Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions II

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions II

Old 12th Sep 2010, 19:50
  #2001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
Has the working relationship between BA and BASSA ever been good? For as long as I've been in BA it's been either BA do as BASSA say or industrial strife. You don't need to pay someone £45K to orchestrate that.
Timothy Claypole is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2010, 21:38
  #2002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
TimPole

What can I say to that? However, if there is an industrial collective recognition agreement, then you should stand by it.

I have just been watching BBC News and BB of the TUC was talking about focusing on the current proposed cuts. The BBC then fanned it up to nationwide co-ordinated secondary action. Lets all go on strike, that will solve everything.

Regards,

Disgruntled from Gatwick.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2010, 22:19
  #2003 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by vctenderness View Post
The way it works for cabin crew is that reps are given a normal roster and all scheduled meetings have to be applied for in advance of this.
Is that the case for the Chairperson and Secretary?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 10:29
  #2004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 873
Yes exactly the same. The Secretary/Chairman would be treated as a 'Senior rep' and give consideration for attending more meetings than others. However the rules applied equally to all reps and for operational reasons de-roster could be refused for them.
vctenderness is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 10:48
  #2005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by vctenderness View Post
However the rules applied equally to all reps and for operational reasons de-roster could be refused for them.
I imagine that if there is no evidence to counter what you say, it is going to be a very short tribunal. It will probably hang on reasonable time off and whether it could be proved that over time, less time off was allowed because of the dispute. But the mandate not to negotiate is a glaringly big statement, when you are trying to defend time off to negotiate!
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 10:54
  #2006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
I don't believe Holley even tried to defend his time off as negotiation time. He's stated publically that he took the time off to update the BASSA membership lists for a forthcoming ballot!
Timothy Claypole is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 11:00
  #2007 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Tim

If that is the case, then that would be a reasonable request from the Branch Secretary, especially because of what happened in previous ballots and the reduction of crew and therefore members.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 11:23
  #2008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
It mattered not to the pre-tribunal hearing whether his request was reasonable or not, they made it clear it was BAs prererogative when Holley should work. BASSA had stated that they would only deal with BA for disciplinary and H&S cases, does BA have a requirement to release BASSA reps for any other purposes? The law only requires reasonable time off for union work, yet Holley had only flown 20 hours in the previous year, compared with a typical 500 for Eurofleet crew.
Timothy Claypole is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 12:14
  #2009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: AROUND AND ABOUT
Posts: 164
TC

Well said. The problem has been that generally MOST reps have used the system to get out of unwanted trips. One rep told me last year that there was a majority who would use EVERY opportunity to do ANY other work, disciplineries, office duties etc rather than fly. Of course the minute a decent trip came up then they did it. Friend of mine was on the crew car park bus a few months ago and heard a loud mouthed rep OPENLY telling everyone that he wouldnt be doing the long day he had just got from Av , and instead would be doing an office duty. Shorter and more lucrative.
JUAN TRIPP is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 12:20
  #2010 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by Timothy Claypole View Post
The law only requires reasonable time off for union work, yet Holley had only flown 20 hours in the previous year, compared with a typical 500 for Eurofleet crew.
I am sure that if 20 hours in a year can be proved to be normal for a Branch Secretary, then there would still be a case.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 12:39
  #2011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by JUAN TRIPP View Post
Well said. The problem has been that generally MOST reps have used the system to get out of unwanted trips. One rep told me last year that there was a majority who would use EVERY opportunity to do ANY other work, disciplineries, office duties etc rather than fly.
If what you say is true and I have no reason to doubt you, then it is no wonder that the rest of BA feel the way they do about BASSA, if PPRuNe is the majority opinion. However, if you read other forums, that view changes.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 12:50
  #2012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Oh Litebulbs,
How sweet of you to play the ingenue!
Neptunus Rex is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:03
  #2013 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,665
A story......pass on if you don't like stories.

