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 1st Sep 2010, 15:59
  #1701 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by RTR View Post
No talks, yes there was, no there wasn't, oh yes there was, who cares - BA wins.
Apart from the small matter of over 10000 crew existing terms and conditions, that do not appear to align with future working patterns. BA are 3-0 up, but it is only the start of the second half.
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 16:19
  #1702 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: berkshire
Posts: 30
Apart from the small matter of over 10000 crew existing terms and conditions, that do not appear to align with future working patterns. BA are 3-0 up, but it is only the start of the second half.

Yep.....but they have used all their subs.
beesflyer is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 16:53
  #1703 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course
Posts: 2,116
Apart from the small matter of over 10000 crew existing terms and conditions, that do not appear to align with future working patterns. BA are 3-0 up, but it is only the start of the second half.
BA are 3-0 up, haven't broken sweat and have all their subs intact with wealthy financial backers ready to invest in the managers tactics for the future.

The opposition supporters are vacating the ground in droves.

The coach has no game plan and appears to be watching another sport as his half time comments bear no resemblance to the game everyone else has been watching.

Most of his key players are either injured or stuck at their training centre half a world away, and he has already had a few players sent off.

His financial backers seem to have refused to put up any more money to fund his home grown (tomato) squad.

The coach is having to speak louder as fewer people are even within earshot to hear his latest pronunciations and if it goes on much longer he will be able to send out personal invites and hold the next meeting of the faithful in his garden shed.
TopBunk is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 16:57
  #1704 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,670
Litebulbs.......
I can't remember many teams overcoming a 3-0 half time deficit. Manure did it over Spurs some time ago.

Now whilst I don't particularly like Manure, they can be a class act. They were in that second half.

Er, I'm not sure that anyone has called bassa a class act in the last 2 years. Perhaps not ever............



A technical aside.
1. Only the Unite Exec can authorise any action which a court might decide to be industrial action. That's so that the TU is not taken to Court over "unofficial" IA. It's there to stop the nutters sacrificing Unite over their own disputes. (Any nutters - I'm not calling bassa nutters!!)
2. I do not know the wording, but in the Unite/Bassa world, whilst only Unite's Exec can authorise industrial action, Unite have to refer any deal which is supposed to end a dispute to a bassa body. Anyone know who speaks for bassa in that situation?

Balance............and my usual balancing comment............

BA gets the TUs that it deserves. BA "management" have trained bassa to act as it does consistently over 40 years. We should not expect people to change in one or two years when they have been trained differently for 40 years. Calling folk names doesn't change this!
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 17:03
  #1705 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Apart from the small matter of over 10000 crew existing terms and conditions, that do not appear to align with future working patterns. BA are 3-0 up, but it is only the start of the second half.
From BA's perspective, there's very little left to agree with the unions. It has got most of the savings it required from Mixed Fleet and crewing changes, neither of which are going to be reversed. The other issues such as changing the disruption agreement are relatively minor in the grand scheme of things.

BA has never anticipated making major changes to existing crew t&cs.

Also if Unite don't accept the current offer, crew don't get two consecutive annual pay rises.

BASSA will never admit it but it is game over.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 19:05
  #1706 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
But it is not clean. There are pre and post 97, LGW and now two new contracts. There are as many different contracts, as grades.
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 19:21
  #1707 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
It isn't but BA would never manage to harmonise all the different contract types. That has never been on the agenda. A separate mixed fleet at LHR adds complexity but this is far outweighed by the benefit of starting Mixed Fleet with a blank sheet of paper and not having to comprise if new contract crew worked alongside the existing LHR crew.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 19:51
  #1708 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
I still believe that if you took all the macho BS out of the equation and started with blank piece of paper, then a unified cross base deal would be achievable. As you have said, the savings have been made.
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:07
  #1709 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
I still believe that if you took all the macho BS out of the equation and started with blank piece of paper, then a unified cross base deal would be achievable. As you have said, the savings have been made.
The savings are coming from Mixed Fleet being on separate contracts as a separate fleet.

Based on BASSA's track record, BA would never be able to agree an integrated approach to the LHR fleets that would yield the savings BA was looking for.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:36
  #1710 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
It is completely achievable; it is only a trade dispute. The CSD's are working and there is a new fleet. The savings are made. All you need is arbitration for the dismissed and suspended workers and some creativity for staff travel..........
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:44
  #1711 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 73
Posts: 706
Litebulbs

All you need is arbitration for the dismissed and suspended workers and some creativity for staff travel..........
Why do you need arbitration for the dismissed? They were dismissed under union agreed procedures. Just like people found guilty in courts of law, they were found GUILTY !

