BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs:
"...Unions hardly ever win."
I would have to respectfully disagree with this comment. My personal opinion is that progressive and reasonable unions win victories every day. Victories that not only provide benefits to their members but also prove their value to their employers.
"...Unions hardly ever win."
I would have to respectfully disagree with this comment. My personal opinion is that progressive and reasonable unions win victories every day. Victories that not only provide benefits to their members but also prove their value to their employers.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Aberdeen
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you MissM for your response but I still think you are deliberately being obstinate about the whole thing, although you know deep inside that you are backing a lost cause.
I also think that you are directing too much hatred towards your non-striker colleagues and vcc's regardless of their reasons for not joining the strike, i.e. they are not Bassa members, or if they are, they realised early on that the strike was not necessary. I understand that you are not happy with the way some of your colleagues voted "yes" in the previous IA ballot but when it came to the actual strike, they buckled. However, (correct me if I am wrong) didn't Bassa at the time advised everyone to just vote yes to "send a strong message to management (WW)" and that they (Bassa) didn't think it will come to an actual strike?
You seem to be an intelligent person judging from your posts so I do not believe that you do not understand the real reason why there are so many of your colleagues who disagree with you and Bassa. Don't you think enough is enough, and that there's no use throwing good money after bad?
It is now time to cut losses and be grateful that at least you are still able to do the job you like and that's more important. Let go of the hatred MissM and you will find that everything will fall into its proper place.
Lastly, I wish the whole CC community peace and contemplate on the SERENITY PRAYER to guide you.
SERENITY PRAYER
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I could not change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference...
I also think that you are directing too much hatred towards your non-striker colleagues and vcc's regardless of their reasons for not joining the strike, i.e. they are not Bassa members, or if they are, they realised early on that the strike was not necessary. I understand that you are not happy with the way some of your colleagues voted "yes" in the previous IA ballot but when it came to the actual strike, they buckled. However, (correct me if I am wrong) didn't Bassa at the time advised everyone to just vote yes to "send a strong message to management (WW)" and that they (Bassa) didn't think it will come to an actual strike?
You seem to be an intelligent person judging from your posts so I do not believe that you do not understand the real reason why there are so many of your colleagues who disagree with you and Bassa. Don't you think enough is enough, and that there's no use throwing good money after bad?
It is now time to cut losses and be grateful that at least you are still able to do the job you like and that's more important. Let go of the hatred MissM and you will find that everything will fall into its proper place.
Lastly, I wish the whole CC community peace and contemplate on the SERENITY PRAYER to guide you.
SERENITY PRAYER
Grant me the serenity to accept the things I could not change, the courage to change what I can, and the wisdom to know the difference...
Litebulbs
Posted on the other thread...
So you would advocate an agreement that "punishes" future strikers then?
If it was you, what would you be looking for? If it was me (moderate), I would be looking at an ACAS binding arbitration solution for the dismissed employees and a full reinstatement of staff travel (over time maybe?) and concede that if any further action was to take place over this issue, then a signed agreement that staff travel will be removed permanently. I doubt if Mr. Walsh will go that far however, but we shall see.
Most on here will not agree with that, because the common thread bias is about punishment and destruction of the BASSA branch.
Most on here will not agree with that, because the common thread bias is about punishment and destruction of the BASSA branch.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mariner9
I am suggesting a full return of staff travel, but obviously BA will not want to give it. It would be a compromise agreement, where both parties look at the potential cost of legal action on the issue, along with a resolution to the dispute.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs
It would be a compromise agreement
There has been an impasse for many months with both sides having an entrenched position. Both sides will have to give up something in order to gain a solution. It is clear what UNITE/BASSA want BA to give up - full ST, what remains shrouded in mystery is what more BA wants from the union and what the union is prepared to give way on.
The details of any proposed settlement will be fascinating. I suspect that there will not be a full return of ST - at least not at first, a phased return wrapped in guarantees may happen, but, I suspect, BA will be very wary of giving away anything that could be spun as a big victory for BASSA.
The ST issue is too big an issue, too much a cause celebre to be given away lightly. BASSA will have to buy full ST back at great cost if they want full return and I suspect the cost would be too great foe BASSA to stomach - UNITE may feel differently. As I said the deal will be fascinating.
Compromise or not, you are advocating a "permanent loss of ST agreement" that you have repeatedly said in the past is punishment of lawful strikers.
Do you think it is OK to punish future strikers but not the current crop? And do you think BASSA will heed a written agreement over loss of ST having ignored written warnings from BA over this issue in the current dispute?
Do you think it is OK to punish future strikers but not the current crop? And do you think BASSA will heed a written agreement over loss of ST having ignored written warnings from BA over this issue in the current dispute?
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mariner9
I still stand by my previous comments, as I am not in the negotiations. As I have also said that there is no clear legal precedent on the issue. Maybe Unite legal have had some advice. I have said nothing about future strikes, as if the deal was agreed, the issue would go.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This whole ST issue is indeed a complex one. On the one had I really don’t like the principle of strikers being punished, any, in any company, it potentially sets a rather nasty president. On the other however this particular group of individuals (BASSA) have done exactly nothing to help themselves or more importantly the members they were elected to represent and I can’t manage to generate any sympathy for them at all.
It was all downhill from the decision not to negotiate and then the 12 days announcement located the final nail. Somewhat foolish tactics at the very least.
I certainly know some members of cabin crew that are VERY opposed to the idea of ST being reinstated in any way. It’s going to be a great struggle on all sides to resolve a gulf of that scale.
