Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV

Old 17th Mar 2011, 12:02
  #1001 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Litebulbs - CO complaints

The law that the CO oversees is quite specific about who can access accounts.

Supplementary to the law is an open invitation to complain made by the CO - I think that an unentitled member of the public would have to present something compelling for the CO to act. Specifically, something more than a few words clipped from the internet. A verified copy of a letter from a union to one of its members refusing availability, for instance, might suffice. If you look at previous similar cases as per VK's post-up you'll see that the CO first established that a valid request had been made and refused before the law was enforced.

Only a guess.

On the other hand, the CO can take things raised in the media as a trigger for action and since we are corresponding on this forum (part of the 'new' media) perhaps things are already happening?

P.S. Re yr reply below: I sort of agree in that it ought to be compelling enough LB, but that's because I believe Bw's posts. What if Bw's posts were pure fiction?

Last edited by mrpony; 17th Mar 2011 at 12:39. Reason: PS added
mrpony is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 12:15
  #1002 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
mrpony

Surely the letter that BASSAwitch put in the public domain is compelling reason?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 12:30
  #1003 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
I don't doubt the letter/email exists; but a cut and paste on a web forum from a third party not connected with the correspondence is no evidence whatsoever.

BASSAwitch has the correspondence, is directly entitled to see the accounts and is in contact with the Certification Officer. They are the party best placed to take this forward; it would be good to see other Unite/BASSA members supporting their former "comrade" but I suppose "brotherhood" only goes so far.

Until we hear back from Bw, there is little to be gained from private individuals pursuing this.

I would still encourage those who do have a vested interest to contact the CO directly using the link below and support transparency, so that it is clear to members exactly how much is received in BASSA subs, what the reps get paid, and to assure them that an independent audit has been properly carried out which demonstrates no potential for fraud.

Certification Officer - Complaints

If, like the refusal to view the BA accounts, BASSA members are content not to see information to which they are legally entitled, then that is a matter for them, and they can keep sending cheques into a black hole.
VintageKrug is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 12:34
  #1004 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
VK

For what reason will these interested parties complain, if it is all based on a cut and paste made on a public forum?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 12:42
  #1005 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,665
LB,
Have you got out the wrong side of bed recently?
You appear to be a little obtuse and difficult, which is not your previous style.
From my idiot perspective, VK is providing detailed info on what might be done, and BW is doing it, entirely independently.

End of. Simples?
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 13:07
  #1006 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
AO

That may be your view, which you are certainly entitled to. As I see it, some are campaigning rather than posting on a point, which is my view.

A post was made detailing information on how to bring a complaint to the CO, from an interested party, so I have asked why the interested party who made the post, has not followed the intent of it.

It would seem that at least there is consistency if somebody holds a different opinion than the main body of the thread, but I have been called worse than difficult and obtuse on 'ere, so I suppose it goes with the territory.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 13:51
  #1007 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,665
Always look on the bright side of life

"Always look on the bright side of life, ti-dum, ti-dum"

As I've posted before, VK's arrival on here, (but not on flyer-talk) coincided with McCarthy's departure from BA.

Of course, VK has not denied that he is McC. (He actually said "Who's McC?", which was a very unusual comment from one who knows so much about this dispute.)
VK's articulation sounds like a BAe manager, which McC was. (BAE).

However, allowing for all that, Mr LB, might I suggest that you are, perhaps, protesting a little tooooo much about the VK role?
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 14:06
  #1008 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
AO

OK, I will stop, unless it is on something else not connected to the issue in question.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 15:14
  #1009 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
I have very clearly stated that I and anyone closely connected to me is not nor ever has been an employee in the travel industry, specifically BA, Burke Group, BAA etc. nor worked for BA in any way whatsoever (contractor etc.) and I hereby categorically state I am not "McCarthy" who I have since googled to learn was once an HR Director at BA.

Though I am told there has in the past been a whole thread on me on the BASSA forum which does seem somewhat paranoid and extreme, but if they prefer to waste time on conspiracy theories and people who post on internet bulletin boards while losing your membership and the argument, so be it.

I don't think one could make that anymore explicit unless I asked Stephen Fry to t w e e t it. At least Derek Simpson would get the message.

I would have no compuction whatsoever in raising the matter with the CO, however unlike the BASSAmentalists I am careful to assess the likelihood of success before heading in; at present Bw has stated the matter is being taken forward, has been directly in touch with BASSA and is personally entitled to view the accounts, and that avenue has the highest chance of success.

Again Litebulbs you don't seem to appreciate there is no allegation of financial wroingdoing; it is simply the act of refusing access to the accounts which is illegal.

But if BASSA members are content to throw money into BASSA without a care in the world, then they are completely entitled to do that. But was I a past or present member of any similar organisation I would be asking questions about where the 1.5m-2m of annual subs went for the past five years, not to seek out fraud, but to assure myself all was well.

