BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't put too much into it. It's a typical hi-jack of a dispute by the likes of the Socialist Workers Party as mentioned by Ancient Observer. It happens at some stage in most major disputes with a large national profile.
It only confirms how out of touch they are with TU membership...I doubt even those who vote for IA will do so based on that document.
It only confirms how out of touch they are with TU membership...I doubt even those who vote for IA will do so based on that document.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And backwards we go...
http://www.uniteba.com/LATESTNEWSUPDATES.html
A select group of senior reps from the joint negotiating committee will be meeting with Tony Woodley and Co tomorrow to discuss the way forwards.
It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.
Definition: Negotiation - mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.
In view of the recent impositions which fly in the face of agreed and required negotiation principles, the company would need to now clearly demonstrate their genuine willingness to be “committed to beginning the process of restoring and improving relationships at all levels” as contained in their latest offer, under Working Together.
In order to restore the relationship and for us all to recognise the merit of that intent, as we understand it, the issues that BA now need to resolve are very simple:
(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);
(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);
(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).
A select group of senior reps from the joint negotiating committee will be meeting with Tony Woodley and Co tomorrow to discuss the way forwards.
It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.
Definition: Negotiation - mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.
In view of the recent impositions which fly in the face of agreed and required negotiation principles, the company would need to now clearly demonstrate their genuine willingness to be “committed to beginning the process of restoring and improving relationships at all levels” as contained in their latest offer, under Working Together.
In order to restore the relationship and for us all to recognise the merit of that intent, as we understand it, the issues that BA now need to resolve are very simple:
(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);
(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);
(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't put too much into it. It's a typical hi-jack of a dispute by the likes of the Socialist Workers Party as mentioned by Ancient Observer. It happens at some stage in most major disputes with a large national profile.
It only confirms how out of touch they are with TU membership...I doubt even those who vote for IA will do so based on that document.
It only confirms how out of touch they are with TU membership...I doubt even those who vote for IA will do so based on that document.
Of course the crowning irony is that what we have here is a classic example of left wing hypocrisy. If the militants in the union were true to their left wing beliefs, they would not be working for a capitalist organisation. They would have set up their own collective operation. Moreover, they would recognise the equal value of other workers within the enterprise, so clerical staff, ground crew and even sales people would be acknowledged as having equal say. Quite a contrast to the rather pompous view expressed by some BASSA supporters that cabin crew are the most important part of the organisation.
I just wonder how many of the remaining BASSA members truly understand what life in a Marxist/Leninist state is really like. When the notion of luxury for the masses is frowned on. Where there are no such things as designer labels. Where utilitarian is the watchword.
Maybe the best example of what happens when a left wing sponsored group seize control of a nation is Zimbabwe, where both ZANU and ZAPU wee sponsored by the Chinese communist party and the Soviet communist party respectively. Come to think of it, the current leader of Zimbabwe has shown a remarkable reluctance to relinquish power. Who does that remind you of ?
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LD12986:
What are they thinking? This is madness.
There is no individual other than the most militant of Cabin Crew that can defend this communication.
Rather makes a mockery of their request for negotiation but for once they have stripped away the rhetoric and are finally stating what they specifically want...though it is incredible that what they are demanding won't even settle the dispute in their eyes but simply be an act of good will on BA's part.
Fools rush in....
What are they thinking? This is madness.
(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);
(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);
(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).
(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);
(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).
Rather makes a mockery of their request for negotiation but for once they have stripped away the rhetoric and are finally stating what they specifically want...though it is incredible that what they are demanding won't even settle the dispute in their eyes but simply be an act of good will on BA's part.
Fools rush in....
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given that the item appears on a union sponsored site, it is painfully obvious that this diatribe, if cobbled together by the SWP or similar trendy lefty organisation, was written with the full knowledge and I daresay, at the behest of the branch leadership.
