BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions II
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It starts to get interesting when you think along the appeal process.
Let's postulate that UNITE do not win their appeal and decide to take it along the ECHR route. There is precedent for this - for interests sake try Googling Danilenkov. A case before the ECHR is one against the UK rather than against the company - it would be that UK law has failed, not that BA had not complied with UK law. Even if UNITE were to ultimately win at the ECHR, it would still be down to the UK legislative body to change the law. Generally what happens is that some compensation is awarded, but again, see the Danilenkov case where the strikers were effectively gotten rid of, the compensation is paltry.
This then, is effectively a one shot go for UNITE, if they lose this appeal there would be very little benefit to proceed further for them. BA on the other hand have everything to gain by dragging this out for as long as possible. The longer this goes on - the ST issue - the better it gets for BA. The downside is very small and the strikers who rely on their ST are being slowly drained. I am still not sure that UNITE have thought this through very well.
Let's postulate that UNITE do not win their appeal and decide to take it along the ECHR route. There is precedent for this - for interests sake try Googling Danilenkov. A case before the ECHR is one against the UK rather than against the company - it would be that UK law has failed, not that BA had not complied with UK law. Even if UNITE were to ultimately win at the ECHR, it would still be down to the UK legislative body to change the law. Generally what happens is that some compensation is awarded, but again, see the Danilenkov case where the strikers were effectively gotten rid of, the compensation is paltry.
This then, is effectively a one shot go for UNITE, if they lose this appeal there would be very little benefit to proceed further for them. BA on the other hand have everything to gain by dragging this out for as long as possible. The longer this goes on - the ST issue - the better it gets for BA. The downside is very small and the strikers who rely on their ST are being slowly drained. I am still not sure that UNITE have thought this through very well.
Last edited by Juan Tugoh; 23rd Sep 2010 at 11:58.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This then, is effectively a one shot go for UNITE, if they lose this appeal there would be very little benefit to proceed further for them. BA on the other hand have everything to gain by dragging this out for as long as possible. The longer this goes on - the ST issue - the better it gets for BA. The downside is very small and the strikers who rely on their ST are being slowly drained. I am still not sure that UNITE have thought this through very well
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's very difficult to take posts seriously when the phrase 'BASSA mentalists' is used: It is actually the sort of language that might be expected from the very people that the phrase describes - It's entirely up to you: I would have thought that sounding like a grown up would be helpful to making your case, but hey, your thread, your words.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of points .........
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
The existence of the disclaimer and the frequency with which it is continually being reinforced, clearly stating that there is no obligation on BA to either allow it in any instance or to continue to do so, leads me to believe that this alters all of the theories discussed and put forward, including any idea from BASSA or UNITE, that BA can in any manner be forced to give ST to anyone.
If I have an item and the sole ownership of it, tangible or otherwise, that some one else desires to have or share, I am the sole judge of what I shall do with my possession, regardless of any screams of 'give me' or 'I demand', and if I so wish I am fully at liberty to destroy that item. As indeed I am to run out of patience with any person I employ in my business, and say - you are fired - you have the legal right to sue me if you wish - I reserve my position regarding reasons.
I believe that BA may be very close to this response.
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
The existence of the disclaimer and the frequency with which it is continually being reinforced, clearly stating that there is no obligation on BA to either allow it in any instance or to continue to do so, leads me to believe that this alters all of the theories discussed and put forward, including any idea from BASSA or UNITE, that BA can in any manner be forced to give ST to anyone.
If I have an item and the sole ownership of it, tangible or otherwise, that some one else desires to have or share, I am the sole judge of what I shall do with my possession, regardless of any screams of 'give me' or 'I demand', and if I so wish I am fully at liberty to destroy that item. As indeed I am to run out of patience with any person I employ in my business, and say - you are fired - you have the legal right to sue me if you wish - I reserve my position regarding reasons.
I believe that BA may be very close to this response.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
It may be difficult to take seriously, TS, but believe me the phrase is well suited. Those of us within BA have been expected to respect and treat seriously the views of people who are either hell bent on inflicting damage on our employer or simply deaf to reasoned argument. Their increasing unwillingness to either compromise or accept reality has, as has been noted on here by several commentators, all the hallmarks of a cult. An acknowledgement that any of their cherished beliefs are wrong would undermine the entire, carefully constructed fabric of lies, half truths and deceptions. Hence the impression that myself and many others get that they are brain washed and, indeed, 'mentalist'.
TightSlot It's very difficult to take posts seriously when the phrase 'BASSA mentalists' is used: It is actually the sort of language that might be expected from the very people that the phrase describes - It's entirely up to you: I would have thought that sounding like a grown up would be helpful to making your case, but hey, your thread, your words.
