BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV
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
Though is it not fair to say that a lot of the ring leaders are/have handing BA excuses to dismiss them without any help from Unite.
I did hear a very little whisper that BA are investigating the branch chair over the posting of a MF roster on the internet a while back
I did hear a very little whisper that BA are investigating the branch chair over the posting of a MF roster on the internet a while back
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just don't believe that BA have gone through 14 months of this dispute to settle now with little result other than thousands of embittered cabin crew (who have lost staff travel entitlements and salaries) and, more importantly now, with BASSA still in place.
Even if BA want an immediate settlement, stopping this strike by warning BASSA \ Unite about the legality of the strike makes no sense to me.
BASSA and Unite will just reballot?? And we'll have another strike in the summer which just drags this dispute out even further (and into the summer schedules)?? Or do you believe that a reballot will produce a different result??
Note the pre-conditions that BASSA \ Unite have before they return to the negotiating table is all their toys back ...... do you really believe that BA will cave in to these demands now ........
Even if BA want an immediate settlement, stopping this strike by warning BASSA \ Unite about the legality of the strike makes no sense to me.
BASSA and Unite will just reballot?? And we'll have another strike in the summer which just drags this dispute out even further (and into the summer schedules)?? Or do you believe that a reballot will produce a different result??
Note the pre-conditions that BASSA \ Unite have before they return to the negotiating table is all their toys back ...... do you really believe that BA will cave in to these demands now ........
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBB,
We will just have to agree to have different opinions.
Speaking as someone who is right in the middle of this and has lived through the last 2 years working along side strikers and listening to all their rhetoric and reading and listening to everything BA has said, I personally feel that the tide is changing. Strikers are starting to openly criticise Bassa in a way I have not seen before and BA have always said that they want to settle this, all be it on their terms.
BA originally wanted huge changes to our working practices but have accepted that, for now at least, we can keep our current terms and conditions and have instead decided to achieve saving through Mixed Fleet. To date BA have actually got ALL the savings they were after from cabin crew with the introduction of Mixed Fleet and the crew compliment changes which also reduced the number of in charge crew on longhaul flights and reduced it to just one on E/F flights. These savings are ongoing year on year and will increase further year on year as current WW and E/F crew leave and Mixed Fleet expands.
BA don't need to do anything because they have actually, thanks to Bassa, achieved MORE than they had hoped for. If Bassa do ballot again BA will just take it on the chin again because they have all the savings they wanted plus more and eventually Bassa will lose the will to carry on and as I have said, I am seeing that online already.
Just my opinion.
We will just have to agree to have different opinions.
Speaking as someone who is right in the middle of this and has lived through the last 2 years working along side strikers and listening to all their rhetoric and reading and listening to everything BA has said, I personally feel that the tide is changing. Strikers are starting to openly criticise Bassa in a way I have not seen before and BA have always said that they want to settle this, all be it on their terms.
BA originally wanted huge changes to our working practices but have accepted that, for now at least, we can keep our current terms and conditions and have instead decided to achieve saving through Mixed Fleet. To date BA have actually got ALL the savings they were after from cabin crew with the introduction of Mixed Fleet and the crew compliment changes which also reduced the number of in charge crew on longhaul flights and reduced it to just one on E/F flights. These savings are ongoing year on year and will increase further year on year as current WW and E/F crew leave and Mixed Fleet expands.
BA don't need to do anything because they have actually, thanks to Bassa, achieved MORE than they had hoped for. If Bassa do ballot again BA will just take it on the chin again because they have all the savings they wanted plus more and eventually Bassa will lose the will to carry on and as I have said, I am seeing that online already.
Just my opinion.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More than happy to agree to disagree ... that is what debate is all about. 
One point - please don't think it is only cabin crew that have been at the center of this for the last 2 years. The whole of BA have been dragged through the mud by striking cabin crew and I think that you may be a little too optimistic about the way things will pan out for those who continue in their thousands (5751?) to vote for strike action.
