BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are saying that an employee is unable to understand his/her employment contract terms and conditions so pays a union to provide representation while having neither any control over who runs that union nor the skills to determine whether the union's leaders are acting in the employee's interests or using the employee's money to follow their own political agendas.
Essentially this leaves the employee with no choice but to take a position of blind faith in the union.
Then, when I suggest that, given the uncontrolled lies, deception and other abuses we are currently seeing CC being subjected to at the hands of their trusted representatives, the employees need protection by stiffening the laws under which union leaders practice you seem very lukewarm in this regard.
Finally, there is a statement that BASSA may implode and be replaced by an organisation that becomes a cult with the even uglier connotations that situation would incur.
Have I misunderstood?
Perhaps CC would be better off saving their Union subscriptions and taking their chances at the hands of their so-called 'brutal' employer BA instead? Indeed. it appears so far that about 1000 or so have done just that and are very happy at their decision.
This entire state of affairs may well be the reason why a significant number of CC posters to this thread, upon discovering its leaders' self-absorbed behaviour, have described leaving the Union rather than even considering trying to vote the current leadership out.
BA cabin crew dispute - general information - British Airways
p.s. Despite the sneering remarks by John Humphrys and the abysmal BAA rep on Friday's Radio 4 'Today', British Airways appear to have called it absolutely correctly re the LHR snow closure.
Cabin crew dispute - latest information
Last updated 11:00 15 December 2010
Unite has informed us of its decision to ballot BA cabin crew members for further strike action.
The ballot will run between 21 December and 21 January. If the ballot result is in favour of industrial action, the earliest the
crew could go on strike would be 28 January.
Should there be any industrial action, we are determined to keep flying and will ensure our customers are looked after.
We have strong contingency plans in place and should industrial action take place:
* we will operate a normal schedule at London Gatwick and London City
* we will aim to fly 100 per cent of our longhaul operation at London Heathrow
* we will aim to fly a substantial proportion of our shorthaul operation at London Heathrow
In the meantime, all flights continue to operate as normal.
We will keep ba.com up-to-date with the latest information.
Last updated 11:00 15 December 2010
Unite has informed us of its decision to ballot BA cabin crew members for further strike action.
The ballot will run between 21 December and 21 January. If the ballot result is in favour of industrial action, the earliest the
crew could go on strike would be 28 January.
Should there be any industrial action, we are determined to keep flying and will ensure our customers are looked after.
We have strong contingency plans in place and should industrial action take place:
* we will operate a normal schedule at London Gatwick and London City
* we will aim to fly 100 per cent of our longhaul operation at London Heathrow
* we will aim to fly a substantial proportion of our shorthaul operation at London Heathrow
In the meantime, all flights continue to operate as normal.
We will keep ba.com up-to-date with the latest information.
p.s. Despite the sneering remarks by John Humphrys and the abysmal BAA rep on Friday's Radio 4 'Today', British Airways appear to have called it absolutely correctly re the LHR snow closure.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBB - I did not say that 1000 or so resigned from BASSA as I agree with you that number is not known.
What I meant to say and have edited my previous post to clarify was that 1000 or so of those who were not Union members chose to sign-up for BA's offer.
While 64% voted in favour of strike action less than half of this number voted to reject BA's then current offer in the second ballot.
A new strike ballot result would be very interesting, however, the Union, for some equally interesting reasons, has been struggling for three months or so now to initiate that ballot to the extent that it has missed its prized Xmas period for another year.
What I meant to say and have edited my previous post to clarify was that 1000 or so of those who were not Union members chose to sign-up for BA's offer.
While 64% voted in favour of strike action less than half of this number voted to reject BA's then current offer in the second ballot.
A new strike ballot result would be very interesting, however, the Union, for some equally interesting reasons, has been struggling for three months or so now to initiate that ballot to the extent that it has missed its prized Xmas period for another year.
Last edited by AV Flyer; 19th Dec 2010 at 10:21.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
are cabin crew sentient beings?