Of course the crowning irony is that what we have here is a classic example of left wing hypocrisy. If the militants in the union were true to their left wing beliefs, they would not be working for a capitalist organisation. They would have set up their own collective operation. Moreover, they would recognise the equal value of other workers within the enterprise, so clerical staff, ground crew and even sales people would be acknowledged as having equal say. Quite a contrast to the rather pompous view expressed by some BASSA supporters that cabin crew are the most important part of the organisation.
I just wonder how many of the remaining BASSA members truly understand what life in a Marxist/Leninist state is really like. When the notion of luxury for the masses is frowned on. Where there are no such things as designer labels. Where utilitarian is the watchword.
Maybe the best example of what happens when a left wing sponsored group seize control of a nation is Zimbabwe, where both ZANU and ZAPU wee sponsored by the Chinese communist party and the Soviet communist party respectively. Come to think of it, the current leader of Zimbabwe has shown a remarkable reluctance to relinquish power. Who does that remind you of ?
Of course the crowning irony is that what we have here is a classic example of left wing hypocrisy. If the militants in the union were true to their left wing beliefs, they would not be working for a capitalist organisation. They would have set up their own collective operation. Moreover, they would recognise the equal value of other workers within the enterprise, so clerical staff, ground crew and even sales people would be acknowledged as having equal say. Quite a contrast to the rather pompous view expressed by some BASSA supporters that cabin crew are the most important part of the organisation.
I just wonder how many of the remaining BASSA members truly understand what life in a Marxist/Leninist state is really like. When the notion of luxury for the masses is frowned on. Where there are no such things as designer labels. Where utilitarian is the watchword.
Maybe the best example of what happens when a left wing sponsored group seize control of a nation is Zimbabwe, where both ZANU and ZAPU wee sponsored by the Chinese communist party and the Soviet communist party respectively. Come to think of it, the current leader of Zimbabwe has shown a remarkable reluctance to relinquish power. Who does that remind you of ?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At this stage, and in the interests of acceleratng a conclusion, if I was BA I would pull the pin from the proverbial grenade and toss it into the BASSA/AMICUS/Unite meeting later today by taking the current offer off the table (on the legitimate grounds of BASSA/AMICUS's failure to recommend) and then watching the ensuing bickering, in-fighting and panic with mild amusement.
This would remove several of the options from the Union and its Branches' discussions leaving them with nowhere to go but either call a strike ballot or capitulate to working under the present Ts & Cs for the foreseeable future.
Unite cannot possibly approve a strike ballot and BASSA/AMICUS will not capitulate - but there would be no other options.
But then I have been known to be mischievous!
This would remove several of the options from the Union and its Branches' discussions leaving them with nowhere to go but either call a strike ballot or capitulate to working under the present Ts & Cs for the foreseeable future.
Unite cannot possibly approve a strike ballot and BASSA/AMICUS will not capitulate - but there would be no other options.
But then I have been known to be mischievous!
Last edited by AV Flyer; 16th Nov 2010 at 02:09.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: US
Age: 77
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AV Flyer
At this stage, and in the interests of acceleratng a conclusion, if I was BA I would pull the pin from the proverbial grenade and toss it into the BASSA/AMICUS/Unite meeting later today by taking the current offer off the table (on the legitimate grounds of BASSA/AMICUS's failure to recommend) and then watching the ensuing bickering, in-fighting and panic with mild amusement.
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the latest BASSA missive posted in the other thread
So they've finally realised what a liability Duncan is! 
Is it right that your democratically elected union representatives and your union, are trampled over by the mantra, ego and dogmatism of one person?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AV Flyer:
I'm sure its tempting... but my money is on BA lettting the staff keep Staff travel as agreed, only to individually lose it again if they are involved infurther industrial action.
This way, when the Union call the next strike, how many of the staff will strike:
a) and actually have the stomach to lose those benefits again, in the knowledge that the union most certainly can't get the benfeits back in "5 minutes" (instead waiting for a possible 5 year plus journey through the European courts)
b) strike knowing that the legal grounds were being contested and could be unprotected, and result in instant dismissal, and the end of their career, and all of their T&C's
Game over BASSA?
