BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It can be quite interesting reading agreements (though I guess BA has so many, covering different work groups it would not be a good idea to publish them for all to see).
(We have one agreement covering all staff (there used to be three) that is freely available on the company intranet)
You find that if the company and the lay reps can't reach agreement, full time officers automatically get involved.
You find that the company is there to manage the business, the unions to intervene on behalf on the employees
Obviously in this case there are 2 separate branches of the same union involved it would, possibly, make sense for the full time officers to be negotiating.
(We have one agreement covering all staff (there used to be three) that is freely available on the company intranet)
You find that if the company and the lay reps can't reach agreement, full time officers automatically get involved.
You find that the company is there to manage the business, the unions to intervene on behalf on the employees
Obviously in this case there are 2 separate branches of the same union involved it would, possibly, make sense for the full time officers to be negotiating.
cheerful pessimist
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fenland
Posts: 70
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
baggersup
I wonder if your earlier query about the number of Cabin Crew involved in the Court Case might have something to do with an appeal that went out for Cabin Crew to sign up as Claimants.
from Desertia 21 Nov 2009 #3501 (link at the bottom of this post)
There was concern expressed on here that anyone who did sign up might make themselves liable for Costs / Damages if the Case was lost. I don't know how valid this concern was / still is.
Here is a link to the 21st November 2009 discussion:
http://www.pprune.org/cabin-crew/379...ml#post5330468
I just reread the original decisions by Mr. Holland. The suit says that Malone et al are suing for themselves and on behalf of 5,337 cabin crew members. And that 6,100 at LHR are not included in the lawsuit.
from Desertia 21 Nov 2009 #3501 (link at the bottom of this post)
Following the legal proceedings initiated against BA regarding imposition of new terms and conditions the Court has ordered our lawyers OH Parsons to provide a list of members of cabin crew who want to pursue the claim against BA. That list has to be submitted to the Court no later than 7 December.
We need the maximum to put their names forward as additional Claimants. All cabin crew are urged to put forward their names.
We need the maximum to put their names forward as additional Claimants. All cabin crew are urged to put forward their names.
Here is a link to the 21st November 2009 discussion:
http://www.pprune.org/cabin-crew/379...ml#post5330468
Last edited by eticket; 18th Oct 2010 at 21:08. Reason: fine tuning
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, I think is interesting
What do you think?
BA and Unite dispute is stuck in 70s like Life on Mars, says union leadership candidate | Politics | The Guardian
For even you non trade unionists, surely this is a step in the right (not politically!) direction?
BA and Unite dispute is stuck in 70s like Life on Mars, says union leadership candidate | Politics | The Guardian
For even you non trade unionists, surely this is a step in the right (not politically!) direction?
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 67
Posts: 1,100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs
I think that has been the point of many posters, that the tactics from the union side in this dispute were those of the 70's. What makes it worse is that it is obvious in other industries (and parts of BA) that times have moved on.
Just why BASSA got support from above is the concern
I think that has been the point of many posters, that the tactics from the union side in this dispute were those of the 70's. What makes it worse is that it is obvious in other industries (and parts of BA) that times have moved on.
Just why BASSA got support from above is the concern
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA 'will not back down' in cabin crew dispute
19.10.10
British Airways will not back down in the year-long cabin crew dispute and is ready to run a near-full service in the event of another strike, the airline's chief executive Willie Walsh said today.
He said it was "entirely" the fault of the cabin crew's union Unite that the dispute had dragged on for 12 months.
And he added that changes to working practices should have been tackled 10 years ago.
Addressing the annual convention of travel organisation Abta in Malta, Mr Walsh said: "In the past I have seen managers and businesses ignore issues and back down in the face of industrial action. We are not going to do that."
He said that should there be further industrial action BA hoped to be able to run a full service at Gatwick and London City airports and all its long-haul flights at Heathrow, with the only question being just how much of Heathrow's short-haul programme could operate.
Asked if it was "entirely the union's fault" that no settlement had been reached in the dispute, Mr Walsh replied: "Entirely."
Speaking about a possible Christmas strike, Mr Walsh said that Unite would have to go through a number of procedures before such a strike could be called.
He went on: "I don't believe it's the intention of Unite to do that (go through the procedures).
He said that while BA hoped to reach agreement, it was also planning "for all eventualities" and had a "very robust" contingency programme in place.
Mr Walsh said he was not being critical of previous BA managers but added: "We should have faced up to these challenges 10 years ago."