AVFLYER raises interesting and relevant points regarding the attitudes and thought processes of cabin crew, particularly those who remain BASSA members.
cabin crew have been quite vociferous in pointing to the knowledge needs of their job, its safety functions and the arduous nature of their shift patterns.
yet, when it comes to understanding the terms and conditions of their employment and information given to them by BA and BASSA, it appears that the (vast) majority, are apathetic, unable to understand the written word or, blindly, delete information, on instruction from BASSA, given by BA.
frankly, you can't have it both ways. Either you are grossly overpaid and rewarded for doing a Noddy job that is just within your capacity or, you are grown up adult human beings who could and should be able to give mature consideration to information regarding your very demanding job- one that is rewarding in many ways and reflects your needs as a grown up, mature and intelligent human being.
life is full of contradictions but perhaps you, the cabin crew, can perhaps understand that outside of your ranks, these contradictions are hard to swallow.
cabin crew have been quite vociferous in pointing to the knowledge needs of their job, its safety functions and the arduous nature of their shift patterns.
yet, when it comes to understanding the terms and conditions of their employment and information given to them by BA and BASSA, it appears that the (vast) majority, are apathetic, unable to understand the written word or, blindly, delete information, on instruction from BASSA, given by BA.
frankly, you can't have it both ways. Either you are grossly overpaid and rewarded for doing a Noddy job that is just within your capacity or, you are grown up adult human beings who could and should be able to give mature consideration to information regarding your very demanding job- one that is rewarding in many ways and reflects your needs as a grown up, mature and intelligent human being.
life is full of contradictions but perhaps you, the cabin crew, can perhaps understand that outside of your ranks, these contradictions are hard to swallow.
Rethymnon,
a thoughtful and challenging post. Thank you for that.
From the outsider's perspective, you are spot on.
I suspect that until/unless the "moderate" and intelligent CC take over the bassa branch of unite, this dispute will run and run.
Meanwhile, in the UK, there are 5 million people on unemployment benefits of one sort or another. They would possibly like a job with BA...........
a thoughtful and challenging post. Thank you for that.
From the outsider's perspective, you are spot on.
I suspect that until/unless the "moderate" and intelligent CC take over the bassa branch of unite, this dispute will run and run.
Meanwhile, in the UK, there are 5 million people on unemployment benefits of one sort or another. They would possibly like a job with BA...........
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm going to be a little frank and contentious here as, following our forum discussions, there is now no doubt in my mind that CC are choosing it in different ways and their voting patterns can be explained by them always taking the apathetically 'safe' or 'easy' position at the time of the ballot.
I would suggest that voting "yes" for strike action was easy in the first ballot as if push came to shove, and BA called the Union's bluff, there were always the 'outs' of hoping you were not rostered on the first strike day and seeing what played out, or throwing a sickie and claiming you didn't understand the doctor's note rule, or throwing a sickie and persuading a doctor to give you a note (bad back, etc.), or going into work and having car trouble on the way, or even just choosing to go into work. However, they felt there was a good chance that WW would fold having been "sent a message" and none of these 'outs' would be required. It was worth a shot. Given the ease in making a "yes" vote, frankly, a count of 64% did not show resoundingly high support for the Union.
In the second ballot things were not so easy. CC were actually put on the spot. Voting to reject an offer that was potentially the best they were going to get, especially on the back of a completely failed series of strikes, was a pretty terminal thing to do with no 'outs' whatsoever so the 'safe' way out this time was not to vote and see what played out. Hence the very low 30% vote to reject which, under these circumstances, probably indicates the true number of 'militants' i.e. around 3500. The surprising thing here was that as many as half this number, i.e. 15%, actually voted to accept BA's offer and settle the dispute - only 1700 votes different.
We can all dodge taking personal responsibility for our actions and play the victim card instead e.g. "I didn't have my lawyer handy to interpret the contract", "I was down-route and was too late back to return my ballot paper in time", etc., etc. But, there will be less easy outs from here on in as like-it-or-not this is a big boys' and girls' game of hard-ball with potentially severe consequences to the loser.
We're going to hear more whimpers of "I'm having a nervous break-down over this", "I want this to end", "life at work is terrible", "I didn't join BA for this", etc., etc., in which case I humbly suggest to these poor and down-trodden 'victims' that, if they feel so unable to rise-up and vote-out their chosen leaders, they simply resign their memberships to the Union that has 'unwittingly' dragged them into this so-called 'nightmare' and go seek some support over at the PCCC website, if needed. As Litebulbs has said on a couple of occasions we'll hear from BA soon enough if the Union membership level hits the 50% to 60% range.
To complete my magnum opus I'll now explain why I am taking what may appear to some as a hard line. UK law, in granting Unions and their members the opportunity to take lawful IA, albeit under controlled conditions, has given BA's CC the chance to inflict, and without any responsibility or liability to pay any compensation whatsoever, hundreds of millions (maybe even close to one billion by now) pounds in damages to BA, its Board, its shareholders, its fellow employees, its passengers (like us), its business suppliers (e.g. catering, fuel, landing fees, etc.), its airline code-sharing business partners, its business partner's passengers, etc., etc., all around the World. For the entire time that this dispute continues, and while CC are showing their apathy in deciding to sit on the fence seeking our sympathy as to how it's their Union's and not their fault they are in this mess, not one of them is stopping to think of the untold damages their apathy in not voting and resolving this dispute is causing the rest of the world at large.