One point - please don't think it is only cabin crew that have been at the center of this for the last 2 years. The whole of BA have been dragged through the mud by striking cabin crew and I think that you may be a little too optimistic about the way things will pan out for those who continue in their thousands (5751?) to vote for strike action.
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To achieve a clean "win" to this dispute BA needs to have the existing BASSA leadership and its key militant reps ousted and replaced with more professional, constructive and mature minded people. Whether the CC's new form of union leadership continues under the name of BASSA or PCCC or anything else does not matter to BA. There is simply no other solution that could be acceptable to BA as without this BASSA would just keep acting up again and again spewing its entrenched vitriolic hatred of BA at every possible turn.
Frustratingly, BA can do very little to force this to happen as it can only be achieved by BASSA's members either voting in new leaders or voting with their feet and leaving thus permitting BA to derecognise what is left. Neither of which, until recently, have BASSA's members been very motivated to undertake. BA has had no choice but to sit by and watch as it is illegal for it to do anything, positive or negative, to encourage CC to leave BASSA.
As such it is very hard to say whether BA's strategy should be to attempt to block the currently threatened IA through either injunction or by warning BASSA of unprotected status (with or without implied consequences) and risk continued action later in the Summer or whether to sit back and quietly allow IA to go ahead and clinically sack any strikers or to pursue any other strategy for that matter.
As BA wishes to preserve its good public image by not taking the nuclear option, it really has no choice but to fight this battle as a war of attrition. As such, I believe its only option is to continue picking away at every opportunity with every weapon it has to hand at the time. This includes suspending misbehaving reps, calling injunctions to stop IA following flawed ballots, choosing not to negotiate on the reasoned basis that Unite/BASSA/CC89's proven dysfuntion makes this impossible, etc., while BASSA's current leadership slowly self-implodes.
A strategy that does appear to be working even though significant brand damage is being done and morale among CC is poor both of which I'm sure BA is already planning how to repair once this is over.
Frustratingly, BA can do very little to force this to happen as it can only be achieved by BASSA's members either voting in new leaders or voting with their feet and leaving thus permitting BA to derecognise what is left. Neither of which, until recently, have BASSA's members been very motivated to undertake. BA has had no choice but to sit by and watch as it is illegal for it to do anything, positive or negative, to encourage CC to leave BASSA.
As such it is very hard to say whether BA's strategy should be to attempt to block the currently threatened IA through either injunction or by warning BASSA of unprotected status (with or without implied consequences) and risk continued action later in the Summer or whether to sit back and quietly allow IA to go ahead and clinically sack any strikers or to pursue any other strategy for that matter.
As BA wishes to preserve its good public image by not taking the nuclear option, it really has no choice but to fight this battle as a war of attrition. As such, I believe its only option is to continue picking away at every opportunity with every weapon it has to hand at the time. This includes suspending misbehaving reps, calling injunctions to stop IA following flawed ballots, choosing not to negotiate on the reasoned basis that Unite/BASSA/CC89's proven dysfuntion makes this impossible, etc., while BASSA's current leadership slowly self-implodes.
A strategy that does appear to be working even though significant brand damage is being done and morale among CC is poor both of which I'm sure BA is already planning how to repair once this is over.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminishing support
BetterByBoat said
Actually, unless Unite issues strike dates quite soon (the last day is next Friday) then the figure of 5751 will never again be achieved - probably less than 5000 if this vote to strike is unfulfilled.
BASSA will change or otherwise it will give way to PCCC - BASSA has an option to survive if it genuinely wishes to stay in business.
those who continue in their thousands (5751?) to vote for strike action
BASSA will change or otherwise it will give way to PCCC - BASSA has an option to survive if it genuinely wishes to stay in business.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Sorry, just eaten and Rugby about to kick off ... 
Betty girl is right ... for those who can remember what this was all about:
BA reduce LHR CC by one to match the LGW manning level - done.
