BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite press advertisement, in tomorrow's papers apparently:
http://www.bassa.co.uk/BASSA/DOWNLOADS/ADVERT.PDF
http://www.bassa.co.uk/BASSA/DOWNLOADS/ADVERT.PDF
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One assumes that BASSA are complying with the Data Protection Act
Is there anything in law that would prevent me paying that certain organisation the statutory fee and then demanding information on its financial situation?
Perplexed of Hamptonne
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In the light of this:
and this:
this is still on display:
http://www.bassa.co.uk/BASSA/downloa...cationform.pdf
This is slapstick comedy and trade union stupidity at its very best!
and this:
"URGENT! Update your membership details. So we can contact you in the coming weeks"
http://www.bassa.co.uk/BASSA/downloa...cationform.pdf
This is slapstick comedy and trade union stupidity at its very best!
Last edited by Chuchinchow; 10th Feb 2011 at 02:45. Reason: Syntax
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: NZ
Age: 55
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I - a private individual, unconnected with the civil aviation industry in any way except as an end-user - wish to obtain information about "a certain organisation" under the provisions of either the Data Protection Act or the Freedom of Information Act.
Is there anything in law that would prevent me paying that certain organisation the statutory fee and then demanding information on its financial situation?
Is there anything in law that would prevent me paying that certain organisation the statutory fee and then demanding information on its financial situation?
"Dear Sir/Madam, thank you for your request. We have checked our records and can confirm that the personal data we hold about you is as follows:
No records found.
Yours faithfully"
As for the Freedom of Information Act, this applies to public authorities only and does not cover trades unions.
At the risk of upsetting some folk concerned with the possible strike by BA Cabin Crew, I will attempt to be nice & polite.
Surely from the pax side in this shambles there is a simple, quick & easy solution, not only avoid flying with BA if at all possible, but I would suggest to avoid LHR or LGW as well.
Now I do hope I have not offended anyone by this.
Surely from the pax side in this shambles there is a simple, quick & easy solution, not only avoid flying with BA if at all possible, but I would suggest to avoid LHR or LGW as well.
Now I do hope I have not offended anyone by this.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Cumbria
Posts: 586
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kaikohe76:
What an interesting post.
..and No, I will not avoid BA, and am encouraging my husband's corporate account to actively engage in booking BA.
Most informed individuals understand that BA is absolutely safe for LH and many wish to book simply to support BA's stance against a militant union.
....
After looking at your previous posts it is obvious that you are simply working to damage BA's brand with no thought to the issue at hand. I will leave you to trying to sell your "cuddle class", but this forum is about exchanging ideas on more serious issues.
What an interesting post.
..and No, I will not avoid BA, and am encouraging my husband's corporate account to actively engage in booking BA.
Most informed individuals understand that BA is absolutely safe for LH and many wish to book simply to support BA's stance against a militant union.
....
After looking at your previous posts it is obvious that you are simply working to damage BA's brand with no thought to the issue at hand. I will leave you to trying to sell your "cuddle class", but this forum is about exchanging ideas on more serious issues.
Last edited by Diplome; 10th Feb 2011 at 02:17. Reason: further exploration
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: motorway services
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
kaikohe: No-one will be offended by your suggestion. However I think that your view is rather simplistic and in fact sounds like nonsense to me. Perhaps you could research some facts?
Last edited by strikemaster82; 10th Feb 2011 at 13:50.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accuracy??
The website that the proposed advertisement points to contains these words
BA Strike. British Airways cabin crew also known as air stewards and air stewardesses or flight attendants– have voted for strike action that will cover 20 days in May and early June. This will inevitably lead to BA flight cancellations, disruptions and possible delays over the next few weeks so it is advisable for passengers travelling with British Airways during this period to check their travel plans.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite advert - own goal?
The advert itself and the link to the 'Brutish Airways' site with it's background information seems to do a pretty good job of linking the next ballot to the original dispute.
If so, I am sure BA's legal dept. are delighted to have the union paying to strengthen the company's legal case.
Is Len really this stupid, or, now that BASSA have served their purpose in helping him to get elected, has he privately switched to Tony and Dereks's view that they are more trouble than they are worth?
If so, I am sure BA's legal dept. are delighted to have the union paying to strengthen the company's legal case.
Is Len really this stupid, or, now that BASSA have served their purpose in helping him to get elected, has he privately switched to Tony and Dereks's view that they are more trouble than they are worth?
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is Len really this stupid, or, now that BASSA have served their purpose in helping him to get elected, has he privately switched to Tony and Derek's view that they are more trouble than they are worth?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 91
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Find out why this dispute is now in its third year.
I would be the first to confess that I have little sympathy for the strikers in the current market, but even so, this kind of moronic error is just beyond belief.
Lafite
Unite Accounts
Here http://www.unitetheunion.org/pdf/Sta...rs%20Final.pdf
are the Unite accounts for the year ending 31 Dec 2009. On page 7 you will see one Lizanne Malone was reinbursed £223 for loss of earnings while on Unite business. There is no breakdown of individual sections.
Lightbulbs does your Unite section give its members a breakdown of its accounts?
Incidentally the Unite website has a link to BALPA which it describes as "the professional union for all UK pilots working in the UK".
Regards
Here http://www.unitetheunion.org/pdf/Sta...rs%20Final.pdf
are the Unite accounts for the year ending 31 Dec 2009. On page 7 you will see one Lizanne Malone was reinbursed £223 for loss of earnings while on Unite business. There is no breakdown of individual sections.
Lightbulbs does your Unite section give its members a breakdown of its accounts?
