BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV
Mariner 9
Don't take this the wrong way, but I have no confidence that any airline will do anything within the regulations other than to follow the path which gets more work from the same number of people or the same amount of work from fewer people. If we end up working to the proposed EASA regs, I think that it will be a retrograde step in terms of safety. BALPA is engaging in this - if I were CC (in any company) I would want my union doing the same.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I reckon that the ballot result will be of the order of just under 5000 votes in favour of industrial action. This is based on looking at the numbers who went on strike last year and the general trend in voting. I don't think that the support will increase as I reckon that here are some who previously voted for strike action that are now hacked off with the union's incompetence. I can't see the shopping list of causes doing anything to appeal to more cabin crew. Unite will do well if they get a 60% turnout and around 80% in favour of strike action That will give them the 'healthy' mandate they seek, but in reality it will make no difference as they seem to have abandoned the notion of strike action in preference for 'wierd and wondrous' initiatives. I'm so excited by the thought of these that I could crush a tissue.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget Colonel, that their illustrious leader said that there was very unlikely to be a strike no matter what the result of the ballot. So we are back to "sending a message" by a "YES" vote.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
their illustrious leader said that there was very unlikely to be a strike no matter what the result of the ballot
It is only the perceived actual threat that will harm forward bookings on BA......
to say you are bluffing, does not make a good card player, and will not work to his advantage..
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think these statements were made to make CC feel they could vote for IA without a strike being called. “Sending a message” again. At this point this is probably the best BASSA can do.
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
Or if it is a good majority, just forget what had been said and call a strike anyway!
(OK it may not be well supported and may be unprotected but anything is possible)
(OK it may not be well supported and may be unprotected but anything is possible)
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it is telling that last time round BA did not go to court rather they informed the ERS and union of flaws in the ballot and the union pulled the strike. Given this and that the current ballot is likely to be within the law all that leaves is the protection or otherwise. Now as BA did not go for an injunction and seemed prepared to let the union strike, merely setting them up for financial liability, perhaps this is an indication of how BA will act this time. Certainly VCC training has been massively ramped up in recent months, suggesting that BA expects a strike to go ahead.
If UNITE are stupid enough to think BA will do nothing they deserve all they get. Industrial Darwinism may be a force at play here - the dinosaur mass extinction could be mere days away. Crippling UNITE the union financially would be a smart move for BA; removing the threat of this cancerous growth interfering with the business forever.
If UNITE are stupid enough to think BA will do nothing they deserve all they get. Industrial Darwinism may be a force at play here - the dinosaur mass extinction could be mere days away. Crippling UNITE the union financially would be a smart move for BA; removing the threat of this cancerous growth interfering with the business forever.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Red Len isn't as stupid as he looks.
He will be looking for a way out of calling an unprotected strike, and moving on from this farce of BASSA's making with some dignity intact.
As it stands now, it appears there is more upside for BA Management if the strike goes ahead.....!
Still no news on those missing BASSA accounts; still if the membership isn't interested they deserve the poor leadership and maladministration which typifies BASSA.
He will be looking for a way out of calling an unprotected strike, and moving on from this farce of BASSA's making with some dignity intact.
As it stands now, it appears there is more upside for BA Management if the strike goes ahead.....!
Still no news on those missing BASSA accounts; still if the membership isn't interested they deserve the poor leadership and maladministration which typifies BASSA.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huge changes in aviation practices.
The new and latest edicts coming from EASA will seriously impact how an airline performs and the hours all crew will work. It will mean a massive change to airline operations. The changes will be severe. You can see the proposed new regulations here and what it can mean to airline crews. http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/4...s-changes.html
This will also mean that unions are an irrelevance with all airlines being subject to the new rules.
This will also mean that unions are an irrelevance with all airlines being subject to the new rules.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The proposed EASA changes are massive for UK Airlines operating under CAP371 - BA included as the BA Scheme is essentially CAP371. They will undoubtedly make it much harder for these airlines to compete on cost with airlines that will embrace the new changes, as their crewing costs will fall dramatically as they will be able to get far more from a reduced number of crew.