19.10.10
British Airways will not back down in the year-long cabin crew dispute and is ready to run a near-full service in the event of another strike, the airline's chief executive Willie Walsh said today.
He said it was "entirely" the fault of the cabin crew's union Unite that the dispute had dragged on for 12 months.
And he added that changes to working practices should have been tackled 10 years ago.
Addressing the annual convention of travel organisation Abta in Malta, Mr Walsh said: "In the past I have seen managers and businesses ignore issues and back down in the face of industrial action. We are not going to do that."
He said that should there be further industrial action BA hoped to be able to run a full service at Gatwick and London City airports and all its long-haul flights at Heathrow, with the only question being just how much of Heathrow's short-haul programme could operate.
Asked if it was "entirely the union's fault" that no settlement had been reached in the dispute, Mr Walsh replied: "Entirely."
Speaking about a possible Christmas strike, Mr Walsh said that Unite would have to go through a number of procedures before such a strike could be called.
He went on: "I don't believe it's the intention of Unite to do that (go through the procedures).
He said that while BA hoped to reach agreement, it was also planning "for all eventualities" and had a "very robust" contingency programme in place.
Mr Walsh said he was not being critical of previous BA managers but added: "We should have faced up to these challenges 10 years ago."
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With all the bluster and finger pointing one thing is essential in getting this dispute ended.
The BASSA members MUST insist, knowing that Duncan Holley can have NO future in negotiations with BA, that he resigns and a new General Secretary is elected after a vote as per the constitution of BASSA. It is wrong that he is still their rep and yet but cannot negotiate with BA, and it is blatantly wrong that he can, if allowed, let Unite speak for him. In which case THAT MUST BE WRONG since he no longer represents the members and one by one the reps are disappearing. BASSA is a shambles!
Unite need to pay credence to the problem. The starlings are restless and murmuring.
The BASSA members MUST insist, knowing that Duncan Holley can have NO future in negotiations with BA, that he resigns and a new General Secretary is elected after a vote as per the constitution of BASSA. It is wrong that he is still their rep and yet but cannot negotiate with BA, and it is blatantly wrong that he can, if allowed, let Unite speak for him. In which case THAT MUST BE WRONG since he no longer represents the members and one by one the reps are disappearing. BASSA is a shambles!
Unite need to pay credence to the problem. The starlings are restless and murmuring.
Paxing All Over The World
Mr Walsh said he was not being critical of previous BA managers but added: "We should have faced up to these challenges 10 years ago."
The French are now in the same playing field about national Pensions. (That probably ought to be in JB but it is related, I suggest.)
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Brentwood, Essex
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
moleytt
End in sight?
From the BBC
One wonders how many CC will vote on this proposal given the apparent disinterest shown on the last consultative ballot.
British Airways cabin crews are to be balloted on a new deal that could end their long-running industrial dispute.
The new offer was reached in talks between BA chief executive Willie Walsh and Unite joint leader Tony Woodley.
The union has been pressing for the restoration of travel concessions removed from members who went on strike earlier in the year.
It has also been trying to reverse disciplinary sanctions imposed on union members during the dispute.
"There will be a consultative ballot on the offer and we're working to get this underway as soon as practically possible," said a Unite spokeswoman.
BA cabin crew have staged 22 days of strike action since March, costing the airline £150m.
When the dispute began in November last year, it centred on changes to staffing levels, pay and working conditions.
However, Unite has since said that the core issues are the removal of the travel concessions and the implementation of disciplinary sanctions against its members since March.
The new offer was reached in talks between BA chief executive Willie Walsh and Unite joint leader Tony Woodley.
The union has been pressing for the restoration of travel concessions removed from members who went on strike earlier in the year.
It has also been trying to reverse disciplinary sanctions imposed on union members during the dispute.
"There will be a consultative ballot on the offer and we're working to get this underway as soon as practically possible," said a Unite spokeswoman.
BA cabin crew have staged 22 days of strike action since March, costing the airline £150m.
When the dispute began in November last year, it centred on changes to staffing levels, pay and working conditions.
However, Unite has since said that the core issues are the removal of the travel concessions and the implementation of disciplinary sanctions against its members since March.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: leafy suburbs
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Juan Tugoh
Full return of staff travel would be expensive - I would suggest a no strike clause? (expensive enough?)
