BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions III

[Litebulbs]

MPN11

No trying to prove anything, just looking for views. Please feel free to suggest modified or new questions that would suit the pax and SLF forum.

[Landroger]

Litebulbs

Any standard capability policy would do that. One thing I have learnt through being a rep, is that fellow employees are far more critical than any management team. It doesn't take to much effort so work out who would be a safe target for a capable management team.

The biggest single issue is that crews work as teams, but very rarely are they a team that knows the strength and weaknesses of each other in a big airline. That is the team of 15 or 10 or 4, will in all probability never fly together more than a handful of times through their entire careers. BA may have 2000 engineers, but the team breakdown is governed by shifts, who work together every day. Peer pressure about letting your mates down happens and you have competition between shifts, some good some bad.

I am not saying the flying community is unique, but there are not too many places where you have a workforce of 10000+ at one base, that don't know the in's and out's of at least 40 fellow colleagues.

I have to be really sick not to go in, because I personally know who will be working extra to cover for me. Do crew? That is not to say that anything more than a small minority of crew actually go sick because they don't care however.

With the invention of the Bradford Factor, sickness is a prime measure in redundancy situations in big workforces today, which has lead to people going in, when they should not. I will not let a cold lead to my redundancy in the future.

It would appear that we have more in common than I had originally imagined and your remarks about 'teams' are interesting. My work as a field service engineer positions me somewhere between yourself - in the workshop with the same 'team' of engineers around you - and the CC who, as you say, are obliged to work as a team grown more or less instantly in (I guess) the CRC?

Although I work, mostly, on my own I nevertheless consider myself to be part of a very strong team. A team who see the installed base as 'our machines' and feel responsible for the high performance of the equipment for our customers - specifically patients. As others have pointed out companies like mine - a big, big American one easy to guess - have very ordered structures for how we should do business, but it is my belief that we FEs work better than expected, because of the way we identify with our customers/patients and see ourselves as a team.

Perhaps small teams - I cannot even begin to suggest any detail for the CC situation - might be a way forward? They can be performance reviewed more easily and may well begin to feel the encouragement, support and 'can doism' available from working in an obviously close and functional team.

I hope you are feeling better, by the way!

Roger.

[Litebulbs]

Landroger

Do you have performance reviews at work and if so, what is the format? If you have them, do welcome or fear them?

[Landroger]

Litebulbs

We do and you will perhaps not be surprised to learn that we - as 'ordinary Brits' - cordially hate the process. We have to submit an annual update to our original submission, effectively 'bigging up' our achievements and 'wins' during the past year. Our first line manager will have done his or her own assessment, which I get to see and discuss at an annual 'appraisal'.

It is a very American process and as I say, we Brits are never comfortable with its format, except that we do, reluctantly, recognise that it is at least a half way reasonable way of assessing 'what we bring to the party'.

In my case, I am always dinged for my crap paperwork and praised and thanked for the technical and customer satisfaction side of my job. The written element of the process is supplimented by other measurements, such as 'applied time', although we hate that particular definition.

Perhaps I should point out that we are non union in the UK, but my peers in France are very unionised and those in Germany have the Betriebsraat (sp?).

ROger.

[flapsforty]

Originally Posted by rethymnon

that's why i come to this forum first: the CC forum lacks the sparkle and intelligence we get here. in fact, i wonder if the mods might consider a compulsory spell check over there?

Great idea rethymnon.
We could install it in connection with a "Capital letters; when to use them." guide.

Originally Posted by rethymnon

ps. have just noticed that on the other forum the Mods has indicated that some cabin crew have a 'horizontal career'! sorry, can't help chuckling.

So pleased to have added to some joy to your day.
In addition to having made you aware of a concept formulated back in 1998.

For more giggles you can google Professor A.G. Watts' inaugural professorial lecture titled "Reshaping career development for the 21st century."
It will have you rolling on the floor laughing.

Alternatively, if pressed for time and/or attention span, have a good belly laugh at the following hilarious line:

Career refers to an individual’s work and life roles over their lifespan. This makes it clear that people can progress through their career horizontally as well as vertically.

*****************************

Interesting discussion about performance management guys; any practical ideas on how to use it in relation to thousands of CC who are away from the office when they work and away form it when they don't?

________________________________

flapsforty
Member of the PPRuNe moderating team

[Litebulbs]

Landroger

Flaps has popped in and hasn't questioned our chat, so I guess we can carry on

Two points from your last post -

• bigging it up
• always dinged

I get the impression that bigging it up happens a lot in reviews, from talking to those that do or have them. If you can big it up, then to me, the process is wrong. Also, if you are always dinged for paperwork (as I would be!), then the system does not work.

To me, you either need to be ruthless and let fear drive success, or have a system that employees value and see the benefit of and actually want. I like the second process, but getting it would be hard work for both sides of the desk!