Colonel White:
Indeed, the irony works on so many levels! If these BASSA militants were so ingrained in these beliefs would they really be basing the core of their careers around looking after First and business Class passengers?!
if I was BA I would pull the pin from the proverbial grenade and toss it into the BASSA/AMICUS/Unite meeting later today by taking the current offer off the table (on the legitimate grounds of BASSA/AMICUS's failure to recommend) and then watching the ensuing bickering, in-fighting and panic with mild amusement.
This way, when the Union call the next strike, how many of the staff will strike:
a) and actually have the stomach to lose those benefits again, in the knowledge that the union most certainly can't get the benfeits back in "5 minutes" (instead waiting for a possible 5 year plus journey through the European courts)
b) strike knowing that the legal grounds were being contested and could be unprotected, and result in instant dismissal, and the end of their career, and all of their T&C's
Game over BASSA?
Colonel White:
If the militants in the union were true to their left wing beliefs, they would not be working for a capitalist organisation.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Sussex
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).
PCCC are you going to let them get away with this ?
PCCC are you going to let them get away with this ?
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AV Flyer:
I must respectfully disagree.
If I were BA I believe I would leave the offer on the table, and continue with the return of staff travel at its present level for strikers.
Let it lie there, with its pay raises, opportunity for full return of staff travel, etc., to show contrast to the inflammatory rhetoric that offers no concrete results to BASSA and Amicus members.
My belief is that it is never a good move to meet extremism with extremism in negotiations. If the opposition is insisting upon cooking its own goose you leave them alone in the kitchen.
I must respectfully disagree.
If I were BA I believe I would leave the offer on the table, and continue with the return of staff travel at its present level for strikers.
Let it lie there, with its pay raises, opportunity for full return of staff travel, etc., to show contrast to the inflammatory rhetoric that offers no concrete results to BASSA and Amicus members.
My belief is that it is never a good move to meet extremism with extremism in negotiations. If the opposition is insisting upon cooking its own goose you leave them alone in the kitchen.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diplome - I agree, it's just the devil in me wanting to break out - but not entirely.
The sad and pathetic fact is that BASSA/AMICUS have lost badly and they simply don't realise it. Unfortunately, from now on they are going to make increasingly ludicrous demands and wildly thrashing gestures as their desperation grows while to the rest of us observers making themselves look stupid. Part of me was wanting to spare the embarrassment of this ugly spectacle by bringing the whole sorry mess to a close in the shortest possible time.
By denying their rank and file members a consultative ballot on the current offer BASSA/AMICUS's reps have denied themselves valuable feedback on the true level of support they would have for a strike so, along with not realising they have lost, they are now rushing head-strong into a strike ballot, with its associated fall-out with Unite and its strong potential for being unprotected, in the misguided belief their foot soldiers are firmly behind them.
Cooking their own goose - self combustion - shooting themselves in their feet - BASSA/AMICUS and their reps are going down in an ugly way and, as you correctly observe, all that BA have to do is take a ring-side seat and watch.
AVF
P.S. Ironically, BASSA & AMICUS appear to be working together more coherently now than they ever have before - pity they couldn't have done this a lot sooner.......
The sad and pathetic fact is that BASSA/AMICUS have lost badly and they simply don't realise it. Unfortunately, from now on they are going to make increasingly ludicrous demands and wildly thrashing gestures as their desperation grows while to the rest of us observers making themselves look stupid. Part of me was wanting to spare the embarrassment of this ugly spectacle by bringing the whole sorry mess to a close in the shortest possible time.
By denying their rank and file members a consultative ballot on the current offer BASSA/AMICUS's reps have denied themselves valuable feedback on the true level of support they would have for a strike so, along with not realising they have lost, they are now rushing head-strong into a strike ballot, with its associated fall-out with Unite and its strong potential for being unprotected, in the misguided belief their foot soldiers are firmly behind them.
Cooking their own goose - self combustion - shooting themselves in their feet - BASSA/AMICUS and their reps are going down in an ugly way and, as you correctly observe, all that BA have to do is take a ring-side seat and watch.