Incidentally the Unite website has a link to BALPA which it describes as "the professional union for all UK pilots working in the UK".
Regards
In fact all of those members throughout the whole of Unite who cast a vote in her favour might ask them selves why she has attended so few of the Executive meetings.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite advert - P.S.
As I have touched on the cock-up theory and the conspiracy theory, perhaps I should mention at least one alternative. Could it be that they have completely given up on mounting a credible strike, and switched to the 'guerrilla tactics' that they hinted at a while back?
This would make more sense for them, but not very much, as it would probably have very little chance of success and is fraught with danger.
Anyone else got any other explanations for this latest bizarre turn of events?
This would make more sense for them, but not very much, as it would probably have very little chance of success and is fraught with danger.
Anyone else got any other explanations for this latest bizarre turn of events?
While the advert apparently shows a blatant disregard by Unite for the fate of their own members by clearly linking the dispute, it doesn't change much IMHO.
In my view, the only realistic way Unite could say that any further action is unrelated to the current dispute would be to accept the current BA offer, thus ending this dispute first.
If BASSA are determined to go on strike to exact revenge for ST and the "hostages" without any prior settlement of the existing dispute, they face a serious risk of losing their jobs in an unprotected strike.
BASSA/Unite should give proper, sensible advice to their members of the risks of prolonging this dispute, and they should do it now. They might start by providing their members with the advice given to the leadership from their QC rather than attempt to deflect the blame to BA for the latest ballot fiasco.
If BASSA are so convinced that BA is a bullying employer, then giving that employer an opportunity to dismiss their members is reckless in the extreme.
In my view, the only realistic way Unite could say that any further action is unrelated to the current dispute would be to accept the current BA offer, thus ending this dispute first.
If BASSA are determined to go on strike to exact revenge for ST and the "hostages" without any prior settlement of the existing dispute, they face a serious risk of losing their jobs in an unprotected strike.
BASSA/Unite should give proper, sensible advice to their members of the risks of prolonging this dispute, and they should do it now. They might start by providing their members with the advice given to the leadership from their QC rather than attempt to deflect the blame to BA for the latest ballot fiasco.
If BASSA are so convinced that BA is a bullying employer, then giving that employer an opportunity to dismiss their members is reckless in the extreme.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs
BA seems to have done pretty much everything you've suggested already. There has been an offer available for some time that secures existing T&Cs, including minimum levels of variable allowances. It appears 95% of the non-Union staff signed up for it.
Not sure requiring people to engage publicly with senior management is going to work. Rightly or wrongly, many non-striking staff feel threatened and being seen to be "communicating with the enemy" might be something they would be reluctant to do. However, BA can use online means of communicating and, again, I believe they have done so. I rather suspect that BA has a much better idea what the bulk of crew want than does Unite.
Finally, I cannot take your suggestion of using ACAS seriously. BA has signalled that, after what seems to be decades of sub-standard management of its crew, it is now going to empower its middle managers to do precisely that. The idea that there is some super-strain of managers just sitting at ACAS waiting to win the hearts and minds of the workers on behalf of a grateful employer is simply laughable. If they were any good at managing people they'd already have a proper job somewhere doing precisely that. If there is one quango that the government could get rid of without anyone actually noticing, then it is ACAS. BA employs its managers to manage. They should get on and do just that. If "the managed" don't like it, tough. We all have to put up with stuff we don't like at work.
Not sure requiring people to engage publicly with senior management is going to work. Rightly or wrongly, many non-striking staff feel threatened and being seen to be "communicating with the enemy" might be something they would be reluctant to do. However, BA can use online means of communicating and, again, I believe they have done so. I rather suspect that BA has a much better idea what the bulk of crew want than does Unite.
Finally, I cannot take your suggestion of using ACAS seriously. BA has signalled that, after what seems to be decades of sub-standard management of its crew, it is now going to empower its middle managers to do precisely that. The idea that there is some super-strain of managers just sitting at ACAS waiting to win the hearts and minds of the workers on behalf of a grateful employer is simply laughable. If they were any good at managing people they'd already have a proper job somewhere doing precisely that. If there is one quango that the government could get rid of without anyone actually noticing, then it is ACAS. BA employs its managers to manage. They should get on and do just that. If "the managed" don't like it, tough. We all have to put up with stuff we don't like at work.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is still the same dispute
Find out why this dispute is now in its third year
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
is it just me?
I'm so bored with the misuse of the word "bully" by Unite/BASSA.
Just because you dont get your way when you throw a hissy fit, does not amount to bullying.
Withdrawal of discretionary perks does not amount to bullying.
and dont try and pull on the heart strings by using the "working mum" line.. it doesn't wash.
That bassa/unite will not release full details of exactly why some cabin crew were sacked, and the fact that no employment tribunial has heard any case (except for DH's absenteeism of course) means there is no evidence in the public domain of bullying on these sacked members, and people like me, who base their decissions on facts, can only assume the sackings were correct and legitimate.
Prove otherwise unite/bassa, or stop this continued "bully" nonsense... you really are crying wolf.
Just because you dont get your way when you throw a hissy fit, does not amount to bullying.
Withdrawal of discretionary perks does not amount to bullying.
and dont try and pull on the heart strings by using the "working mum" line.. it doesn't wash.
That bassa/unite will not release full details of exactly why some cabin crew were sacked, and the fact that no employment tribunial has heard any case (except for DH's absenteeism of course) means there is no evidence in the public domain of bullying on these sacked members, and people like me, who base their decissions on facts, can only assume the sackings were correct and legitimate.
Prove otherwise unite/bassa, or stop this continued "bully" nonsense... you really are crying wolf.