[slf22]

I've had three jobs in different areas of the public sector (heavily unionised) over the past ten years and all three of them have annual appraisals and probationary appraisal type affairs. Contrary to the belief of some on the other thread an appraisal doesn't take all day - the meeting will be perhaps 1 to 2 hours. You have to fill in the form before that meeting and work out what progress has been made since your last appraisal. Of course it depends on your manager (or maybe how seriously your manager's manager takes it) as to whether it is more than a paper shuffling exercise but that's the same with everything. After the meeting your manager provides you with an action plan - things to improve (if there are any) and training you should undergo over the course of the next year. You both sign off on that.

[Litebulbs]

slf22

If you use your figure for the time taken for the review, it would need 12 reviewers (managers), carrying out 4 reviews a day, for every working day of the year in the crew community. Also, who reviews the reviewers to sample for consistency?

[Litebulbs]

Come on Pax & SLF, only 20 replies but a 1000 views. It only takes a couple of minutes -

Perfomance Review Survey of Pprune Members

[PAXboy]

I think that the topic is absolutely germane to this thread:

I worked in telecommunications/IT for 27 years and in a wide variety of organisations. From local govt to American merchant bank in the City of London, also I have worked freelance and in other countries.

In short, I watched the introduction of appraisals with mixed feelings and that has not changed in the 22 or so years since I first encountered them. I have been the subject of them and had to conduct them for my own staff. Whilst they were introduced with the (I trust) intention of fairness and openness, they are just like any other human process - open to movement in either direction. The 'bigging' and the 'dinging', as so eloquently named.

I have seen both of those pressures exerted, and both for and against myself. The biggest problem is that: Everybody presumed/presumes that more 'bigging' takes place than 'dinging'. So, any appraisal is automatically 'downgraded' in the mind of the senior line mgr and HR. Thus, if an appraisal contains a fair amount of 'dinging' it is perceived to be MORE than it is. What might be intended as a small 'ding' to the person to encourage them forward, can turn into an almighty 'dang' when viewed higher up the scale!

It is in the interests of many to big up, so that the reviewing mgr appears to be bringing their staff onward and upward and so they get rewarded. By the time it is found not to be the case, the mgr in question has probably left to join another company and repeat the process.

It's a bit like signing off the tech sheet of an a/c. All the process' are designed to be done with due diligence and not to be scrimped or changed in any way. If one engineer tries to bypass the system with shoddy work - it will usually be spotted quickly. But if there is a groundswell of movement to shoddy work [false appraisals] then it may be difficult to spot for quite some time. It will rely on someone with old fashioned skills and sense of fair play to bring it into the open. They may even have to blow the whistle.

When I joined one company, I was given glowing reports about one of my new staff by the mgmt. She fooled me for about two years. Only then did I see the cracks in the system and her work. She was doing just enough but had managed to fool others into promoting her. Yet she was laughing behind our backs and not carrying out the instructions I had given. She worked at a remote location, which made it more difficult to monitor closely. Those that did know what was happening, could not speak as they were dependent on her for their appraisals. Once I realised what had happened, I tightened the screws and found that she was lacking. Eventually, she left the company but she should not have got that far.

Bigging and Dinging happens every day in every company. So - no appraisal system, or one that can be subverted? Bear in mind that, whatever system of promotion is used, it WILL be subverted!

[Litebulbs]

PAXboy

Hammer, nail, head!

[Roccoreid]

For details of the Militaries reports best look at Rick Jolly's In Confidence for the best way to phrase.

To say this Royal Marines behaviour was unacceptable is a given, even his shockproof watch was embarrassed.

The intentions of Lt Cdr XXX are devious. If I were the Pope and him a Catholic I would be worried.

This Officer has decided that he has only a certain number of heartbeats and he does not intend to waste them on the sports fields.

Works well when cornered

This man is depriving a village of its idiot.

My Medical Officer is a contradiction. She knows tight clothes restricts circulation yet the tighter her clothes the more she circulates.

[Litebulbs]

Roccoreid

Now that is a proper left field post! You will probably find that Bassa are to blame however

[Landroger]

LB & Paxboy

Hammer, nail, head!

Sadly, I fear, you are both right. Paxboy has experience from both sides of the Appraisal Table and has given us a remarkably clear outline of the way it works. I once had an immediate manager with whom I (uniquely in nearly 35 years) had a personality clash, plain and simple. I recognised early on that it was 'six of one and half dozen of the other' and just stayed away from him. I made it my business to stay off his radar and visit the office as little as possible - once or twice a year was my best.

