BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snas:
I agree. If Unite is foolish enough to argue that staff travel is contractual, and heaven help them if they do win in court, the tax man cometh.
I agree. If Unite is foolish enough to argue that staff travel is contractual, and heaven help them if they do win in court, the tax man cometh.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what a horrible legacy left for CC to not enjoy for years after should it come to pass.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree. If Unite is foolish enough to argue that staff travel is contractual, and heaven help them if they do win in court, the tax man cometh
If staff travel is declared as contractual, then will that not cover anyone, in any UK airline, that benefits from it?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Arizona
Age: 56
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Obviously I made a mistake when I booked with BA. Unfortunately I had not discovered this forum when I did so. Now I'm stuck with them for our flights on June 18th and July 04th. At this stage the only thing I hope is that there will actually be flights on those days and that, ideally there won't be any of these morons on the aircraft. I'd prefer to have a crew comprised entirely of volunteers. For future flights wether or not I book BA will depend entirely on Walsh managing to break the union and dump the trash. Failure to do so will result in me using anyone but BA in the future.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My company is clamping down on travel, but even so, where necessary BA are definitely off the list.
I'm very sorry for those in BA who want to make it great again, and who despise the strikers for the very real risk of putting BA out of business that they are creating for a stupid, ridiculous non-cause. But I'm not risking our business in a probably futile attempt to help BA by buying flights that may not happen.
Unite and BASSA have their own agenda, we all know that. But why these brain-dead morons allow themselves to be used as cannon-fodder is beyond me.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: England
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Staff Travel - taxable
Bringing this perk to the full public glare may inadvertently alert the Taxman to a potential source of income, whether or not Unite win the case. Maybe this is their scorched earth policy - bankrupt BA and spoil perks they're no longer entitled (no longer employed as CC).
The militants do seem to want to put off the passengers, don't they realise we pay their wages. Surely they understand that not all will return - scorched earth?
The militants do seem to want to put off the passengers, don't they realise we pay their wages. Surely they understand that not all will return - scorched earth?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The taxable value of a benefit, whether contractual or not, is not the market value of the benefit, but what it costs the employer to supply it. If it cost BA more to supply than the employee pays, there would be a taxable amount even if it were not contractual.
As staff travel is on an otherwise empty seat, and is profitable in respect of the 90% discount tickets, no tax would apply.
I think, but am not sure, that BA already makes a 'settlement' payment agreed with the Revenue in respect of the 100% discount tickets. As they are still technically otherwise empty seats, the only cost is the supply of food and drink. Staff are specifically barred from accepting the in flight goody bag, I'd guess this is make sure the revenue don't include the value of that in their settlement calculation.
So if Unite wins the case for staff travel being contractual, it may make no difference to it being tax free.
As staff travel is on an otherwise empty seat, and is profitable in respect of the 90% discount tickets, no tax would apply.
I think, but am not sure, that BA already makes a 'settlement' payment agreed with the Revenue in respect of the 100% discount tickets. As they are still technically otherwise empty seats, the only cost is the supply of food and drink. Staff are specifically barred from accepting the in flight goody bag, I'd guess this is make sure the revenue don't include the value of that in their settlement calculation.
So if Unite wins the case for staff travel being contractual, it may make no difference to it being tax free.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just an observer:
Interesting post. My reading has told me that there is a very specific reason why the unions have always left staff travel as a "perk", and not an essential element of the employees' contracts.
Even the union has played tippy toe with this issue. I believe they see the danger of letting that dog off the leash.
Interesting post. My reading has told me that there is a very specific reason why the unions have always left staff travel as a "perk", and not an essential element of the employees' contracts.
Even the union has played tippy toe with this issue. I believe they see the danger of letting that dog off the leash.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diplome - see revenue website here
The benefits code: cash equivalent of benefits: in house benefits: marginal additional expense: Pepper v Hart
The benefits code: cash equivalent of benefits: in house benefits: marginal additional expense: Pepper v Hart
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: LONDON
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just an Observer,
You are correct.
When I was at BA we has a PSA agreement to cover to cost of providing ID100's. That means that tax was paid by the employer not the employee. (I've been out of BA for 3 years so this may have changed)
ID 90's were judged to be non-taxable as the cost to the employer was covered.