I personally believe this is too much power placed in the hands of people who are thinking quite selfishly only of themselves, are not aware of the disruption they are causing to others, and the least the law could do in granting them this power is to make voting compulsory. It has been suggested that BA should incentivise CC to vote but this would do nothing more than reward the selfish and damaging behaviour further. Given the ability to wield this amount of power, CC should quite simply be forced to VOTE one way or the other so the rest of the World can cut the huge losses that CC's behaviour is causing and move on.
I'll place my hard-hat on now!
I would suggest that voting "yes" for strike action was easy in the first ballot as if push came to shove, and BA called the Union's bluff, there were always the 'outs' of hoping you were not rostered on the first strike day and seeing what played out, or throwing a sickie and claiming you didn't understand the doctor's note rule, or throwing a sickie and persuading a doctor to give you a note (bad back, etc.), or going into work and having car trouble on the way, or even just choosing to go into work. However, they felt there was a good chance that WW would fold having been "sent a message" and none of these 'outs' would be required. It was worth a shot. Given the ease in making a "yes" vote, frankly, a count of 64% did not show resoundingly high support for the Union.
In the second ballot things were not so easy. CC were actually put on the spot. Voting to reject an offer that was potentially the best they were going to get, especially on the back of a completely failed series of strikes, was a pretty terminal thing to do with no 'outs' whatsoever so the 'safe' way out this time was not to vote and see what played out. Hence the very low 30% vote to reject which, under these circumstances, probably indicates the true number of 'militants' i.e. around 3500. The surprising thing here was that as many as half this number, i.e. 15%, actually voted to accept BA's offer and settle the dispute - only 1700 votes different.
We can all dodge taking personal responsibility for our actions and play the victim card instead e.g. "I didn't have my lawyer handy to interpret the contract", "I was down-route and was too late back to return my ballot paper in time", etc., etc. But, there will be less easy outs from here on in as like-it-or-not this is a big boys' and girls' game of hard-ball with potentially severe consequences to the loser.
We're going to hear more whimpers of "I'm having a nervous break-down over this", "I want this to end", "life at work is terrible", "I didn't join BA for this", etc., etc., in which case I humbly suggest to these poor and down-trodden 'victims' that, if they feel so unable to rise-up and vote-out their chosen leaders, they simply resign their memberships to the Union that has 'unwittingly' dragged them into this so-called 'nightmare' and go seek some support over at the PCCC website, if needed. As Litebulbs has said on a couple of occasions we'll hear from BA soon enough if the Union membership level hits the 50% to 60% range.
To complete my magnum opus I'll now explain why I am taking what may appear to some as a hard line. UK law, in granting Unions and their members the opportunity to take lawful IA, albeit under controlled conditions, has given BA's CC the chance to inflict, and without any responsibility or liability to pay any compensation whatsoever, hundreds of millions (maybe even close to one billion by now) pounds in damages to BA, its Board, its shareholders, its fellow employees, its passengers (like us), its business suppliers (e.g. catering, fuel, landing fees, etc.), its airline code-sharing business partners, its business partner's passengers, etc., etc., all around the World. For the entire time that this dispute continues, and while CC are showing their apathy in deciding to sit on the fence seeking our sympathy as to how it's their Union's and not their fault they are in this mess, not one of them is stopping to think of the untold damages their apathy in not voting and resolving this dispute is causing the rest of the world at large.
I personally believe this is too much power placed in the hands of people who are thinking quite selfishly only of themselves, are not aware of the disruption they are causing to others, and the least the law could do in granting them this power is to make voting compulsory. It has been suggested that BA should incentivise CC to vote but this would do nothing more than reward the selfish and damaging behaviour further. Given the ability to wield this amount of power, CC should quite simply be forced to VOTE one way or the other so the rest of the World can cut the huge losses that CC's behaviour is causing and move on.
I'll place my hard-hat on now!
Last edited by AV Flyer; 19th Dec 2010 at 21:37.