BA introduce Mixed Fleet to save paying inflated legacy wages - done.
BA agree no existing T&Cs will be changed - done.
BA say ST will be withdrawn for strikers - done, then reinstated with limitations.
And BASSA wants what, these days? Do they even know?
Betty girl is right ... for those who can remember what this was all about:
BA reduce LHR CC by one to match the LGW manning level - done.
BA introduce Mixed Fleet to save paying inflated legacy wages - done.
BA agree no existing T&Cs will be changed - done.
BA say ST will be withdrawn for strikers - done, then reinstated with limitations.
And BASSA wants what, these days? Do they even know?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding sacking strikers, I genuinely don't believe would do this. It would be akin to pouring petrol on a fire that is about to go out. The reaction from the rest of the company, the union movement, the media and politicians and the public is a huge unknown.
If a strike is considered illegal, then the reps themselves could be exposed to gross misconduct charges, all dealt with under the company's disciplinary policy, rather than just being sacked.
If a strike is considered illegal, then the reps themselves could be exposed to gross misconduct charges, all dealt with under the company's disciplinary policy, rather than just being sacked.
Last edited by LD12986; 5th Feb 2011 at 17:07.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,803
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
LD12986
Agree again ... BA's primary objective is to be able to run BA efficiently, not to set off a series of sympathy actions [of whatever variety] from sackings.
I have no doubt that the embittered BASSA activists, spurred on by their SWP friends, will find their own way of achieving separation from the company that pays them with SLF money
[off topic] Sorry ... it's half-time, Scotland v. France, and being reminded of what Rugby should be like instead of England's pathetic, stolid, set-piece travesty yesterday [/off topic]
I have no doubt that the embittered BASSA activists, spurred on by their SWP friends, will find their own way of achieving separation from the company that pays them with SLF money
[off topic] Sorry ... it's half-time, Scotland v. France, and being reminded of what Rugby should be like instead of England's pathetic, stolid, set-piece travesty yesterday [/off topic]
In relation to last weeks court case BetterbyBoat posted:-
This would not have been possible if the offer, which Unite and BA had shook hands on, had been accepted by the members. Neither BA or Unite would have been able to take legal action for events which occurred during the dispute, due to the caveat contained within the offer.
The irony of course is that this very caveat was held up by BASSA and CC89 as one of the reasons that they couldn't recommend the offer to their members, and why a ballot was never held.
Own goal methinks....
It would make much more sense if this did relate to the 2010 dispute and BA were seeking advice \ contemplating suing for lost earnings. This would be very different from seeking the injunction to stop the strike (which ultimately they lost).
The irony of course is that this very caveat was held up by BASSA and CC89 as one of the reasons that they couldn't recommend the offer to their members, and why a ballot was never held.
Own goal methinks....
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many BA cabin crew qualify for membership of BASSA?
The figure of 13,500 cabin crew that I have been using is evidently unreliable, since it relates to December 2009
I also see that http://bapress.custhelp.com no longer exists - which diminishes the trustworthness of this source of information._ So my question is how many BA cabin crew qualify for membership of BASSA?
All that we can be sure of is that in Dec 2010 - Jan 2011 Unite balloted 10,200 cabin crew._ The often quoted figure of 2,500 for non-members is maybe nothing more than a plausible guess.
No of BA Cabin Crew 13500 (http://bapress.custhelp.com , mid-Dec, I presume after the departure of those taking Voluntary Serverence)
24 January 2010 -link
I also see that http://bapress.custhelp.com no longer exists - which diminishes the trustworthness of this source of information._ So my question is how many BA cabin crew qualify for membership of BASSA?
All that we can be sure of is that in Dec 2010 - Jan 2011 Unite balloted 10,200 cabin crew._ The often quoted figure of 2,500 for non-members is maybe nothing more than a plausible guess.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Betty Girl
Not to mention the Cabin Crew themselves. One of the most damaging disputes without meaning ever. If there was a case for putting two people in the stocks - it is they! Their utter selfishness and proven inability to guide BASSA is breathtaking. They have caused a massive let-down to all the CC whether some of them understand it or not. Indeed, if the TUC needed to disband a union for gross incompetence BASSA wins hands down.