How all this makes unions an irrelevance is a mystery to me. Unions were set up to improve safety, pay and conditions - this role has not changed. The power of a union is essentially the threat of crippling a company by withdrawing labour. This threat still remains for unions that can organise a legal ballot and have a just cause that mobilises overwhelming support within its members. As an example, if 90% of BA pilots were to strike BA would grind to a halt. 10% support would be an inconvenience and the threat would produce nothing, as BASSA have found out.
The safety issues here are huge. Passengers and crew should be aware of the ramifications of this issue. However, this nonsense of the irrelevance of unions is just Daily Mailesque Fear-mongering.
How all this makes unions an irrelevance is a mystery to me. Unions were set up to improve safety, pay and conditions - this role has not changed. The power of a union is essentially the threat of crippling a company by withdrawing labour. This threat still remains for unions that can organise a legal ballot and have a just cause that mobilises overwhelming support within its members. As an example, if 90% of BA pilots were to strike BA would grind to a halt. 10% support would be an inconvenience and the threat would produce nothing, as BASSA have found out.
The safety issues here are huge. Passengers and crew should be aware of the ramifications of this issue. However, this nonsense of the irrelevance of unions is just Daily Mailesque Fear-mongering.
For you good folks of the SLF community here is a precis of the proposed EASA limits that could be forced on us. We presently work to the scientifically based CAP 371, but these new proposals would appear to come from a combination of MEPs and accountants.
1. Reducing rest has always been at the behest of the aircraft commander, after he has taken consideration of the state of his crew. Under EASA it will be at the behest of the operator, maybe even just before report.
2. The max number of duty hours worked in 7 days will increase by 5 hours, but 'nothing' is being said about 14 days!!
3. The number of early starts will be almost unregulated and the 'window' defining an early start closes to only one specific hour - 0500 to 0559, from 0500 to 0659 at present.
4. The max flying duty period would be increased. The early morning allowabel FDPs show a huge increase in those in CAP 371.
5. The flying hour limit would increase to 1000 hours per '12 consecutive months' - up from 900 hours.
6. Minimum rest away from base could be cut to 7.5 hours from the existing 10 hours.
7. The present 2 days off together in any 14 days ensures that the body gets 3 nights to recover. There is no mention at all of 2 in 14 in EASA!!!
8. EASA makes no comment regarding doing a standby at home and then being called to carry out a flying duty period. There is therefore no protection about doing a standby followed by a long flying duty period.
9. Airport standby rules would be 'watered down'.
10. The definition of 'home base' would mean that you would be expected to report directly to that home base, but not get credit for the journey in any flying duty period.
11. A lot of the definitions and interpretations that are clearly defined in CAP 371 are not even mentioned in EASA.
12. EASA make no mention at all on several critical areas, such as: restrictions around late finishes and early starts, restrictions around what constitutes a night duty and options related to night operations, control if delayed at the start of a flying duty period.
As is usually the case, BALPA recognised the unsound review process of EASA and then did a thorough study of the document. All BALPA members were then advised of the problems and encouraged to look at the proposals. We have then been encouraged to contact MPs, who were briefed at Westminster, and the next step is to put carefully considered 'arguments' against some of the draconian measures being proposed.
1. Reducing rest has always been at the behest of the aircraft commander, after he has taken consideration of the state of his crew. Under EASA it will be at the behest of the operator, maybe even just before report.
2. The max number of duty hours worked in 7 days will increase by 5 hours, but 'nothing' is being said about 14 days!!
3. The number of early starts will be almost unregulated and the 'window' defining an early start closes to only one specific hour - 0500 to 0559, from 0500 to 0659 at present.
4. The max flying duty period would be increased. The early morning allowabel FDPs show a huge increase in those in CAP 371.