Paxing All Over The World
In passing, if anyone thinks that BASSA are alone in wanting to strike during the holiday season ... Saturday 18th saw the London Underground line the 'Bakerloo' closed (dreadful delays and crowded trains on other routes) and on Thursday 23rd ASLEF plans a strike of drivers on London Midland railways. Unions just don't seem to know how to get the public on their side.
That's the end of the bulletin, now back to CC...
That's the end of the bulletin, now back to CC...
Last edited by PAXboy; 19th Dec 2010 at 20:25.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA membership.
- if, as you state, only 1000 CC have resigned from BASSA (I don't know how accurate this figure is),
However using BASSA's own figures, a little over a year ago, their website claimed 10,800 members. IIRC when the automatic counter was taken down earlier this year it was showing a figure of around 9,250. So the leakage of members was there for all to see. So on that basis we can assume that a loss of 1,500 members was near the mark at that time. Who know if that trend has continued? Unfortunately the reports we see on this and other forums of non members getting post (and ballot papers?) is disturbingly high.
It remains to be seen how the remaining membership reacts to a call for IA when (if) the time comes. It would appear that the militants (at least) have stayed loyal to the union leadership (WHY?????) so in percentage terms a vote for action may still be high, even though actual numbers may be less.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Lenny McCluskey" (as BASSA call him) writes for The Guardian website promising a fightback against the cuts through a broad strike movement, but absolutely no mention of the BA dispute.
Unions, get set for battle | Len McCluskey | Comment is free | The Guardian
Unions, get set for battle | Len McCluskey | Comment is free | The Guardian
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dawdler says
I wonder if this figure is before or is it after early retirement was accepted by a reasonable number of BASSA Cabin Crew?_ It would make a difference.
I don’t think that the management of BA is allowed to interrogate their wages computer._ The chief person who argued this on this thread, realised his error and deleted all of his postings that suggested that BA had breached what is called in the UK the "Chinese Wall".
The total numbers of BASSA plus cc89 was 11691 on 22 February 2010 - as authenticated by the Electoral Reform Service._ This had fallen to 11311 on 20 July - a drop of 3.25%._ Like you, Dawdler, I am waiting impatiently for the result of the strike ballot that starts next Tuesday._ It will be very interesting to see what is the numerical size of BASSA plus cc89._ It would also be nice if the call to strike is rejected.
However using BASSA's own figures, a little over a year ago, their website claimed 10,800 members
I don’t think that the management of BA is allowed to interrogate their wages computer._ The chief person who argued this on this thread, realised his error and deleted all of his postings that suggested that BA had breached what is called in the UK the "Chinese Wall".
The total numbers of BASSA plus cc89 was 11691 on 22 February 2010 - as authenticated by the Electoral Reform Service._ This had fallen to 11311 on 20 July - a drop of 3.25%._ Like you, Dawdler, I am waiting impatiently for the result of the strike ballot that starts next Tuesday._ It will be very interesting to see what is the numerical size of BASSA plus cc89._ It would also be nice if the call to strike is rejected.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First an apology to Dawdler, I am in Australia which is why I am posting while you are asleep.
Cabin crew who took voluntary redundancy
192 left on 31 October 2009
742 left on 30 November 2009
69 left on 15 December 2009
reference paragraph 39 of_____link
Cabin crew who took voluntary redundancy
192 left on 31 October 2009
742 left on 30 November 2009
69 left on 15 December 2009
reference paragraph 39 of_____link
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lisbon
Age: 51
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frankly, you can't have it both ways. Either you are grossly overpaid and rewarded for doing a Noddy job that is just within your capacity or, you are grown up adult human beings who could and should be able to give mature consideration to information regarding your very demanding job- one that is rewarding in many ways and reflects your needs as a grown up, mature and intelligent human being.
If they feel the offer is not right (whatever we may think, it is their job), but do not think that strike action is appropriate, then abstention is a principled decision.
As to the large amounts of cost to the the business, well (a) the board must also share some responsibility for this, since they are running the business and (b) it is petty cash compared to the bonuses awarded by banks, post crash, perhaps a more obvious target for ire, since this behaviour does directly affect the amount of money available for people's mortgage and other loan needs. What impact does the BA strike really have on most people?
The board may well have decided to take a hit to resolve the problem and that is a legitimate and reasonable decision, but the dispute is still ongoing after 12 months, suggesting that the strategy has not yet worked.
I wonder how long it will be until there is some pressure on the board to end the dispute? If there is a legal way of imposing the new contract, then at some stage I would expect larger shareholders to ask why this is not being executed.