Whether a benefit is contractual or not does not impact it's tax impact. The question is whether the benefit is remuneration for employement, e.g if my employer writes off a loan to me, full tax with have to be paid on it.
If this were not the case then many of us would receive substantial "non contractual" benefits, especially when faced with a 60% marginal tax rate.
For those of you with a masochistic tendency start here
Employment income: general: table of contents
and look through the benefit in kind rules
You are correct.
When I was at BA we has a PSA agreement to cover to cost of providing ID100's. That means that tax was paid by the employer not the employee. (I've been out of BA for 3 years so this may have changed)
ID 90's were judged to be non-taxable as the cost to the employer was covered.
Whether a benefit is contractual or not does not impact it's tax impact. The question is whether the benefit is remuneration for employement, e.g if my employer writes off a loan to me, full tax with have to be paid on it.
If this were not the case then many of us would receive substantial "non contractual" benefits, especially when faced with a 60% marginal tax rate.
For those of you with a masochistic tendency start here
Employment income: general: table of contents
and look through the benefit in kind rules
Last edited by BA-BEANCOUNTER; 20th May 2010 at 18:59. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't find confirmation online but my memory is that BA actually paid part, a large part, of the teachers legal costs refered to in the test case Pepper v Hart above, as they could see if the case was lost, staff travel would be next.
Well it will soon goodbye BA, who would want to book with an airline and then be denied travel if others are flying to the same destination. BASSA have to remember that BA are not a monoply supplier of air travel unlike their unionised brothers in the state sector for example education and the National Health Service, competition is not big enough just yet in education.
WW brought all BA long haul into LHR & LGW, other airlines have moved into their place and remember fron the north or even the midlands it can be easier to go to AMS or CDG than either of the two London airports.
BA has no given right to exist, look at Sabena Swissair Pan Am TWA or Braniff in the past. A private airline to exist has to offer a service that passengers WANT as a first choice not a last when all other options are exhausted, what part of this do BASSA not appreciate.
If BA goes into liquidation what will BASSA members do then, want state aid to keep flying, not with this government in a million years or at least the next 5. People will look to others as a national flag carrier.
BASSA wake up your UB40 awaits soon, others will laugh at you as they take your market and if you are liquidated, just imagine if someone like Emirates or Qatar take you over, your feet will touch the ground on the way out of the door. Maybe that would be a good thing in the long run. I personallly would rather fly Emirates any day than BA.
WW brought all BA long haul into LHR & LGW, other airlines have moved into their place and remember fron the north or even the midlands it can be easier to go to AMS or CDG than either of the two London airports.
BA has no given right to exist, look at Sabena Swissair Pan Am TWA or Braniff in the past. A private airline to exist has to offer a service that passengers WANT as a first choice not a last when all other options are exhausted, what part of this do BASSA not appreciate.
If BA goes into liquidation what will BASSA members do then, want state aid to keep flying, not with this government in a million years or at least the next 5. People will look to others as a national flag carrier.
BASSA wake up your UB40 awaits soon, others will laugh at you as they take your market and if you are liquidated, just imagine if someone like Emirates or Qatar take you over, your feet will touch the ground on the way out of the door. Maybe that would be a good thing in the long run. I personallly would rather fly Emirates any day than BA.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Walsh firmly placing BASSA in the frame.
The more the better in my view, BASSA are the issue here.
YouTube - British Airways: Willie Walsh on the Court of Appeal decision on the BA cabin crew strike 20 May
The more the better in my view, BASSA are the issue here.
YouTube - British Airways: Willie Walsh on the Court of Appeal decision on the BA cabin crew strike 20 May
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone else see the silly women stood behind Derek Simpson outside court today, laughing like drains, jumping up and down in glee at the result?
Bassa/Unite are just enjoying this a bit too much!!!
If there were any sympathy left from the public, the demeanour of these people on TV will ensure it's all gone.
Bassa/Unite are just enjoying this a bit too much!!!
If there were any sympathy left from the public, the demeanour of these people on TV will ensure it's all gone.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: sussex
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My wife and I were watching and thought the behaviour was poor. Indeed, we commented at the time that they would deter us from flying with BA!
My heart is with all the hard working people at BA, I hope you get the opportunity to show the world how good you can be. Best wishes for the future.