AVF
P.S. Ironically, BASSA & AMICUS appear to be working together more coherently now than they ever have before - pity they couldn't have done this a lot sooner.......
Last edited by AV Flyer; 16th Nov 2010 at 11:36.
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough is enough
Surely CC will see from this that BASSA are now in the final stages of digging their own graves and don't seem to mind who they take with them.
They have painted themselves in to a corner with just about everyone, very few have any respect for what they stand for or what they want. The latest missive regarding negotiation is remarkable, describing what they feel negotiation is and then stating that before they start to negotiate that they want a certain set of criteria fulfilled!
They are scoring so many own goals...Mr Woodley now appears to be the latest target as he couldn't give them what they demanded and therefore they are stamping their feet and seem to be attempting to go it alone, despite the courts proving previously that they were unable to 'negotiate' in any coherant manner. I wonder if Mr Woodley is close to casting them free. I bet BA can't believe just how well this is going...BASSA/CC89 are doing a better job of cost reduction and reducing union influence than they could have ever hoped for.
Surely now CC, take a step back and just for a moment try to avoid confirmation bias. Take a couple of moments to ask yourself if there are any reasons to think that you are being led astray, perhaps not even maliciously but through sheers incompetence. Ask yourself why even members of Unite are not backing BASSA and are even voluntering to work in your absence? Look at the facts and don't be too proud admit that you may have made a mistake. Your colleagues will support you...everyone wants this to end and to move forward.
If you feel that you must follow the BASSA leadership...that is your perogative, but please find out where they are taking you and what is in it for you.
They have painted themselves in to a corner with just about everyone, very few have any respect for what they stand for or what they want. The latest missive regarding negotiation is remarkable, describing what they feel negotiation is and then stating that before they start to negotiate that they want a certain set of criteria fulfilled!
They are scoring so many own goals...Mr Woodley now appears to be the latest target as he couldn't give them what they demanded and therefore they are stamping their feet and seem to be attempting to go it alone, despite the courts proving previously that they were unable to 'negotiate' in any coherant manner. I wonder if Mr Woodley is close to casting them free. I bet BA can't believe just how well this is going...BASSA/CC89 are doing a better job of cost reduction and reducing union influence than they could have ever hoped for.
Surely now CC, take a step back and just for a moment try to avoid confirmation bias. Take a couple of moments to ask yourself if there are any reasons to think that you are being led astray, perhaps not even maliciously but through sheers incompetence. Ask yourself why even members of Unite are not backing BASSA and are even voluntering to work in your absence? Look at the facts and don't be too proud admit that you may have made a mistake. Your colleagues will support you...everyone wants this to end and to move forward.
If you feel that you must follow the BASSA leadership...that is your perogative, but please find out where they are taking you and what is in it for you.
The SWP ARE back in this dispute.
I have heard from a reasonable (but not always perfect) source that the SWP have taken up positions in this dispute again.
Let's be very clear - the SWP and their friends do not give a fig for the BA CC, and are not interested in solving the problem - they just want the fight and the publicity. They are run by millionaires, so the fate of a few BA CC is way down on their list of priorities.
We will now see traditional SWP positions emerge - the "negotiated" compromises that WW and the Unite Gen Secs have reached will be abandoned. Rather, the bassa/amicus junta will revert to positions at the extreme end of their earlier demands. e.g. rather than agreeing the de-facto manning standards, they will ask for a much higher crewing number on every plane. Rather than talk about ACAS arbitration, they will ask for immediate re-instatement of everyone, including DH and the person fired back in 2007, and that re-instatement will be a pre-condition to even meeting BA..
.............and so on.
Then, when BA start moving away from the negotiated positions, the SWP fascists will claim "foul" and try to get on the moral high ground opposite ordinary crew members.
I've lived/worked through this sort of political domination of industrial disputes, and the only way through for BA now is to play hard-ball, but with an eye to the moral high ground.
Compared to SWP and friends, even DH makes sense.