If they don't like it then those who were found GUILTY , can take their case to an industrial tribunal, where they will be fully supported by their union.
fincastle84 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:46
  #1712 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
It is completely achievable; it is only a trade dispute. The CSD's are working and there is a new fleet. The savings are made. All you need is arbitration for the dismissed and suspended workers and some creativity for staff travel..........
We seem to be at cross-purposes?

The original point you made was about there being various different contracts at LHR/LGW to which I responded that for new fleet being an entirely separate fleet was critical to achieving savings targets.

On the point you raise above, WW is unconvinced that if staff travel was restored BASSA would agree to the deal on the table.

On disciplinaries, I see no reason why there should be a departure from the established procedure. It is entirely proper that they are dealt with in this way, to do otherwise would create a dangerous precedent.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:54
  #1713 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
fincastle84

Calm down. As you can be sacked at any time for anything, then it is not about being found guilty. You are not tried by a jury of your peers, but by a manager of some sort. It is not the most impartial system, but that is UK employment law for you. Once you are gone, you are gone, no matter what any ET decides.
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 20:59
  #1714 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Originally Posted by LD12986 View Post
he original point you made was about there being various different contracts at LHR/LGW to which I responded that for new fleet being an entirely separate fleet was critical to achieving savings targets.
Maybe I am not making myself clear. I commented earlier about 10000 plus employees on existing deals. What you want is a new start contract and an existing employee deal. That would meet and exceed the critical savings.
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 21:04
  #1715 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 859
It may not be a court of law that decides on disciplinaries but it is a union agreed process. Deciding they don't like the process just because there is a trade dispute is on will not wash. They, BASSA have shown that they do not like the democratic process by attempted gerrymandering. There should be NO movement from the company, those sacked after due process MUST remain sacked.
Juan Tugoh is offline  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 21:12
  #1716 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Agreed? Effective consultation on policy that is non contractual, that is altered by statute law, statutory instruments and guides. I believe crewing levels were agreed too? If an ET finds those dismissed to have been treated unfairly, they will still be dismissed, but with some cash in their accounts. What would you have to fear from arbitration, if what you have done is fair?
Litebulbs is online now  
Old 1st Sep 2010, 23:54
  #1717 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
I think the feeling is that Arbitration in this case means compromise - the suspended are either guilty or they are not. Perhaps that compromise is the likely hood of them getting away with the action that brought them to attention in the first place. However mitigating circumsances may be taken into account when considering the penalty. We often hear about those found guilty and sacked, but little about those who have been found not guilty of misdemeanour, or those whose actions did not warrant being fired, i.e. kept on, but an admonishment entered on their record.
Dawdler is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2010, 01:17
  #1718 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 73
BA has won. Why should they open the door for BASSA even an inch? If there are hard feelings between the two sides so be it. Making concessions to Bassa is not the way to heal the feelings. Letís face it the rest of BA staff do not care how the strikers feel. It is the strikers problem to reintegrate themselves with the rest of BA staff. Litebulbs from a Union Repís prospective what course of action do you think Bassa should take? Other than accepting the offer on the table what can they achieve for their members? Certainly they can cause additional financial damage to BA, but what does this accomplish for their members and at what possible harm to their members? Itís over and Bassa/Unite need to move on. I think I answered my question from my prospective, sorry for that, but would like to hear your prospective.
pcat160 is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2010, 04:53
  #1719 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 455
Litebulbs, if BASSA feel that those dismissed have been dismissed unfairly, despite it being done using agreed procedures with the union, then they go to tribunal and the truth comes out. We will then hear exactly what they did and be able to judge for ourselves, as will those leading the tribunal.

What is stopping these people doing this?

I think you can guess as well as I can.

BA are most likely under agreement not to release details of these cases, and I'm sure if they did there would not be much sympathy for the individuals concerned.

Like most BASSA foot stomps, this is yet more wind and p***.

We know why Holley got the boot (fair) and we can probably guess why Everard is in the mire. I doubt any of the rest are much different, but if they are, let them take it to tribunal and show the world how "macho bullying and harrassing" BA actually are.

Don't hold your breath though.
ChicoG is offline  
Old 2nd Sep 2010, 05:29
  #1720 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 73
Posts: 706
Litebulbs

You are not tried by a jury of your peers, but by a manager of some sort. It is not the most impartial system,
You have put yourself forward on here as some sort of expert on IR & yet you seem foggy about disciplinary hearings. The hearing will always have in attendance someone from HR as well as a line manager, plus the accused person is allowed representation. As stated, the hearings are a procedure which is agreed by the unions.

Having been found GUILTY, why haven't they applied to an industrial tribunal? I think that we all know the answer to that question.
fincastle84 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.