BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions II
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's definitely something to be left to the court.....Us mere mortals will no doubt continue to argue the points even when the decision is made.
An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation. A "right" is itself an entitlement associated with a moral or social principle, such that an "entitlement" is a provision made in accordance with legal framework of a society. Typically, entitlements are laws based on concepts of principle ("rights") which are themselves based in concepts of social equality or enfranchisement.
If nothing else it will be interesting.
An entitlement is a guarantee of access to benefits based on established rights or by legislation. A "right" is itself an entitlement associated with a moral or social principle, such that an "entitlement" is a provision made in accordance with legal framework of a society. Typically, entitlements are laws based on concepts of principle ("rights") which are themselves based in concepts of social equality or enfranchisement.
If nothing else it will be interesting.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: The Deep South (Sussex)
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As one of the SLF without staff travel: Just came back from Denver in BA Club.
Outbound a good flight with no attitude problems from the cabin crew and on the return the CSD was working the cabin with the rest and I was greatly cheered by a male attendant called Tony who seemed to have a humorous quip for everything I could throw at him.
No sign of any hot towels but there again it was Club and not a cheap UK Charter flight!
Pity that the flight deck were so uncommunicative. Apart from a brief TOD chat there was nothing even when we obviously had to hold for 15-20 minutes and this threw the original arrival estimate.
It looks as if there is some hope for the future of BA.
Outbound a good flight with no attitude problems from the cabin crew and on the return the CSD was working the cabin with the rest and I was greatly cheered by a male attendant called Tony who seemed to have a humorous quip for everything I could throw at him.
No sign of any hot towels but there again it was Club and not a cheap UK Charter flight!
Pity that the flight deck were so uncommunicative. Apart from a brief TOD chat there was nothing even when we obviously had to hold for 15-20 minutes and this threw the original arrival estimate.
It looks as if there is some hope for the future of BA.
Glad you had a good flight.
FWIW the brief is pretty much to try for minimum announcements, certainly from the flight deck, once airborne (to avoid disturbance to those sleeping/watching PA's/enjoying the Cabin Service), though an extended holding delay probably would be worth a mention.
Pity that the flight deck were so uncommunicative. Apart from a brief TOD chat there was nothing even when we obviously had to hold for 15-20 minutes and this threw the original arrival estimate.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed. Staff travel has been "removed" or "embargoed" in the past during industrial disputes for all staff. Usually restored. Your entitlement (not right) to staff travel is also suspended when off work sick.
It is not unusual to remove staff travel entitlement. The difference in this case is not restoring the entitlement. BUT they were warned.
It is not unusual to remove staff travel entitlement. The difference in this case is not restoring the entitlement. BUT they were warned.
An embargo on staff travel for all staff during a strike to avoid having staff stranded all over the place is very different to having your entitlement to staff travel removed. Staff affected by an embargo still have an entitlement, and can go on applying for tickets for periods outside the embargo period. My spouse has had his entitlement removed during IA 3 times in the early part of his career, and restored as part of the settlement, but has been affected by an embargo more times than I can remember.
As for no entitlement during sick leave, that is a pretty obvious restriction, to avoid people self certifying sickness just to enhance holiday allowances.
What has not been made clear here as yet is that ST has been removed from employees in the past for taking Industrial Action.
During the Gate Gourmet dispute a number of TGWU (Unite) shop stewards were disciplined by BA for unlawful action.
Some where dismissed and others had their ST removed for life as a punishment.
I do not remember any court cases, human rights claims etc being made for them by the union.
If this cabin crew ST dispute gets to court I would imagine the BA brief will immediately bring this information forward.
During the Gate Gourmet dispute a number of TGWU (Unite) shop stewards were disciplined by BA for unlawful action.
Some where dismissed and others had their ST removed for life as a punishment.
I do not remember any court cases, human rights claims etc being made for them by the union.
If this cabin crew ST dispute gets to court I would imagine the BA brief will immediately bring this information forward.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That was, as you said, for unlawful action. The Gate Gourmet dispute was not a BA dispute, (the catering had been subcontracted, and BA's own catering staff taken on, on the whole, by Gate Gourmet, it may have been, not sure, that BA sold off it's catering to GG as a lump, staff included) but secondary strikes at BA were encouraged in support, and that was clearly unlawful. The CC strike, however misguided the reasons, was lawful.
Still, if they lost staff travel as a punishment, it does at least mean it has happened as a result of a disciplinary situation, which was a question I asked earlier. Striking CC are not going to be on disciplinaries however, not just for striking, so it's unclear just how relevant it is to this.
I shall certainly watch any court case with interest.
Still, if they lost staff travel as a punishment, it does at least mean it has happened as a result of a disciplinary situation, which was a question I asked earlier. Striking CC are not going to be on disciplinaries however, not just for striking, so it's unclear just how relevant it is to this.
I shall certainly watch any court case with interest.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As for no entitlement during sick leave, that is a pretty obvious restriction
Yes, but the point is that the employer has in the past "removed, suspended, embargoed " the "entitlement" for a variety of reasons. Previously the "entitlement" has been restored (in most cases)
Therefore I assume using precedent the employer can remove the perk. The only difference now is that the employer forewarned the employees that the removal would be permenant.
Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.
However as you said the court case, if there is one, will decide and make a pretty penny for someone.
Therefore I assume using precedent the employer can remove the perk. The only difference now is that the employer forewarned the employees that the removal would be permenant.
Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.
However as you said the court case, if there is one, will decide and make a pretty penny for someone.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Staff travel is a non-contractual and discretionary benefit granted at the sole discretion of BA and as such can be withdrawn or varied at the sole discretion of the Company at any time.
I agree to these terms and conditions
I agree to these terms and conditions
Last edited by Juan Tugoh; 22nd Sep 2010 at 17:39. Reason: SPAG
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Thanks, Juan ... that's a very important factor to be placed in the public arena.
It's a shame it has taken so long to be revealed; the Media might even have noticed that
It will be a genius of a lawyer to argue his way round that one, IMO.
Right ... One down, two to go. Next case?
It's a shame it has taken so long to be revealed; the Media might even have noticed that
It will be a genius of a lawyer to argue his way round that one, IMO.
Right ... One down, two to go. Next case?
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPN11
That fact has been in the public domain since this dispute started.
If you search all the threads I'm sure that you'll find it.
The fact the BASSA choose to ignore it is not surprising given their form
That fact has been in the public domain since this dispute started.
If you search all the threads I'm sure that you'll find it.
The fact the BASSA choose to ignore it is not surprising given their form
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Sorry, TopBunk ... so many pages, here and on the other thread, I must have missed that.
Still, it's nice to see it re-stated.
Still, it's nice to see it re-stated.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brentwood, Essex
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just an observer: Thanks for your reply. Interesting to get the facts on what's happened to ST during past IA.
TopBunk/Juan Tugoh: That's the bit of info I was looking for. To be honest the search engine is a little difficult to pin point something like that, unless it's the way I'm using it
Anyway, Mrs moleytt and I are off to Boston tomorrow - with BA of course. Recent flight reports sound encouraging, so looking forward to it.
moleytt
TopBunk/Juan Tugoh: That's the bit of info I was looking for. To be honest the search engine is a little difficult to pin point something like that, unless it's the way I'm using it
Anyway, Mrs moleytt and I are off to Boston tomorrow - with BA of course. Recent flight reports sound encouraging, so looking forward to it.
moleytt
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPN11
No problems. This dispute has been going on so long that almost everything worth saying (or indeed not worth saying) has been said several times at least that one could almost lose the will to live
Reputedly attributed to Woodley (on this forum or elsewhere) when questioned privately at the TUC conference, he admitted that they (BASSA and/or Unite) were f***ed in this dispute, and it was all about an exit strategy.
Note: that is not to suggest that BASSA accept that viewpoint, and that, throughout this dispute has been the ultimate problem - BASSA will take no council from anyone.
BA only talk through Unite (because BASSA have refused to negotiate) and Unite can't deliver any BASSA agreement without re-instatement of those dismissed and ST for all, so we end up with apparent stalemate.
Only apparent, because in the meantime, BA are making the desired savings through the crewing changes, and BASSA through their intransigence, are accelerating BA's growth of MF and their own demise, by opting out of any discussions of route transfers to MF (for example, the newly announced routes to HND (Tokyo Haneda) and EZE (Buenos Aires) direct will almost certainly go straight to MF at a saving of about £8000 per cabin crew rotation per route - all avoidable had BASSA agreed to negotiate.
So sad that so many have been so misrepresented by so few for personal grievances and vendettas
No problems. This dispute has been going on so long that almost everything worth saying (or indeed not worth saying) has been said several times at least that one could almost lose the will to live
Reputedly attributed to Woodley (on this forum or elsewhere) when questioned privately at the TUC conference, he admitted that they (BASSA and/or Unite) were f***ed in this dispute, and it was all about an exit strategy.
Note: that is not to suggest that BASSA accept that viewpoint, and that, throughout this dispute has been the ultimate problem - BASSA will take no council from anyone.
BA only talk through Unite (because BASSA have refused to negotiate) and Unite can't deliver any BASSA agreement without re-instatement of those dismissed and ST for all, so we end up with apparent stalemate.
Only apparent, because in the meantime, BA are making the desired savings through the crewing changes, and BASSA through their intransigence, are accelerating BA's growth of MF and their own demise, by opting out of any discussions of route transfers to MF (for example, the newly announced routes to HND (Tokyo Haneda) and EZE (Buenos Aires) direct will almost certainly go straight to MF at a saving of about £8000 per cabin crew rotation per route - all avoidable had BASSA agreed to negotiate.
So sad that so many have been so misrepresented by so few for personal grievances and vendettas
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Thanks, TopBunk. I wasn't trying to stir, honest. I've been reading this and other Boards for the last 12 months, and I've flown during strikes, and ... arrrgh! It's so easy to lose your way and try to remember what's been said, especially at my age!
