BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV
Better by Boat
If BA were going to sue Unite and sack strikers they would have allowed the last strike to go ahead. The timing was great as it would have had minimal impact on peak seasons and the strike was clearly "unprotected" so I think if this approach was going to happen then BA would have done it by now.
BA did not apply for an injunction following the last ballot, and thus it would seem would have "allowed" any strike to proceed. However they did write to Unite warning them that they considered the ballot to be flawed for several reasons, which in their view would make any strike unprotected. This letter would prepare the way for sackings and damages claims against the union.
As I've said before, I think Unite and individual CC are on very dangerous ground if they continue with further strike action. I also suspect that Unite know this.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Far from the "legal blitz" alleged by the Nazi-obsessed BASSA, I believe it was the Electoral Reform Service (who administered the ballot on behalf of Unite) who refused to give their support to the ballot result.
If you examine the most recent ballot, ERS never actually released a statement on their notepaper setting out the results of the ballot; if you notice, the third ballot announcement was on ERS notepaper:
http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BA_ballot_result_consultative_20_7_2010.pdf
The latest (failed, fourth ballot) confirmation was initially communicated by Unite directly to its membership:
http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BAllot_..._21jan2011.pdf
I have never seen anything on ERS notepaper endorsing the most recent ballot result.
It will be telling on what notepaper the ballot result is publicised this time round (which I think shall be known as the “fourth” ballot).
If you examine the most recent ballot, ERS never actually released a statement on their notepaper setting out the results of the ballot; if you notice, the third ballot announcement was on ERS notepaper:
http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BA_ballot_result_consultative_20_7_2010.pdf
The latest (failed, fourth ballot) confirmation was initially communicated by Unite directly to its membership:
http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BAllot_..._21jan2011.pdf
I have never seen anything on ERS notepaper endorsing the most recent ballot result.
It will be telling on what notepaper the ballot result is publicised this time round (which I think shall be known as the “fourth” ballot).
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Thailand
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me this whole strike issue has lost any relevance. I have four long haul segments booked in June and am not at all concerned, is anyone? The current ballot will certainly return an overwhelming percentage in favor of IA.
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: England
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am coming to the opinion that BA really are just going to sit this one out. They hold all the cards. They know that the number of strikers is falling. They know they can run a near full operation. So they will take the hit financially on potential lost bookings and just wait until the unions and strikers give up. My only concern with this approach is that it leaves the issues largely unresolved and potentially just puts them off for a future date.
I agree re BA 'sitting it out'.
As for IA on any future date, there may be no future date. It is noticeable that ever since the last BA Engineering strike, when BA had contingency plans and managed to largely keep flying, Engineering has never that I can recall even threatened another strike - after all what is the point if the company carries on regardless. You lose money, and probably staff travel, and gain nothing. Engineering belong to Unite as well, although directly, not through a specific branch.
BA may simply want to show CC that a strike gets you nowhere, but that talking works. Eg, in one of the early offers, BA was going to reinstate some crew, leading to 184 more on WW/EF, but paid for it by withdrawing some allowances (telephone?) Those crew who gave feedback said they would rather have the allowance than the crew back, so the next offer from BA didn't give any crew back but reinstated the allowance and gave the feedback received as the reason.
In the short term future, BASSA has thrown so many 'reasons' into this ballot, that if any strike actually happens this time, after 3 months, they will definitely have nothing new left to ballot on and be clearly unprotected, thus BA will have won.
The 'hearts and minds' bit will still be unresolved initially, but if crew see that they are not put on MF contracts, and their average pay is maintained via the top up, contrary to BASSA's scaremongering, it will happen, slowly.
Is it just me or does it make anyone else feel automatically unsympathetic when anyone starts calling anyone else 'comrade' ?
Somehow it just suggests to me that such an individual is more interested in the destruction of the organisation that I am paying, than in improving the service they give me as a customer.
Maybe I am being unfair ?
Somehow it just suggests to me that such an individual is more interested in the destruction of the organisation that I am paying, than in improving the service they give me as a customer.
Maybe I am being unfair ?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,809
Received 135 Likes
on
63 Posts
Originally Posted by litebulbs
It was probably a great term 100+ years ago, but speaking from a pro union stance, it needs to be re-branded.
Now, as you surely know these things, what's all this stuff on the CC thread about new EU rules on CC working hours etc.? Will you enlighten us, please? What's the impact on BA CC in the context of what's currently going on?
Paxing All Over The World
To me, comrade is very outdated and is synonymous with an organisation that is locked into a cycle of conflict - which is pointless. Further, it tells me that the two people are looking at each other - rather than outward towards the client (me). The term colleague is better as it demonstrates that you work alongside a person and in a collegiate fashion and leaves room to consider the customer.
MPN11 and others. You may wish to have a look at the 'Easa Flight Time Limitations Changes' thread in Rumours and News. If this comes in, then you can be flown by pilots with less protection than lorry drivers and at the limit the possibility exists of 7hr30min rests between long crew duty days. Yes - it will impact on CC as well.
Possibly coming to airlines near you all over Europe. Be afraid - be very afraid....