Meanwhile, I notice that on some frequent flyer fora, there is an escalating amount of dissatisfaction with the premium cabin service, on both legacy and mixed fleet routes. Whilst there is always some dissatisfaction with most airlines, specific reports include dirty seats in first class, no pudding being served in first class, poor service in club world, chaotic service on a Las Vegas flight, with mixed fleet crew etc, suggesting to me that maybe a morale problem may now be affecting some cabin crew.
Let me say that I have not encountered the problems in the preceeding paragraph and believe that clubworld is a very good product, but I have pulled my flights in Jan/Feb, as I cannot justify any risk of disruption to key business trips, when there are many other options. I may like flying BA, but I have responsibilities to colleagues and my company.
Come on BA, resolve this dispute.
Last edited by Joao da Silva; 20th Dec 2010 at 07:45. Reason: correcting typos
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there is a legal way of imposing the new contract, then at some stage I would expect larger shareholders to ask why this is not being executed.
However, this would be a strategy that could easily backfire on the company as it would be highly likely to motivate the wider union movement within BA to action. It is also a highly risky strategy as until now the clear weight of public support has been with BA. If BA were to act in such a high handed and arbitrary manner, it is likely that public support would be lost and BA painted as a rapacious and evil employer.
WW and the board have played this dispute well in terms of public support and seem to be sensitive to the image aspects of this dispute, I doubt they will throw a favourable perception away without many warnings. Oddly enough the current bad weather could allow BA to persue a more hardline approach...."BA cannot allow a small group of staff to punish the travelling public any more, particularly after all the disruption they have suffered this winter"
I don’t think that the management of BA is allowed to interrogate their wages computer._ The chief person who argued this on this thread, realised his error and deleted all of his postings that suggested that BA had breached what is called in the UK the "Chinese Wall".
There is no problem in a senior manager having access to wages computer information. In fact this is essential to provide accurate accounts, especially if these involve deductions before payment to the staff member.
Chinese Walls don't exist to stop managers knowing how much their staff are paid, they were put in place to help prevent insider trading and fraud.
There is no problem in a senior manager having access to wages computer information. In fact this is essential to provide accurate accounts, especially if these involve deductions before payment to the staff member.
Chinese Walls don't exist to stop managers knowing how much their staff are paid, they were put in place to help prevent insider trading and fraud.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lisbon
Age: 51
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juan Tugoh
All well and good to make your argument, to a certain point.
However, at some stage public image becomes a pyhrric victory and the large institutions are bottom line players.
The point about mobilising the other unions is reasonable, except I thought that all the other departments/branches had already made deals, involving some pain sharing.
Given this and also the humiliation of the main union by the branches, one may well have thought that a SOSR approach might not be impossible, albeit with much background preparation, to the benefit of all?
A win-win outcome, the JGS of Unite could well say to the branch members, look what happens when you ignore our advice.
All well and good to make your argument, to a certain point.
However, at some stage public image becomes a pyhrric victory and the large institutions are bottom line players.
The point about mobilising the other unions is reasonable, except I thought that all the other departments/branches had already made deals, involving some pain sharing.
Given this and also the humiliation of the main union by the branches, one may well have thought that a SOSR approach might not be impossible, albeit with much background preparation, to the benefit of all?
A win-win outcome, the JGS of Unite could well say to the branch members, look what happens when you ignore our advice.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JDS
the problem is that by issuing a change to contract without consultation would give an issue to ALL work groups within BA and could easily provide a reason for other groups to initiate IA. This would not be "sympathy" action but a genuine new concern within all workgroups as to how BA conducts it's industrial relations.
Public perception is everything here, as you say the bottom line is all. When the public decides that BA is acting unreasonably then the bottom line will be hit. The ABBA mentality exists within many on the political left already, if this shifts to the centre ground then BA will have effectively lost this dispute. At the moment they have both the moral high ground and public sympathy.
An SOSR approach most definitely remains an option but this is not the moment to utilise such draconian measures. Remember that BA has what it needs at the moment, it has the savings it needed and has introduced NF as a bonus. The savings it required from IFCE have been more than achieved.
BASSA and UNITE are playing a game that is having reducing returns. Another strike is likely to be less well supported than last time due to ennui if nothing else. Sure the militant hard core will doubtless get a strong majority of a reduced number of votes (a majority of the minority, if you like) but it is doubtful that as many CC will actually walk off the job this time. They have just got back ST and, as the job market looks increasingly difficult outside, many will just be glad to have a regular income.