Let's be very clear - the SWP and their friends do not give a fig for the BA CC, and are not interested in solving the problem - they just want the fight and the publicity. They are run by millionaires, so the fate of a few BA CC is way down on their list of priorities.
We will now see traditional SWP positions emerge - the "negotiated" compromises that WW and the Unite Gen Secs have reached will be abandoned. Rather, the bassa/amicus junta will revert to positions at the extreme end of their earlier demands. e.g. rather than agreeing the de-facto manning standards, they will ask for a much higher crewing number on every plane. Rather than talk about ACAS arbitration, they will ask for immediate re-instatement of everyone, including DH and the person fired back in 2007, and that re-instatement will be a pre-condition to even meeting BA..
.............and so on.
Then, when BA start moving away from the negotiated positions, the SWP fascists will claim "foul" and try to get on the moral high ground opposite ordinary crew members.
I've lived/worked through this sort of political domination of industrial disputes, and the only way through for BA now is to play hard-ball, but with an eye to the moral high ground.
Compared to SWP and friends, even DH makes sense.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I were BA I believe I would leave the offer on the table, and continue with the return of staff travel at its present level for strikers.
Let it lie there, with its pay raises, opportunity for full return of staff travel, etc., to show contrast to the inflammatory rhetoric that offers no concrete results to BASSA and Amicus members.
Let it lie there, with its pay raises, opportunity for full return of staff travel, etc., to show contrast to the inflammatory rhetoric that offers no concrete results to BASSA and Amicus members.
I suspect BA will wait until they know the Xmas period cant be hit and will then go all in to end it.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure there is an "all in" for BA without a strike ballot being issued.
There are of course, some business decisions that may be made as the result of BASSA and Amicus' rather bizarre and inflammatory behavior.
Mid Fleet, within training capacity, can be accellerated with their mandate being expanded to include routes that are most lucative to BA. It would be unreasonable to expect BA to keep a "hands off" policy on those routes when BASSA and Amicus are intentionally placing their viability in peril.
Of course, if BASSA and Amicus call for strikes then BA and its employees will respond appropriately, and that could be a tad painful (an understatement) for the militant crew.
It will be interesting to see how Unite respond to the actions of BASSA. Unite is undergoing significant challenges and changes not related to this dispute. How will they respond to the tail trying to wag the dog?
There are of course, some business decisions that may be made as the result of BASSA and Amicus' rather bizarre and inflammatory behavior.
Mid Fleet, within training capacity, can be accellerated with their mandate being expanded to include routes that are most lucative to BA. It would be unreasonable to expect BA to keep a "hands off" policy on those routes when BASSA and Amicus are intentionally placing their viability in peril.
Of course, if BASSA and Amicus call for strikes then BA and its employees will respond appropriately, and that could be a tad painful (an understatement) for the militant crew.
It will be interesting to see how Unite respond to the actions of BASSA. Unite is undergoing significant challenges and changes not related to this dispute. How will they respond to the tail trying to wag the dog?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
manintheback
suspect BA will wait until they know the Xmas period cant be hit and will then go all in to end it.
Assuming that Unite allowed BASSA to issue a ballot tomorrow, the ballot would close in 4 weeks, i.e. 15th December.
One week prior notice would then have to be given, which makes 22nd December the earliest it could happen (ignoring lack of protected status etc for the moment).
So BASSA have only three days to convince unite to ballot to hit xmas day by my math.
So CC89 have openly listed 4 areas of dispute clearly linked to the current dispute. There can be no denying that any imminent strike will be unprotected. Its almost as if they are daring BA to sack their members...
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: 45 yards from a tropical beach
Posts: 1,103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
manintheback
You, Sir, are a wimp. I have never worked for BA, but I say that they will win through, despite the shouts of BASSA, and your booking would be safe. Show some mettle, man, otherwise why post on here?
You, Sir, are a wimp. I have never worked for BA, but I say that they will win through, despite the shouts of BASSA, and your booking would be safe. Show some mettle, man, otherwise why post on here?