Anyway, I'm flying BA on Monday and Tuesday [CE then CW] and I know it will be a good experience. How good depends on the particular crew operating out of LHR, of course.
Fingers are crossed, and best regards to the great majority of BA CC!
Anyway, I'm flying BA on Monday and Tuesday [CE then CW] and I know it will be a good experience. How good depends on the particular crew operating out of LHR, of course.
Fingers are crossed, and best regards to the great majority of BA CC!
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North London and occasionally Dullstroom
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When is the court case re the withdrawal of staff travel for the strikers at BA? In my 35 years in the airline industry staff travel was a privilege and not a right. If the case goes against BA I would think that many airlines around the world will have to re-think their staff privileges. Just my humble opinion.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in the airline industry staff travel was a privilege and not a right. If the case goes against BA I would think that many airlines around the world will have to re-think their staff privileges.
Presumably all the court case will determine is
1. Whether the withdrawal of a discretionary privilege, normally available to all staff, from those who went on strike, is a punishment for striking, and
2. whether an employer bound by UK law has the right to punish employees for going on a legal strike.
In this particular case the means of punishment is staff travel, but it could be anything, depending on the employer concerned. It's the principle of punishment for striking, not the method, that counts.
Other airlines around the world aren't bound by UK law anyway.
BA's lawyers haven't shot themselves in the foot yet, so they must reckon they have a good case, but it will still be interesting.
Last edited by just an observer; 22nd Sep 2010 at 23:00.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA's lawyers thought they had a good case when they lost at appeal last time....
One of the reasons that only a fool says they know the law is that it changes so frequently and in this field so much is based on case law.
Of course it's about a punishment for doing something lawful. BA may have messed up by just withdrawing it from the strikers. That could be seen as punishment for taking part in legal strike action. What was withdrawn is irrelevant.
I think Litebulbs has been trying to convince folk of this for a while now.
As my crystal ball is broken I won't guess at the outcome, but, it should be interesting whichever way it goes.
One of the reasons that only a fool says they know the law is that it changes so frequently and in this field so much is based on case law.
Of course it's about a punishment for doing something lawful. BA may have messed up by just withdrawing it from the strikers. That could be seen as punishment for taking part in legal strike action. What was withdrawn is irrelevant.
I think Litebulbs has been trying to convince folk of this for a while now.
As my crystal ball is broken I won't guess at the outcome, but, it should be interesting whichever way it goes.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
call100, absolutely agree. IMO the answer to item 1 in my post above is 'yes' it is a punishment. We all agree that BA can withdraw staff travel at their discretion but it's the reason they have withdrawn it that counts.
As for item 2 I would like to think that punishment for a legal strike is unlawful, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
As for item 2 I would like to think that punishment for a legal strike is unlawful, but I certainly wouldn't bet on it.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: london
Posts: 177
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whichever way it will be judged, bassa might expect compensation for travel expences for the allegedly penalised members and if they lose they ll blame a corrupt court-judging system and the argument will be going on and on
They are not interested in a settlement but simply to fuel their hate for the company they work for and generate as much damage they can possibly inflict in doing so.
They are not interested in a settlement but simply to fuel their hate for the company they work for and generate as much damage they can possibly inflict in doing so.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: in the air
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100 and just an observer are I think correct.
In the first instance BASSA mentalists were running around explaining to all and sundry that staff travel was contractual, this was soon dropped very quickly, suprise suprise, of course it didn't help that BASSA sent everyone a text explaining that staff travel would be "back in 5 minutes"
Interestingly crew-defence lawyers are dipping their toe in the water at an Industrial tribunal utilising the race relations act, of course all this is being paid for by individual crew donations, and one wonders if they could afford to take this all the way to the ECJ.
What should of course be worrying for both cabin crew and BASSA are the time lines involved. I would expect BA to fight all these cases all the way to Europe if necessary.
BALPA have a similar case pending with the financial help of the TUC (should please BASSA mentalists who want them rejected from the TUC) It started out at an industrial tribunal in March 2006 and is now expected to be heard at the ECJsome time in 2011 with an opinion in 2012, and even then it gets bounced back to the British courts to deal with.
Only 6 years then ,I hope Cabin Crew and BASSA can be patient
In the first instance BASSA mentalists were running around explaining to all and sundry that staff travel was contractual, this was soon dropped very quickly, suprise suprise, of course it didn't help that BASSA sent everyone a text explaining that staff travel would be "back in 5 minutes"
Interestingly crew-defence lawyers are dipping their toe in the water at an Industrial tribunal utilising the race relations act, of course all this is being paid for by individual crew donations, and one wonders if they could afford to take this all the way to the ECJ.
What should of course be worrying for both cabin crew and BASSA are the time lines involved. I would expect BA to fight all these cases all the way to Europe if necessary.
BALPA have a similar case pending with the financial help of the TUC (should please BASSA mentalists who want them rejected from the TUC) It started out at an industrial tribunal in March 2006 and is now expected to be heard at the ECJsome time in 2011 with an opinion in 2012, and even then it gets bounced back to the British courts to deal with.
Only 6 years then ,I hope Cabin Crew and BASSA can be patient