It may be difficult to take seriously, TS, but believe me the phrase is well suited. Those of us within BA have been expected to respect and treat seriously the views of people who are either hell bent on inflicting damage on our employer or simply deaf to reasoned argument. Their increasing unwillingness to either compromise or accept reality has, as has been noted on here by several commentators, all the hallmarks of a cult. An acknowledgement that any of their cherished beliefs are wrong would undermine the entire, carefully constructed fabric of lies, half truths and deceptions. Hence the impression that myself and many others get that they are brain washed and, indeed, 'mentalist'.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Age: 64
Posts: 3,586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, thanks, I had quite appreciated all that already,although it is always a pleasure to see it concisely explained again.
I can see that I'm flogging a dead horse here - you just carry on and ignore me.
I can see that I'm flogging a dead horse here - you just carry on and ignore me.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of points .........
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
The existence of the disclaimer and the frequency with which it is continually being reinforced, clearly stating that there is no obligation on BA to either allow it in any instance or to continue to do so, leads me to believe that this alters all of the theories discussed and put forward, including any idea from BASSA or UNITE, that BA can in any manner be forced to give ST to anyone.
If I have an item and the sole ownership of it, tangible or otherwise, that some one else desires to have or share, I am the sole judge of what I shall do with my possession, regardless of any screams of 'give me' or 'I demand', and if I so wish I am fully at liberty to destroy that item. As indeed I am to run out of patience with any person I employ in my business, and say - you are fired - you have the legal right to sue me if you wish - I reserve my position regarding reasons.
I believe that BA may be very close to this response.
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
The existence of the disclaimer and the frequency with which it is continually being reinforced, clearly stating that there is no obligation on BA to either allow it in any instance or to continue to do so, leads me to believe that this alters all of the theories discussed and put forward, including any idea from BASSA or UNITE, that BA can in any manner be forced to give ST to anyone.
If I have an item and the sole ownership of it, tangible or otherwise, that some one else desires to have or share, I am the sole judge of what I shall do with my possession, regardless of any screams of 'give me' or 'I demand', and if I so wish I am fully at liberty to destroy that item. As indeed I am to run out of patience with any person I employ in my business, and say - you are fired - you have the legal right to sue me if you wish - I reserve my position regarding reasons.
I believe that BA may be very close to this response.
TS....Thanks for trying....
With regard to the ST disclaimer you are unable to proceed with any ST request without first ticking the box to accept the terms and conditions. No ticked box = no cheapie to anywhere land! 
Therefore, IMO, everyone who uses ST must be fully aware that it can be taken away at the Employers behest for ANY reason.
Therefore, IMO, everyone who uses ST must be fully aware that it can be taken away at the Employers behest for ANY reason.
Last edited by vctenderness; 23rd Sep 2010 at 14:48. Reason: typo
A Runyonesque Character
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The South of France ... Not
Age: 74
Posts: 1,209
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
By removing ST from strikers and only from strikers, BA weren't punishing them, they were merely 'sending BASSA a message'.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A minor point. Just because BA have a disclaimer saying that the staff member agrees it's a perk and can be withdrawn at any time doesn't necessarily make it legally watertight that they can do so. In the same way, just because you sign a contract doesn't automatically mean that all provisions are legally enforceable - the company must abide by the law.
If they had a disclaimer that said everyone must stand on their head and sing the national anthem, chances are that would be viewed as unreasonable and set aside - irrespective of how many people signed it.
If they had a disclaimer that said everyone must stand on their head and sing the national anthem, chances are that would be viewed as unreasonable and set aside - irrespective of how many people signed it.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: London
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
fundamentalism (ˌfʌndəˈmɛntəˌlɪzəm) 
— n 1. Christianity (esp among certain Protestant sects) the belief that every word of the Bible is divinely inspired and therefore true 2. Islam a movement favouring strict observance of the teachings of the Koran and Islamic law 3. strict adherence to the fundamental principles of any set of beliefs
— n 1. Christianity (esp among certain Protestant sects) the belief that every word of the Bible is divinely inspired and therefore true 2. Islam a movement favouring strict observance of the teachings of the Koran and Islamic law 3. strict adherence to the fundamental principles of any set of beliefs
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call 100 ............
"If only it were that simple......What a wonderful world it would be."
If the above dismissive and meaningless comment is the only response that you are able to make to a considered statement regarding Contract Law, then I suggest that you restrict yourself to only responding where you are qualified to do so.
"If only it were that simple......What a wonderful world it would be."