Bottom line is that BA does not need to do anything more to end this dispute than it already is doing. This next strike is likely to be, at worst, delayed by legal issues and at best prevented as the union sees big losses and possible bankruptcy from an unprotected strike. For the CC there remains the option of dismissals on day 1 of the strike and the whole thing folds. ET's cannot enforce re-engagement orders in the UK and the limited compensation awards will not pay the mortgage and feed the kids for long.
BA does not need to do anything much as some want them to.
the problem is that by issuing a change to contract without consultation would give an issue to ALL work groups within BA and could easily provide a reason for other groups to initiate IA. This would not be "sympathy" action but a genuine new concern within all workgroups as to how BA conducts it's industrial relations.
Public perception is everything here, as you say the bottom line is all. When the public decides that BA is acting unreasonably then the bottom line will be hit. The ABBA mentality exists within many on the political left already, if this shifts to the centre ground then BA will have effectively lost this dispute. At the moment they have both the moral high ground and public sympathy.
An SOSR approach most definitely remains an option but this is not the moment to utilise such draconian measures. Remember that BA has what it needs at the moment, it has the savings it needed and has introduced NF as a bonus. The savings it required from IFCE have been more than achieved.
BASSA and UNITE are playing a game that is having reducing returns. Another strike is likely to be less well supported than last time due to ennui if nothing else. Sure the militant hard core will doubtless get a strong majority of a reduced number of votes (a majority of the minority, if you like) but it is doubtful that as many CC will actually walk off the job this time. They have just got back ST and, as the job market looks increasingly difficult outside, many will just be glad to have a regular income.
Bottom line is that BA does not need to do anything more to end this dispute than it already is doing. This next strike is likely to be, at worst, delayed by legal issues and at best prevented as the union sees big losses and possible bankruptcy from an unprotected strike. For the CC there remains the option of dismissals on day 1 of the strike and the whole thing folds. ET's cannot enforce re-engagement orders in the UK and the limited compensation awards will not pay the mortgage and feed the kids for long.
BA does not need to do anything much as some want them to.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'BA need to end this dispute.....'
it is not inconceivable that BA management regard this dispute as over. the postings on the CC forum have diminished and the more vociferous members seem to have departed.
we are busily debating current BASSA membership numbers and a frequent theme is how many will bother to vote and will there be any sort of majority in favour of further industrial action. given that CC now realise that staff travel is a vanishing perk, who will put it at risk when their families are looking at summer holiday destinations?
the picture is one of resignation (apathy?) and it would take something momentous to fan the flames on this dead fire.
It looks to me as though BA would be well advised to sit this out whilst advising the travelling public that service can and will be maintained. inaction here could be a safe and winning policy.
we are busily debating current BASSA membership numbers and a frequent theme is how many will bother to vote and will there be any sort of majority in favour of further industrial action. given that CC now realise that staff travel is a vanishing perk, who will put it at risk when their families are looking at summer holiday destinations?
the picture is one of resignation (apathy?) and it would take something momentous to fan the flames on this dead fire.
It looks to me as though BA would be well advised to sit this out whilst advising the travelling public that service can and will be maintained. inaction here could be a safe and winning policy.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Lisbon
Age: 51
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rethymon
Whilst I can see where you are coming from, this strategy depends on people buying in to it.
The evidence from other frequent flyer fora is that premium service is going down, this I suggest, is very dangerous.
Juan
Whislt it is true that it would be imposition without consultation, Unite recommended the last offer and BASSA and Amicus branches rejected it out of hand and without consultation; this seems significant to me.
Whilst I can see where you are coming from, this strategy depends on people buying in to it.
The evidence from other frequent flyer fora is that premium service is going down, this I suggest, is very dangerous.
Juan
Whislt it is true that it would be imposition without consultation, Unite recommended the last offer and BASSA and Amicus branches rejected it out of hand and without consultation; this seems significant to me.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wonder how the armchair pundits on this thread - clearly all considering themselves to be very important magnates of commerce, industry and finance in their own right - who appear to have much free time to pontificate on how British Airways should or should not manage its business, would feel if their enterprises and concerns were subjected to the same public criticism and unsolicited advice?
More to the point, could any of them do better than the current British Airways' board of directors?
More to the point, could any of them do better than the current British Airways' board of directors?
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
surely, the whole point of being 'an armchair pundit' is that one can pontificate without being remotely at risk of being required to put your money where your mouth is?
i'm in the process of setting up a small company and it does give you pause for thought when it's 'up close and personal'.
i'm in the process of setting up a small company and it does give you pause for thought when it's 'up close and personal'.