Whatever happens one group or another are not going to be happy. Will BA chose to make the strikers or the non-strikers happy I wonder?
I suspect BA will try to disregard such considerations and will opt for the path that’s commercially the most sensible, whatever that may be – which could of course be argued is also be best for its employees and their long term employment and remuneration.
I know I’ve failed to sell ST return to the CC I know in any shape, I trust (and suspect) that Mr Walsh has a better argument at the ready if it does get returned.
It was all downhill from the decision not to negotiate and then the 12 days announcement located the final nail. Somewhat foolish tactics at the very least.
I certainly know some members of cabin crew that are VERY opposed to the idea of ST being reinstated in any way. It’s going to be a great struggle on all sides to resolve a gulf of that scale.
Whatever happens one group or another are not going to be happy. Will BA chose to make the strikers or the non-strikers happy I wonder?
I suspect BA will try to disregard such considerations and will opt for the path that’s commercially the most sensible, whatever that may be – which could of course be argued is also be best for its employees and their long term employment and remuneration.
I know I’ve failed to sell ST return to the CC I know in any shape, I trust (and suspect) that Mr Walsh has a better argument at the ready if it does get returned.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Out there, somewhere
Age: 60
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This whole ST issue is indeed a complex one. On the one had I really don’t like the principle of strikers being punished, any, in any company, it potentially sets a rather nasty president. On the other however this particular group of individuals (BASSA) have done exactly nothing to help themselves or more importantly the members they were elected to represent and I can’t manage to generate any sympathy for them at all.
That is a very succint and excellent summary, Snas
That is a very succint and excellent summary, Snas
...and concede that if any further action was to take place over this issue, then a signed agreement that staff travel will be removed permanently
I have said nothing about future strikes, as if the deal was agreed, the issue would go.
Just to clarify, I'm not arguing with your view that concessions are likely required from both sides to end this dispute - I'm just interested in what a union supporter feels would be acceptable to offer in the way of compromise in order to get ST returned.
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
Don't overlook that removing ST from 4500 (or however many) strikers also benefitted everyone else who is eligible for BA ST (me included) by moving them up the standby pecking order.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The goal will be having everyone on a new contract as soon as possible. There has been no legal challenge as yet to the removal of the benefit, so it could still be seen as a future punishment (of which I do not agree).
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From Uniteba website, I quote (can't copy text as it is part of an image):
talking about the reported significant developments alluded to last week by Tony Woodley ....
"....None of your negotiating committee was either aware or present. We still do not know the contents of these talks or what 'significant progress' means.
We shall be meeting with Tony shortly to discuss the details. IF and ONLY IF your negotiating committee assess this 'progress' as 'significant' enough to meet your needs and requirements, the document will be put to a consultative ballot of you, the members.
If we DO NOT these talks to have produced a suitable deal, we shall be asking Unite to issue a strike ballot in line with your recent mandate"
This to me typifies the control and manipulation demonstrated throughout this dispute by the BASSA top table. They continually refuse to let their electorate decide, but insist on deciding for themselves what is good for them.
Now, just let's think ...... that's right, the negotiating committee that comprises of what, 3 sacked reps and several more suspended; all of which would be unable to put themselves up for re-election if there was a deal.
Hmmm, let's think, now what is in it for them if they agree to Tony Woodleys' latest deliberations?
1. They won't get their jobs back
2. They will lose their control of BASSA (and their attempts at controlling BA) as fresh elections are already about a year overdue in BASSA
3. They lose their significant skimming off of the branch union dues each month
Just a thought.
talking about the reported significant developments alluded to last week by Tony Woodley ....
"....None of your negotiating committee was either aware or present. We still do not know the contents of these talks or what 'significant progress' means.
We shall be meeting with Tony shortly to discuss the details. IF and ONLY IF your negotiating committee assess this 'progress' as 'significant' enough to meet your needs and requirements, the document will be put to a consultative ballot of you, the members.
If we DO NOT these talks to have produced a suitable deal, we shall be asking Unite to issue a strike ballot in line with your recent mandate"
This to me typifies the control and manipulation demonstrated throughout this dispute by the BASSA top table. They continually refuse to let their electorate decide, but insist on deciding for themselves what is good for them.
Now, just let's think ...... that's right, the negotiating committee that comprises of what, 3 sacked reps and several more suspended; all of which would be unable to put themselves up for re-election if there was a deal.
Hmmm, let's think, now what is in it for them if they agree to Tony Woodleys' latest deliberations?
1. They won't get their jobs back
2. They will lose their control of BASSA (and their attempts at controlling BA) as fresh elections are already about a year overdue in BASSA
3. They lose their significant skimming off of the branch union dues each month
Just a thought.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we DO NOT these talks to have produced a suitable deal, we shall be asking Unite to issue a strike ballot in line with your recent mandate"
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA leadership has now publicly undercut any ability or chance of TW negotiating a settlement. Further talks are fruitless as BASSA leadership will approve the settlement not BASSA membership and we know what the leadership have said they will insist on. BASSA leadership has a problem though. Unite must call for the vote and Unite do not want a strike vote. BASSA leadership again overplays their hand. I would assume TW will soon be depicted with horns or a mustache.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would assume Tony Woodley will insist that whatever offer he and Willie Walsh put together is offered to CC directly, or Unite will not allow any further strike ballot.
Not that this is likely to be made public by either Unite or BASSA.
Not that this is likely to be made public by either Unite or BASSA.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to the update on uniteba.com BA is refusing to deroster Lizanne Malone for the meeting:
. XX
. XX