If the above dismissive and meaningless comment is the only response that you are able to make to a considered statement regarding Contract Law, then I suggest that you restrict yourself to only responding where you are qualified to do so.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Papillon ...........
The point that you are missing, is that the BA document is not a disclaimer, it is in itself a contract between BA and the person signing, governing that single transaction.
As one of these is signed for each ticket issued, it is each time an individual contract, not a disclaimer, therefore the concept of this being supplied only under the same contract and conditions is reinforced and updated, each and every time and, has been so for a number of years. It cannot be argued that the tickets are supplied under any other terms and conditions of contract, or even modified in any degree.
In any contract between two parties, the question of both parties being required to comply with any applicable law of contract would apply, but I would be surprised if BA had not by now, produced a nice, legally tight contract to cover this area.
Finally - if you wish to stand on your head and sing the national anthem, so be it - just sign a contract on the dotted line with anyone who is interested enough to draw up a contract!! - but just remember - you a entering into a contract of performance - not a disclaimer.
The point that you are missing, is that the BA document is not a disclaimer, it is in itself a contract between BA and the person signing, governing that single transaction.
As one of these is signed for each ticket issued, it is each time an individual contract, not a disclaimer, therefore the concept of this being supplied only under the same contract and conditions is reinforced and updated, each and every time and, has been so for a number of years. It cannot be argued that the tickets are supplied under any other terms and conditions of contract, or even modified in any degree.
In any contract between two parties, the question of both parties being required to comply with any applicable law of contract would apply, but I would be surprised if BA had not by now, produced a nice, legally tight contract to cover this area.
Finally - if you wish to stand on your head and sing the national anthem, so be it - just sign a contract on the dotted line with anyone who is interested enough to draw up a contract!! - but just remember - you a entering into a contract of performance - not a disclaimer.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
Originally Posted by Entaxei
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
However, what the Courts make of the overall issue of withdrawing ST will be very interesting. Having read a lot of comments, here and elsewhere, I'm slightly less confident about the decision in respect off BA's position. It does have a sense of 'punishment' about it ... and it will undoubtedly take an expensive lawyer with experience in the field of IR to determine which way it goes.
I guess we have to wait and see - the decision won't be made here!
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxei, can I refer you to a recent post.
If the reason for withdrawal is to punish a legal strike, they may be on dodgy legal ground. The point has also been made that we are talking about the principle of punishment for striking, the fact that the means of punishment is staff travel in this instance is irrelevant. Your post did not debate on that point at all.
There are wider issues involved than BA's provision (or not) of staff travel. BA does have the power to withdraw staff travel, but their doing so could set a precedent throughout employment law as it relates to strikes. This is what any court case is likely to cover. As Call100 says, it's not as simple as ' BA can withdraw staff travel whenever they want'.
We all agree that BA can withdraw staff travel at their discretion but it's the reason they have withdrawn it that counts.
There are wider issues involved than BA's provision (or not) of staff travel. BA does have the power to withdraw staff travel, but their doing so could set a precedent throughout employment law as it relates to strikes. This is what any court case is likely to cover. As Call100 says, it's not as simple as ' BA can withdraw staff travel whenever they want'.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been following the original thread since around September last year, and this thread since it started. To my knowledge, prior to Juan's post, nobody in that time has identified the existence of, or the words of, the disclaimer regarding staff travel when you sign for it.
You may be right, and I couldn't easily find the quote via the search function, but I have seen it posted somewhere quite a while ago (and I'm sure I'm not becoming senile and only remembering it from the BA Staff Travel internet site!) The trouble is that this dispute has generated upwards of 15,000? posts over the last year, so trawling through them is tiresome and unwieldy with the tools provided.
I guess the only proof is someone finding a link in these threads - I can't be bothered to research it any further.
Anyway, the bottom line is that it is certainly out there now, and adds to the understanding of the arguments.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,810
Received 136 Likes
on
64 Posts
@ TopBunk ... whichever!
Probably an issue for someone very highly paid in the legal profession to determine whether the exercise of that clause could constitute unfair treatment of a striking employee. At the moment I'd go for an each-way bet.
Probably an issue for someone very highly paid in the legal profession to determine whether the exercise of that clause could constitute unfair treatment of a striking employee. At the moment I'd go for an each-way bet.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxi, MPN11,
You may be right, and I couldn't easily find the quote via the search function, but I have seen it posted somewhere quite a while ago (and I'm sure I'm not becoming senile and only remembering it from the BA Staff Travel internet site!)
You may be right, and I couldn't easily find the quote via the search function, but I have seen it posted somewhere quite a while ago (and I'm sure I'm not becoming senile and only remembering it from the BA Staff Travel internet site!)