offer says:
(my bold)
But pro-IA Reargunner interprets this as:
Given that mindset, it is clear that whatever BA offer, it will not be considered believable, and therefore unacceptable. Reargunner appears to consider that the virtual certainty that his/her contract will be terminated in June is equally as likely as BA going back on their word, so he/she has little to lose by continuing IA
BA's offer says:
There are firm commitments on your pay, your individual contracts, your lifestyle choices and your future career opportunities.
Your pay won’t be cut
Your contract won’t change
You won’t be forced to move fleets
You won’t lose all the best routes to a new fleet
Your pay won’t be cut
Your contract won’t change
You won’t be forced to move fleets
You won’t lose all the best routes to a new fleet
But pro-IA Reargunner interprets this as:
As far as I can see, accepting this deal means I will keep my existing T&C until New Fleet is fully operational then I will lose all of it. I will be told there is no work for my existing job and put into Careerlink.
The redeployment agreement I will have just accepted gives me 3 months on full basic to find a new vacancy. Then 3 further months on 75% of that basic and then a further 3 months on 50% etc. So, if New Fleet is still growing and recruiting I can apply for a job there or leave.
If I strike, and it is not supported by a lot of cabin crew, then in June the company can terminate all cabin crew contracts and offer new ones with 90 days notice.
As far as I can see, there is very little between the two threats to my livelihood
The redeployment agreement I will have just accepted gives me 3 months on full basic to find a new vacancy. Then 3 further months on 75% of that basic and then a further 3 months on 50% etc. So, if New Fleet is still growing and recruiting I can apply for a job there or leave.
If I strike, and it is not supported by a lot of cabin crew, then in June the company can terminate all cabin crew contracts and offer new ones with 90 days notice.
As far as I can see, there is very little between the two threats to my livelihood
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Scotland
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ST
"That is correct. Staff Travel is awarded after six months continuous service."
This is a quote off the other thread and I suppose indicates that after 6 months of loss of ST (April to October) affected CC will have "earned" it back, albeit at the starter level ?
Wotcha fink ?
This is a quote off the other thread and I suppose indicates that after 6 months of loss of ST (April to October) affected CC will have "earned" it back, albeit at the starter level ?
Wotcha fink ?
CC may feel they have earned ST back after 6 months, but do you think its likely that WW will restore a non-contractual benefit having said he would not? Doubt it personally.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to Tony Woodley's letter, the company is prepared to restore ST to commuters and to strikers (but with no accumulated seniority):
. Tony Woodley letter
. Tony Woodley letter
Interesting link LD.
So WW is prepared to change his mind on ST provided his demands are met. (I suspect he knows they will not be)
One would have thought that a Union would have a duty to advise their members the pros and cons of further IA when inviting them to vote on the subject, but I note Mr Woodley avoids mentioning the very real possibility of termination after 12 weeks.
I await the next installment with interest.
So WW is prepared to change his mind on ST provided his demands are met. (I suspect he knows they will not be)
One would have thought that a Union would have a duty to advise their members the pros and cons of further IA when inviting them to vote on the subject, but I note Mr Woodley avoids mentioning the very real possibility of termination after 12 weeks.
I await the next installment with interest.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Unite Letter
This then leads on to the third and most general consideration why I ask you to reject the offer. It is this – any agreement is only as good as the integrity and sincerity of those putting their names to it. By their actions and behaviour throughout the dispute, and continuing to this day, it is impossible to take BA management’s words at their face value.
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Cardiff
Age: 62
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good news
Sounds like more IA ahead, as a regular BA Club World SLF I welcome it. Next trips are LHR DEL in mid May and truly hope they fall in the next declared strike periods.
If so I fully expect BA to get me to DEL and look forward to engaging with the high morale of the CC and VCC on baord.
Sounds like WW proposed concessions are more than anyone deserves showing what a fair man he really is.
In perspective is it not the case that CC main purpose is to serve the coffee? Similar main purpose to those working in Coffee Costa in T5? Difference being that serving coffee on the A/C seems to have more leverage with BA in that Regs say flying without coffee servers is unsafe??
This gives obvious leverage to the in flight coffee serving in that no coffee = no flight. A fact fully exploited by the airborne coffee servers (ACS) as opposed to the ground based coffee servers (GBCS).
If in any doubt please compare average remuneration of the ACS versus the GBCS - same coffee different altitude!
If so I fully expect BA to get me to DEL and look forward to engaging with the high morale of the CC and VCC on baord.
Sounds like WW proposed concessions are more than anyone deserves showing what a fair man he really is.
In perspective is it not the case that CC main purpose is to serve the coffee? Similar main purpose to those working in Coffee Costa in T5? Difference being that serving coffee on the A/C seems to have more leverage with BA in that Regs say flying without coffee servers is unsafe??
This gives obvious leverage to the in flight coffee serving in that no coffee = no flight. A fact fully exploited by the airborne coffee servers (ACS) as opposed to the ground based coffee servers (GBCS).
If in any doubt please compare average remuneration of the ACS versus the GBCS - same coffee different altitude!
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pencisley - I trust that an element of your post is tounge in cheek?
Many of the "coffee servers" are a lot more than that. I know it's not a skilled job (in the usual accepted def) but it isnt the same as working in the local coffee bean store, it really isnt.
My own partner is a Purser and takes her job very seriously indeed as witnessed by the many hours she spends at home in study to ensure that she is knowledgble on every aspect of the service, destinations, SEP etc, to the benefit of the customer and company alike.
--------
OK, now I've done my defender bit, this is more interesting from the other thread: -
On the ST front, any thoughts that it's return was offered on the belief that the offer would be rejected and brownie points scored for making it must be reviewed on the basis that he's expecting the non union crew to vote yes...
But, will some non union crew vote no to prevent ST return, there are some strong views out there on it after all.
Let's see eh...
Many of the "coffee servers" are a lot more than that. I know it's not a skilled job (in the usual accepted def) but it isnt the same as working in the local coffee bean store, it really isnt.
My own partner is a Purser and takes her job very seriously indeed as witnessed by the many hours she spends at home in study to ensure that she is knowledgble on every aspect of the service, destinations, SEP etc, to the benefit of the customer and company alike.
--------
OK, now I've done my defender bit, this is more interesting from the other thread: -
I'm delighted that we all now have an opportunity to vote on the offer in an email sent to all of us from Willie Walsh late this evening.
If you are not a member of UNITE like myself, you can do this via a link on the ESS homepage under IFCE, The Way Forward - Have your say on your future.
If you are not a member of UNITE like myself, you can do this via a link on the ESS homepage under IFCE, The Way Forward - Have your say on your future.
But, will some non union crew vote no to prevent ST return, there are some strong views out there on it after all.
Let's see eh...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Over the hill and far away
Age: 76
Posts: 174
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snas
On the ST front, any thoughts that it's return was offered on the belief that the offer would be rejected and brownie points scored for making it must be reviewed on the basis that he's expecting the non union crew to vote yes...
1. Acceptance of the agreement
Obviously the Way Forward agreement needs to be ratified by a ballot of all members. We would expect all parts of the union to communicate in a balanced way during this balloting period.
Obviously the Way Forward agreement needs to be ratified by a ballot of all members. We would expect all parts of the union to communicate in a balanced way during this balloting period.