The case most often quoted in time off for TU duties is Beecham vs Beal. It went to the court of appeal. (1982). Beecham became Glaxo Smith Kline Beecham. (Glaxo SK, or GSK).
Beal was an activist ASTMS rep within GSK, and Ian Moore, the then HRD was fed up with Beal. Ian, as an ex-TGWU convenor at the (then) Michelin factory in Scotland, didn't have much time for ASTMS generally. This was in the days when CliveJenkins, the ASTMS GenSec was doing dodgy personal property deals in Camden, using ASTMS money, and most of us in the trade were aware of it. Clive resigned "unexpectedly" in 1988.
(Clive regarded himself as an expert on Aviation)
The case was about Beal attending an ASTMS "conference/meeting" which Ian believed had no direct relevance to GSK. Ian saw it as Beal skiving, yet again.
At that point in time, Ian had a "mate" in the GSK legal team who was assertive, so they thought they'd take on ASTMS about time off for this meeting. Unfortunately for Ian ASTMS used a bright left wing QC who was trying to make a name for himself in the Employment law market, and who saw this case as a way of getting his name known. (Even BA's famous lawyer, Webb, was young once!).
The case went to the Court of Appeal, and Beal won. The Court put quite a wide definition on what "reasonable time off for TU duties" actually was. Ever since then, employers have been careful about when to refuse time off.

Er, except Ian. The next time Beal asked for time off for a very similar meeting, Ian told Beal that he could not have the time off. If Beal wanted to challenge GSK on that point, he could take them to court. ASTMS declined the opportunity to take GSK to court.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:06
  #2014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 73
Posts: 706
I am sure that if 20 hours in a year can be proved to be normal for a Branch Secretary, then there would still be a case.
As a share holder in BA I would sincerely hope that 20 hours work per annum wasn't the norm for ANY BA employee!
fincastle84 is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:11
  #2015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 73
Posts: 706
The next time Beal asked for time off for a very similar meeting, Ian told Beal that he could not have the time off.
Excellent post AO, thanks. This is why DH doesn't have a leg on which to stand. He was refused time off & in turn refused to work. Gross misconduct-bye bye.
fincastle84 is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:12
  #2016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
fincastle84

You missed out the flown hours from your post.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:12
  #2017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
If what you say is true and I have no reason to doubt you, then it is no wonder that the rest of BA feel the way they do about BASSA, if PPRuNe is the majority opinion. However, if you read other forums, that view changes.
Yes, it certainly is difficlut to find a negative view of BASSA reps on any forum where they control the moderation!
Timothy Claypole is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:18
  #2018 (permalink)  
Está servira para distraerle.
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: In a perambulator.
Posts: 4
So, Ancient Observer, at the end of that extremely interesting post of yours, and purely because I'm too lazy to research it, what was the appeal judgement or guidance on reasonable time off for union duties?

But work loads for union business such as balloting and the like in 1982 must be a far cry from those of today where the Internet and perhaps reduced numbers of union members surely enormously reduces time required for extraneous duties associated with union management. So any guidance from the Court of Appeal in 1982 would have been predicated on old working practices?
cavortingcheetah is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 13:24
  #2019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Blimey, Fin, I am not surprised you are one concerned shareholder.
45, 000 quid divided by 20 hours = 2,150 quid per hour!
I think BALPA should be told!
Neptunus Rex is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2010, 14:03
  #2020 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: AROUND AND ABOUT
Posts: 164
Litebulbs

Quote:
Originally Posted by JUAN TRIPP
Well said. The problem has been that generally MOST reps have used the system to get out of unwanted trips. One rep told me last year that there was a majority who would use EVERY opportunity to do ANY other work, disciplineries, office duties etc rather than fly.

Litebulbs wrote in reply
If what you say is true and I have no reason to doubt you, then it is no wonder that the rest of BA feel the way they do about BASSA, if PPRuNe is the majority opinion. However, if you read other forums, that view changes.

I have over the years got to know a number of people within cabin services, and the ones who I trust and who trust me have mentioned MANY scenarios about what Bassa have got upto. Now I'm not being naive, BUT as I said these are people I implicitely trust. The stories of Bassa not turning up at numerous meetings is well recorded as an example. In fact CC89 regularly got fed up of that happening to them as well. DH mentioned on radio 5live, that ALTHOUGH Bassa didn't win the 97 dispute, it meant BA brought in a more softer person to deal with them. Over the next 8 years the lovely but ineffective Joy Hordern ( or joy Hidden as she was known as) did pretty much everything DH and his troops wanted. Hence according to DH all was happy. It was only when WW appointed Simon Talling-Smith that things started to change.

A dear friend of mine sat in the same office as Joy for years, and used to tell me that Bassa had her EXACTLY where they wanted her. Any problems and the little threats started.

Now I know that its not that simple, but I don't think I'm far from the truth. As for putting even a percentage of what I've written on Crew forum or the Bassa forum would result in the the usual - you must be a pilot/ waterworld latte drinker, VVC etc!
JUAN TRIPP is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.