5. The flying hour limit would increase to 1000 hours per '12 consecutive months' - up from 900 hours.
6. Minimum rest away from base could be cut to 7.5 hours from the existing 10 hours.
7. The present 2 days off together in any 14 days ensures that the body gets 3 nights to recover. There is no mention at all of 2 in 14 in EASA!!!
8. EASA makes no comment regarding doing a standby at home and then being called to carry out a flying duty period. There is therefore no protection about doing a standby followed by a long flying duty period.
9. Airport standby rules would be 'watered down'.
10. The definition of 'home base' would mean that you would be expected to report directly to that home base, but not get credit for the journey in any flying duty period.
11. A lot of the definitions and interpretations that are clearly defined in CAP 371 are not even mentioned in EASA.
12. EASA make no mention at all on several critical areas, such as: restrictions around late finishes and early starts, restrictions around what constitutes a night duty and options related to night operations, control if delayed at the start of a flying duty period.
As is usually the case, BALPA recognised the unsound review process of EASA and then did a thorough study of the document. All BALPA members were then advised of the problems and encouraged to look at the proposals. We have then been encouraged to contact MPs, who were briefed at Westminster, and the next step is to put carefully considered 'arguments' against some of the draconian measures being proposed.
Interesting, as a SLF I have no idea if thats good, bad or indifferent.
But given that BA CC 'experts' tried the 'safety' angle on staffing level reductions which caused the current dispute, its hard for us SLF to know if this is a case of 'not invented here' and whether the assertion that only MEP's and acountanst have drawn up the proposal is true or not.
The latter bit I struggle with, and when people say 'scientifically based' I automatically think of the Nutty Professor and studies undertaken in the 1950's.
We shall see in due course I guess.
But given that BA CC 'experts' tried the 'safety' angle on staffing level reductions which caused the current dispute, its hard for us SLF to know if this is a case of 'not invented here' and whether the assertion that only MEP's and acountanst have drawn up the proposal is true or not.
The latter bit I struggle with, and when people say 'scientifically based' I automatically think of the Nutty Professor and studies undertaken in the 1950's.
We shall see in due course I guess.
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAP371 was essentially drawn up just after WW2. It is NOT outmoded but it has been subjected to changes, or attempted changes over the years, but not much.
EASA is a totally different thing. It makes changes that affect all of us and it will be very difficult to change anything. Have you heard of any union getting items in the ANO changed? No? That is because it is a legislative document and so will the new FTL scheme designed by the bureaucrats in Europe. They will accept questions but will probably do nothing.
Red herring - with about as much teeth too. BASSA or Unite would have the bite of a dead frog. In the case of BASSA very true, wouldn't you say?
Please read the whole 'boring' number of pages. This will be LAW soon and who knows we might change to FAA rules..........there's a thought.
Please do not make the mistake that many have made before that a union can win over legislature.
EASA is a totally different thing. It makes changes that affect all of us and it will be very difficult to change anything. Have you heard of any union getting items in the ANO changed? No? That is because it is a legislative document and so will the new FTL scheme designed by the bureaucrats in Europe. They will accept questions but will probably do nothing.
How all this makes unions an irrelevance is a mystery to me. Unions were set up to improve safety, pay and conditions - this role has not changed. The power of a union is essentially the threat of crippling a company by withdrawing labour.
Please read the whole 'boring' number of pages. This will be LAW soon and who knows we might change to FAA rules..........there's a thought.
Please do not make the mistake that many have made before that a union can win over legislature.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But given that BA CC 'experts' tried the 'safety' angle on staffing level reductions which caused the current dispute, its hard for us SLF to know if this is a case of 'not invented here' and whether the assertion that only MEP's and acountanst have drawn up the proposal is true or not.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It will only legislate the minimum requirements. As always there will be the opportunities for Unions (ALL) to improve conditions within their own companies.