DH and LM have caused permanent damage to both Bassa and Unite.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have this 21 January 2011 quote from a British Airways spokesperson
However the coincidence of 13,500 over a twelve month period when no staff are being recruited to Heritage Cabin Crew is a coincidence that is not entirely convincing.
"Of our 13,500 crew, only 43 per cent voted in favour of strike action in this ballot.
"Unite has lost about 2,500 cabin crew members since this dispute started, as crew have voted with their feet"
"Unite has lost about 2,500 cabin crew members since this dispute started, as crew have voted with their feet"
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
notlangley - Have you remembered to allow for all of the new Mixed Fleet recruits in your estimates of total BA cabin crew. I'm sure that BA will have included these in their 13,500 total cabin crew figure that they quoted on 21/01/11.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bassa Reps ..........
Every few days or so, reference is made to BASSA reps, out of curiosity are there any lists of such, detailing -
a. How many existed around August 2009 when this all really blew up.
b. How many have since left BA or BASSA for various reasons.
c. Do any unpaid voluntary ones exist, responding to DH's call a few
months ago.
d. Any appointed formally by BASSA since August 2009.
e. All current existing formally appointed Reps.
Is it not a requirement on Unions to always have publicly available a list of formally appointed Reps?
In addition, there appears to be a large degree of current information unavailable from BASSA which is required by law, including public accounts and branch meeting minutes, although possibly I'm looking in the wrong place for this. I am assuming that it is not feasible to access any up to date membership register, as this aspect of BASSA administration appears presently to be in disarray, is there any previous data/date known which was published and regarded as firm, 2009 perhaps.
Having posed the above current/potential problems and given the amount of trolling effort expanded recently re the source of PCCC funds - with the number of offers floating around on both threads to donate £150 to the PCCC, the question of where they will have obtained this sum from, will only become relevant, if at all, when they eventually are required to pay it.
In case of temptation - don't forget - play the ball
a. How many existed around August 2009 when this all really blew up.
b. How many have since left BA or BASSA for various reasons.
c. Do any unpaid voluntary ones exist, responding to DH's call a few
months ago.
d. Any appointed formally by BASSA since August 2009.
e. All current existing formally appointed Reps.
Is it not a requirement on Unions to always have publicly available a list of formally appointed Reps?
In addition, there appears to be a large degree of current information unavailable from BASSA which is required by law, including public accounts and branch meeting minutes, although possibly I'm looking in the wrong place for this. I am assuming that it is not feasible to access any up to date membership register, as this aspect of BASSA administration appears presently to be in disarray, is there any previous data/date known which was published and regarded as firm, 2009 perhaps.
Having posed the above current/potential problems and given the amount of trolling effort expanded recently re the source of PCCC funds - with the number of offers floating around on both threads to donate £150 to the PCCC, the question of where they will have obtained this sum from, will only become relevant, if at all, when they eventually are required to pay it.
In case of temptation - don't forget - play the ball
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxie, it is worth remembering that BASSA is not a union. It is a branch of Unite the union.
A number, if not all, of the legal requirements placed on unions therefore do not apply to this mere section but only the main union.
A number, if not all, of the legal requirements placed on unions therefore do not apply to this mere section but only the main union.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxie
As snas has said, the requirement is probably for executives of Unite, not lay reps: they represent fellow colleagues at a particular workplace.
It might not be palatable, but it is lawful.
And for the record, DH is a man that I respect, inasmuch as he was employed before the dispute, but now he is not. That is some sacrifice. It may not suit some, well, most on here, but fair play. Could I do what he has done?
BA and Mr Walsh have played a fantastic game. Bassa have tried to counter it. On the face of it and looking in as an independent, we are where we are.