Just for interest's sake it would be interesting to ask the same question of BALPA; would the accounts be made available without issue?

BASSA has so far failed to do that, and that is illegal.
VintageKrug is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 15:25
  #1010 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 455
I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet, but assuming BASSA comply with the law when requested to do so, are they entitled to make whoever has requested the information sign a non-disclosure agreement?

Because if they are, then the PPRuNe SLF feeding frenzy will never get off the ground.

ChicoG is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 15:47
  #1011 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: N. Spain
Age: 76
Posts: 1,309
I'm not sure if it has been mentioned yet, but assuming BASSA comply with the law when requested to do so, are they entitled to make whoever has requested the information sign a non-disclosure agreement?
As long as no irregularities come to light if/when the information is made available as requested.
Shack37 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 15:51
  #1012 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,665
VK - I could not see the point in you and LB tweaking each other.
I accept that you are not connected in any way with the "travel industry". We could spend weeks on JB trying to define that. Let's not.
Good. You'll both now stop it. We'll await BW's further posts - if they want to post any. As ChicoG says, we may all miss the feeding frenzy.

On the money front - and it is always worth following the money, I have always had enormous sympathies with Branch Secs in TUs dealing with the money. From the 70s on Merseyside...........Lots of big old pennies in ancient Old Holborn tins come to mind. However, somewhere between 1.5 and 2.0 million quid a year is some very real money.
To slightly mis-quote - a million here, a million there, and soon you're talking about real money........
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 15:58
  #1013 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Accounts confidentiality

There is no confidentiality requirement in the relevant Act for members or ex-members. If an accountant attends then they have to sign a confidentiality agreement.
mrpony is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 22:55
  #1014 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Cheshire
Age: 79
Posts: 122
Throughout this sorry tale, Litebulbs has been the staunch guardian of the trade union viewpoint. However, I fail to see how his insistence on VintageKrug entering the fray has anything to do with the legitimate request from Bassawitch for sight of the Bassa accounts. We await the revelation !
X767 is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 23:19
  #1015 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
X767

I am awaiting BASSAwitch and any info that may be brought back. I have learn't something on here on this issue, that lay reps can be paid a wage from members. Do I agree, no. Is it allowed, yes.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 17th Mar 2011, 23:32
  #1016 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
BUT

If I believed that a representative had been unfairly dismissed for trade union activities, morally rather than legally, then I would happily see a compensation remuneration paid from union funds, whether at branch or national level.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2011, 01:07
  #1017 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 73
LB

What do you consider to be "trade union activities"? Would setting up a porno site be "trade union activities"? Would DH's refusal to report to work be "trade union activities"? Would interfering with company investigation of vandalism be "trade union activities"? What is the definition of a "trade union activity"?
pcat160 is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2011, 08:03
  #1018 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Originally Posted by Litebulbs
If I believed that a representative had been unfairly dismissed for trade union activities, morally rather than legally, then I would happily see a compensation remuneration paid from union funds, whether at branch or national level.
That would suggest you believe the trade union to be above the law? Is that your position?
VintageKrug is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2011, 14:39
  #1019 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: London
Posts: 92
Liebulbs

Just to put the DH dismissal case into context...

Some years ago an ex-GMB rep colleague got involved in a dispute with a passenger (in support of a CC member) on board whilst on duty travel.

The CSD reported him to management and he was subsequently sacked (actually allowed to take early retirement on appeal). His behaviour WAS unprofessional and GMB did not support him. It may have been harsh, but he did bring BA and the union into disrepute.

Contrast that with DH. He was able to get away with unprofessional behaviour for some time despite official warnings. He has brought CC, BASSA and Unite into disrepute and I find it incredible that there are CC out there who still believe he was unfairly dismissed. As for UNITE, their reputation hasn't exactly been enhanced by this fiasco. A terrible advertisement for the union movement.
gr8tballsoffire is offline  
Old 18th Mar 2011, 14:58
  #1020 (permalink)  
RTR
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
gr8tballsofire
As for UNITE, their reputation hasn't exactly been enhanced by this fiasco. A terrible advertisement for the union movement.
Some of their conduct in the past two years has been reprehensible and even sometimes repugnant. McCluskey at Sandown was showboating, whilst Woodley and Simpson were going through the motions of supporting BASSA but all the while were thinking that the BASSA reps were "deluded clowns." Now that Woodley and Simpson have gone it is left to McCluskey (Lenny to his friends ) to showboat his support once again with rhetoric that is so worn out by previous 'great' union leaders leaving us with one sentence: they ALL RUN WITH THE HARE AND THE HOUNDS.

In McCluskey's case I cannot subscribe to anything other than he has lost his way, never mind the plot. The latest soft ball ballot will be a farce whatever the result.
RTR is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.