My heart is with all the hard working people at BA, I hope you get the opportunity to show the world how good you can be. Best wishes for the future.
I have just seen these complete muppets with their open topped bus making absolute fools of themselves in London and, thanks to the BBC World service on the world media.
Who in god's name would want to be on an aircraft with people such as these in charge of their cabin safety and service. Can't they see, or don't they care, about the enormous damage they are doing to the reputation and image of BA as well as the financial damage when the company is already making huge losses.
The BBC reports that this strike will cost BA GBP 160m all down to the actions of 3,000 militants, thats over GBP 50,000 each, more than they are worth and vastly more than retraining a replacement, who could be hired at market rate producing an immediate saving, will cost.
This is now a battle, a war even, to save BA. Moderation in war is imbecility, so lets earnestly hope that WW sacks each and every one of the strikers and he and the rest of the dedicated staff at BA can get down to rebuilding the companies finances and reputation. If I were still flying I sure as hell wouldn't want any of these strikers in my crew after they have shown so little commitment to the company who have hitherto looked after and rewarded them so well.
Cant sack them ? Thats what the controllers in the USA thought back in the '80s. Reagan didn't see it that way, they went, he wasn't as PATCO thought, bluffing. ! It takes a LOT less time and money to train a steward or stewardess and there are lot of CC still working in BA who could well fill the senior positions and enjoy the benefits of promotion. So lets get on with it, NOW.
Who in god's name would want to be on an aircraft with people such as these in charge of their cabin safety and service. Can't they see, or don't they care, about the enormous damage they are doing to the reputation and image of BA as well as the financial damage when the company is already making huge losses.
The BBC reports that this strike will cost BA GBP 160m all down to the actions of 3,000 militants, thats over GBP 50,000 each, more than they are worth and vastly more than retraining a replacement, who could be hired at market rate producing an immediate saving, will cost.
This is now a battle, a war even, to save BA. Moderation in war is imbecility, so lets earnestly hope that WW sacks each and every one of the strikers and he and the rest of the dedicated staff at BA can get down to rebuilding the companies finances and reputation. If I were still flying I sure as hell wouldn't want any of these strikers in my crew after they have shown so little commitment to the company who have hitherto looked after and rewarded them so well.
Cant sack them ? Thats what the controllers in the USA thought back in the '80s. Reagan didn't see it that way, they went, he wasn't as PATCO thought, bluffing. ! It takes a LOT less time and money to train a steward or stewardess and there are lot of CC still working in BA who could well fill the senior positions and enjoy the benefits of promotion. So lets get on with it, NOW.
Last edited by RetiredBA/BY; 21st May 2010 at 04:08.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not booking any more BA flights for the foreseeable future. It's just too risky now.
I'm not even sure anymore that BA can be saved unless Mr Walsh sacks the lot of them and is seen by the public and the city to have finally, once and for all, removed the cancer that is BASSA from what was once a proud airline.
If he leaves it much longer it may well be too late.
I'm not even sure anymore that BA can be saved unless Mr Walsh sacks the lot of them and is seen by the public and the city to have finally, once and for all, removed the cancer that is BASSA from what was once a proud airline.
If he leaves it much longer it may well be too late.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: NZ
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regard to the 'Muppets'
The airline said it currently had £1.7bn in the bank.
"Returning the business to profitability requires permanent change across the company and it's disappointing that our cabin crew union fails to recognise that," Mr Walsh said.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: West Sussex
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Should BA Be Allowed to Operate?
I too saw yesterday's disgraceful antics of reputed BASSA/Unite supporters on the court steps and the open top bus. I am now uncertain as to whether my safety and welfare during a flight can be put into the hands of such people.
In my opinion, it's no longer safe flying with British Airways. Consequently, unless this cancer is removed immediately, I would support any move to petition the CAA to revoke BA's license to operate. This would inject some predictability into booking flights that actually depart and safeguard passengers from the brainless actions of BA's luddite cabin crew.
In my opinion, it's no longer safe flying with British Airways. Consequently, unless this cancer is removed immediately, I would support any move to petition the CAA to revoke BA's license to operate. This would inject some predictability into booking flights that actually depart and safeguard passengers from the brainless actions of BA's luddite cabin crew.