And I thought I'd copy this in from the CC forum (one I prepared earlier)
The above, of course, is IMO
what yet remains to be seen is what UNITE/BASSA are willing to give up in order to "buy" full return of ST.
And I thought I'd copy this in from the CC forum (one I prepared earlier)
Although this has not been mentioned recently, just a thought (and relevant please note Mods)
I saw a BBC Question Time programme recently and one of the hot subjects was Public Spending cuts. Near the end of the programme a London Firefighter (cannot remember the borough) stated that they had been given 90 days notice. Their job would no longer exist in its' present form after the 90 days. Obviously the new contract offered was less desirable than the current contract and saves the borough money.
So fast forward to this current Cabin Crew dispute. Many prophesies of CC being given the 90 day notice have not arisen in fact. I put it to you though, that if it is accepted the company will not give the 90 day notice, on CC that struck, for accepting the MF contract (which I personally would find unfair to said crew) there is no reason why the company cannot invoke the 90 day notice for the striking BASSA crew to accept the contract that has been accepted by non striking, non union crew. This I would find as a fair solution to the dispute.
And before you shoot me down in flames, this dispute is at an impasse. I am certain the company do not really want it to drag on much longer. As much as the striking crew have made their point it is time to put up or shut up and move out.
If you are so venomous in your comments against the company then why are you still working for them? The answer I come up with is money for old rope! The easy life etc. etc.
I saw a BBC Question Time programme recently and one of the hot subjects was Public Spending cuts. Near the end of the programme a London Firefighter (cannot remember the borough) stated that they had been given 90 days notice. Their job would no longer exist in its' present form after the 90 days. Obviously the new contract offered was less desirable than the current contract and saves the borough money.
So fast forward to this current Cabin Crew dispute. Many prophesies of CC being given the 90 day notice have not arisen in fact. I put it to you though, that if it is accepted the company will not give the 90 day notice, on CC that struck, for accepting the MF contract (which I personally would find unfair to said crew) there is no reason why the company cannot invoke the 90 day notice for the striking BASSA crew to accept the contract that has been accepted by non striking, non union crew. This I would find as a fair solution to the dispute.
And before you shoot me down in flames, this dispute is at an impasse. I am certain the company do not really want it to drag on much longer. As much as the striking crew have made their point it is time to put up or shut up and move out.
If you are so venomous in your comments against the company then why are you still working for them? The answer I come up with is money for old rope! The easy life etc. etc.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One wonders how many CC will vote on this proposal given the apparent disinterest shown on the last consultative ballot
It is worthwhile remembering that this is not is not another strike ballot but rather a consultative ballot on whether or not to accept the latest deal. A strike ballot may follow but there remains the problem of which issue to choose for a strike ballot. As has been pointed out in this thread many times, it will have to be a new issue for there to be "protected" strike action.
As I understand, and I may well be wrong, you cannot ballot over things that have not yet happened, so a ballot on MF cannot happen until after 1 Nov. A weeks notice of the ballot and a 3 week consultation process and then a weeks notice of IA to the company would still allow a Christmas strike. However, as there has been no formal grievance or failure to agree etc over MF then I think this could easily be blocked by BA at court for failure of due process. I doubt UNITE would risk another embarrassing injunction blocked strike because they have not done things by the book.
Back to the original point though, turnout for this consultative ballot will be critical. Too small and the union position can be easily seen as very weak, BASSA need a good turn out.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Every time there has been some kind of ballot, the consensus on here prior to the ballot has been that CC would finally see sense and vote BASSA down. Hasn't happened yet.
The language coming from BASSA is already along the lines that "we are only recommending this as WW made it one of the conditions of the offer"
They are clearly itching for a strike ballot, and my money is upon them achieving it, and then getting a majority of those who can be bothered to vote opting for further (useless) strikes
The language coming from BASSA is already along the lines that "we are only recommending this as WW made it one of the conditions of the offer"
They are clearly itching for a strike ballot, and my money is upon them achieving it, and then getting a majority of those who can be bothered to vote opting for further (useless) strikes
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are right, Mariner9:
From DH, on that other thread:
Bring it on, Baby, bring it on.
From DH, on that other thread:
Your ballot, when it arrives will also contain a detailed analysis of the document, to help you to make up your mind.
If you wish to accept it the dispute will end on that basis, if you reject it, the union will issue an immediate ballot for strike action."
If you wish to accept it the dispute will end on that basis, if you reject it, the union will issue an immediate ballot for strike action."