It might not be palatable, but it is lawful.
And for the record, DH is a man that I respect, inasmuch as he was employed before the dispute, but now he is not. That is some sacrifice. It may not suit some, well, most on here, but fair play. Could I do what he has done?
BA and Mr Walsh have played a fantastic game. Bassa have tried to counter it. On the face of it and looking in as an independent, we are where we are.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 82
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reps etc.......
Snas and LB -
Thank you for your information re Reps and Unites responsibilities versus a branch, I have to admit that I felt that it might be the case. However that then leads to a couple of follow on questions -
a) Presumably the questions that I posed in the previous post, now apply
to this information being required to be available from Unite - does
anyone know if it is?, would branch accounts be separate?.
b) I would assume that for its own branch members BASSA would still be
required, if only by custom & practice, to list Reps for the benefit of its
members, otherwise how else will they know who to look to with
problems.
c) BASSA, although only a branch, appears to have been able to
change its own rules and regulations in such a way, that branch
meetings and elections of officials are suspended until it declares
that the current dispute is over, also seems to be able to turn down
offers, independantly declare results of ballots, call for IA and declare
the dates on which IA will take place, behaving in fact as an
independant union. How is this? - does it mean that BASSA has
powers beyond that of a branch and therefore additional obligations.
It seems to be an nicely confusing labyrinth.
LB - Re DH, I have to admit that I do not share your view, but twould be
a grey place if all views were uniform. I would however note
that the 'sacrifice' does appear to be fully funded, both now and into
retirement at the end of the year.
There appears to be more twists available than a good murder plot!!
Thank you for your information re Reps and Unites responsibilities versus a branch, I have to admit that I felt that it might be the case. However that then leads to a couple of follow on questions -
a) Presumably the questions that I posed in the previous post, now apply
to this information being required to be available from Unite - does
anyone know if it is?, would branch accounts be separate?.
b) I would assume that for its own branch members BASSA would still be
required, if only by custom & practice, to list Reps for the benefit of its
members, otherwise how else will they know who to look to with
problems.
c) BASSA, although only a branch, appears to have been able to
change its own rules and regulations in such a way, that branch
meetings and elections of officials are suspended until it declares
that the current dispute is over, also seems to be able to turn down
offers, independantly declare results of ballots, call for IA and declare
the dates on which IA will take place, behaving in fact as an
independant union. How is this? - does it mean that BASSA has
powers beyond that of a branch and therefore additional obligations.
It seems to be an nicely confusing labyrinth.
LB - Re DH, I have to admit that I do not share your view, but twould be
a grey place if all views were uniform. I would however note
that the 'sacrifice' does appear to be fully funded, both now and into
retirement at the end of the year.
There appears to be more twists available than a good murder plot!!
Last edited by Entaxei; 6th Feb 2011 at 10:36.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Entaxie
With regard to DH, we will shortly see the process and justification on his dismissal, if it is not settled. If we do get to see the case, then no doubt we will discuss to content outside of the legal verdict.
edit - after some advice and re-reading, what the above means is that I understand that DH will be taking BA to tribunal soon, over his dismissal. The ET will come to a verdict on whether the dismissal was fair or not. The facts will be presented and the ET will make a decision on whether BA was right to act in the way it did; whether the dismissal was in the band of reasonable responses. We will then make our minds up based on the facts and also discuss whether it was a reasonable response, based on the facts presented.
We will see all of this if the case is not settled outside of court.
edit - after some advice and re-reading, what the above means is that I understand that DH will be taking BA to tribunal soon, over his dismissal. The ET will come to a verdict on whether the dismissal was fair or not. The facts will be presented and the ET will make a decision on whether BA was right to act in the way it did; whether the dismissal was in the band of reasonable responses. We will then make our minds up based on the facts and also discuss whether it was a reasonable response, based on the facts presented.
We will see all of this if the case is not settled outside of court.
Last edited by Litebulbs; 6th Feb 2011 at 10:42.