He, on the other hand, was incapable of leaving me alone and in this respect he, I consider, was seriously at fault. As a manager he should have recognised there was a problem and requested that I be 'managed' by another branch manager. At the time perfectly possible. However, he did not and there was almost open, public war between us. The way I work hasn't changed over the years, but I found out many years after him, that he had submitted poor appraisal reports on me on several subsequent years, after one infamous appraisal where he took four hours to tell me I was 'a level four'. A level at which - according to the company process book - a could not work equally with my peer group. It was usually me that was sent to help my peers when they were in trouble.

I had to refuse to accept the assessment and demand to meet the UK Service manager - who defended his prote'ge' somewhat apologetically - and hammered out a 'deal' that would overcome the immediate problem - not the subsequent six years. So, Paxboy is perfectly correct in saying that even the structured, corporate system like that, can and will be abused.

However, there is no doubt that the hard working, conscientious majority - as well as the 'walk on water' highflying minority - are negatively effected by poor performing, incompetent minorities. Which brings us back to where we started with performance assessing a large body of transient staff such as Cabin Crew.

ROger.

[rethymnon]

performance review

a few more relevant points:
1. it should be just that - a 'review,, not a 'revelation'. too often the manager uses it to bring up issues that should have been aired at the time the problem cropped up. otherwise the appraisee has no opportunity to modify his behaviour.

2. the appraisee should be entitled to a) request further training if there are identified areas of weakness. you can't ding an appraisee yet deny him/her the opportunity to improve performance and b)raise any issues where his/her job has been made more difficult by lack of personnel, equipment or managerial support.

personally, i found a refusal to 'sign-off' on an appraisal was sufficient to get a critical manager to revise it to a more acceptable form.

I do not see that it is impossible to appraise cabin crew because they work away from base or because they work in no settled team. these factors can be turned to advantage. cabin crew will be appraised over time by (properly trained-not always a given factor) senior staff and the fact that they are working with numerous seniors should help to eliminate the sort of personal bias that has been mentioned.

[Roccoreid]

The Royal Naval system of reporting gives each Subject a 24hr period to read and then comment on the report. This system allows people to contest factual inaccuracies as part of the reporting mechanism. However you get a mid period appraisal that is a quick highlight of good but more importantly things to improve. If something crops up between that and the report a written report highlighting faults would be expected.

I highlight this as the military is often seen as bad in these areas but in reality the Divisional System (an officer or Chief Petty Officer will run about 10 - 15 people) gives the report writer a structure to follow. In theory no surprises should come out of the annual report as constant dialogue is order of the day (it might just be that dialogue was strong verbal guidance in a forceful manner ie bollocking). Also our reporting is geared for merit for promotion. Performance pay of a type exists but we are much more promotion to gain pay based.

But this relies upon someone, normally the Leading Hand supervisor and above having contact in some form to review people.

Interestingly for the very new 19yr lads or lasses it comes as a very big shock to have a report that is not stellar. They tend to have gone through the school system with each report telling them they are the best and all is well. I have had to talk many youngsters through what the reporting chain is about. If you have been in the Navy less time than I have been on the crest of a wave you are not going to be A+ material first year, you need to build experience towards achieving Ninja status.

[Dawdler]

I see on the other thread that there is a discussion over rostered hours and the split between flying and duty hours. One of the first contributors mentioned that they had been rostered for 143 hours in January. There is some confusion as to whether these were duty or flying hours. Apparently if they were the latter it would be illegal. If that is the case we must assume that they are duty hours, This has been described as "busy" but not impossible. Therefore as it seems to equate to a 35 hour week for duty hours, are we now asked to consider a 35 hour week onerous? I speak as one who has endured 60 hour (5 x 12hours) weeks on alternate days and nights in a factory. That I do regard as onerous.

[Juan Tugoh]

Dawdler

Therefore as it seems to equate to a 35 hour week for duty hours, are we now asked to consider a 35 hour week onerous? I speak as one who has endured 60 hour (5 x 12hours) weeks on alternate days and nights in a factory. That I do regard as onerous.

This has been done to death. I suggest a reading of the fairly recent pages of the two active threads on this issue will give you an insight into crewing hours etc. Suffice it to say that 100 flying hours in a 28 day period (and the associated duty hours limits) are legal limits that have been put in place after some intensive scientific studies into fatigue. There are valid safety reasons for these limits and while, in your opinion, you do not think that it equates to hard work, your opinion is not based on any scientific evidence.

[Litebulbs]

Dawdler

If you look at the other thread, it has been suggested that for 11 months, duty hours are 192, with 180 in the last. This gives an average of 44 hours a week on duty. That is not too much below what is the maximum anybody can work, without opting out of the WTD.

[Roccoreid]

On the other thread someone mentioned that the course for the Terminal staff (bookings, checkin and such) is longer than the Cabin Crew course. That strikes me as odd, can someone in the know confirm this?????