Possibly coming to airlines near you all over Europe. Be afraid - be very afraid....
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The proposed EASA Flight Time Limitations are, or should be of concern to all of us: Flight Crew, Cabin Crew and Passengers. Essentially the document that controls the legal limitations on Flight Time and Duty is CAP371. All duty rigs of UK based airlines are based on this document. CAP371 is the product of years of scientific research and has its roots in the Bader Committee of the 1970s. The idea behind the EASA regulations is to bring all the countries of Europe into line, the same regulations would apply to all the EASA countries. So the smart thing to do would have been to take the best, safest regulatory environment and extend it to EASA. Instead the euro politicians have created a mish-mash set of regulations based on NO scientific input, rather the input of the airlines and whatever compromises they decided was convenient. IF these regulations go through unchanged then safety will be compromised. The Colgan Air crash in Buffalo and several other incidents have put the spotlight on crew fatigue and its dangerous repercussions. The FAA are tightening up the regulations with regard to fatigue, Euro politicians are happy to let safety be significantly eroded.
As Juan said the proposals efect everybody, some of them are quite frightening and in many instances there's no science to justify the proposals, or the relevant science appears to have been ignored. It appears to be an operator's dream and wishlist.
This EASA proposals are available via the internet for our comment and input up until the 20th March.
This EASA proposals are available via the internet for our comment and input up until the 20th March.
to Juan
"IF these regulations go through unchanged then safety will be compromised"
Sorry but are you saying that EASA (the European Aviation Safety Agency) is prepared to compromise safety?. If i understand it correctly they (EASA) do not pass european legislation. It is only the European Commission (through the Official Journal) that legislate.
Sorry but are you saying that EASA (the European Aviation Safety Agency) is prepared to compromise safety?. If i understand it correctly they (EASA) do not pass european legislation. It is only the European Commission (through the Official Journal) that legislate.
Rescue 3
Start with this BALPA - PILOTS FATIGUE WARNING There is lots available on the internet about the proposed EASA flight time limitations. Working to the limits in CAP371 is hard, but if these proposals go through you are going to have seriously tired aviators in the skies on a regular basis.
Litebulb
You'd like to think so and so would I, but money talks. Current simple example is that CAP371 has an annual limit of 900hours - more and more airline are treating this as a target rather than a limit.
And this FTL Campaign Site • BALPA FTL Campaign Home Mods - apologies for the thread drift. These rules will impact on CC too.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
deltahotel
Too true. It is a bit like the minimum wage. It is portrayed as one of the major successes of the last Labour Government, although it has now allowed employers to target it as a goal, rather than a minimum position for those below.
As I understand it, BA's aircraft crewing levels still exceeds CAA/EASA minima despite the removal of 1 CC member.
No reason then to suppose that BA will take the opportunity to reduce rest periods to the revised minimas.
After all, to do so would provide BASSA with a genuinely new and unconnected reason for a further strike ballot....
No reason then to suppose that BA will take the opportunity to reduce rest periods to the revised minimas.
After all, to do so would provide BASSA with a genuinely new and unconnected reason for a further strike ballot....
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Jungles of SW London
Age: 77
Posts: 354
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A B73NG Captain I know was scathing - verging on downright angry - about the EASA changes proposed. He thought it was leveling the playing field, but to the level of the lowest player.
In other words, they felt it was unfair on the smaller airlines to comply with the standards of large and responsible airlines - so they will allow/enforce/police only the lowest standards.
Not involved - except as SLF - myself, but I wasn't encouraged by what he said.
Have also noted that BALPA have an input and an opinion, but not BASSA.
Roger.
In other words, they felt it was unfair on the smaller airlines to comply with the standards of large and responsible airlines - so they will allow/enforce/police only the lowest standards.
Not involved - except as SLF - myself, but I wasn't encouraged by what he said.
Have also noted that BALPA have an input and an opinion, but not BASSA.
Roger.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On BA's approach, I agree BA is going to sit this out. It is somewhat ironic that DH now claims that the ballots are no longer about strikes, but "sending a message". It is for exactly this reason BASSA and CC89 implored their members to vote yes the first tine round nearly 18 months ago.
And collectively, through their representatives, cabin crew are enabling BA to do this by just sitting waiting for something to happen. If Unite was actually proposing new settlement offers, BA would have to entertain them.
Whilst I don't think there is any doubt there will be another Yes vote, it will be interesting to see if the Yes vote continues its downward trend:
1st ballot 9,514 out of 12,780 members
2nd ballot 7,482 out of 11,691 members
3rd ballot 5,751 out of 10,230 members
4th ballot 9,824 members to be balloted
And collectively, through their representatives, cabin crew are enabling BA to do this by just sitting waiting for something to happen. If Unite was actually proposing new settlement offers, BA would have to entertain them.
Whilst I don't think there is any doubt there will be another Yes vote, it will be interesting to see if the Yes vote continues its downward trend:
1st ballot 9,514 out of 12,780 members
2nd ballot 7,482 out of 11,691 members
3rd ballot 5,751 out of 10,230 members
4th ballot 9,824 members to be balloted