So I don't see how the wishful thinking that it makes unions irrelevant makes any sense.
So I don't see how the wishful thinking that it makes unions irrelevant makes any sense.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: maidenhead
Posts: 941
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bassa not wanting someone off a 747 has got absolutely nothing to do with this legislation.
We are all experts about something but none of us are experts about everything.
I expect it will be very hard for those of you that don't have an aviation background to fully understand the implications of this legislation.
I don't think it make unions any more ineffective or effective than they are now and I personally don't believe it will be in the interests of all airlines to necessarily adopt all of the new rules but it is definitely not good legislation.
Also just to clarify, this legislation has nothing to do with Boeing, the FAA or the CAA, it is drafted by the the EASA. The CAA regulations are more restrictive on airlines than this new proposal.
We are all experts about something but none of us are experts about everything.
I expect it will be very hard for those of you that don't have an aviation background to fully understand the implications of this legislation.
I don't think it make unions any more ineffective or effective than they are now and I personally don't believe it will be in the interests of all airlines to necessarily adopt all of the new rules but it is definitely not good legislation.
Also just to clarify, this legislation has nothing to do with Boeing, the FAA or the CAA, it is drafted by the the EASA. The CAA regulations are more restrictive on airlines than this new proposal.
Last edited by Betty girl; 11th Mar 2011 at 10:51.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Scientific Basis
As a simple piece of freight I don't have expertise but would be very shocked if even the EU had abandoned scientific analysis of these flight time limit assessments. If you go to the website it is quite easy to find that these people:
1 Dr. Barbara Stone QinetiQ, UK
2 Dr. Karen Robertson QinetiQ, UK
3 Dr. Alexander Gundel DLR, Germany
4 Mr. Martin Vejvoda DLR, Germany
5 Dr. Mick Spencer Human Factor Investigation, UK
6 Prof. Dr. Torbjorn Ackersted Karolinska Institute, Sweden
7 Dr. Ries Simons TNO, The Netherlands
8 Dr. Philipp Cabon University of Paris Descartes, France
9 Prof. Dr. Régis Mollard University of Paris Descartes, France
10 Prof. Dr. Simon Folkard Swansea University, UK
Table 1 The list of the FTL expert Team
See specialities listed here - MOEBUS aviation Ltd
....who were consulted in the course of compiling this:
Final Report - Scientific and Medical Evaluation of Flight Time Limitations
...accessible here:
http://easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/...l%20Report.pdf
So whilst I am keen that the UK doesn't get led down some bureaucratically-driven new and dangerous flight time limit path, I can't see that the proclamations made by some on this forum about there being no scientific basis for the proposed changes quite ring true.
P.S. If you do go to the link have a look at page 19. For any who dismiss CC's role with ill-thought out comparisons in the leisure industry, this should correct your thinking.
1 Dr. Barbara Stone QinetiQ, UK
2 Dr. Karen Robertson QinetiQ, UK
3 Dr. Alexander Gundel DLR, Germany
4 Mr. Martin Vejvoda DLR, Germany
5 Dr. Mick Spencer Human Factor Investigation, UK
6 Prof. Dr. Torbjorn Ackersted Karolinska Institute, Sweden
7 Dr. Ries Simons TNO, The Netherlands
8 Dr. Philipp Cabon University of Paris Descartes, France
9 Prof. Dr. Régis Mollard University of Paris Descartes, France
10 Prof. Dr. Simon Folkard Swansea University, UK
Table 1 The list of the FTL expert Team
See specialities listed here - MOEBUS aviation Ltd
....who were consulted in the course of compiling this:
Final Report - Scientific and Medical Evaluation of Flight Time Limitations
...accessible here:
http://easa.europa.eu/ws_prod/r/doc/...l%20Report.pdf
So whilst I am keen that the UK doesn't get led down some bureaucratically-driven new and dangerous flight time limit path, I can't see that the proclamations made by some on this forum about there being no scientific basis for the proposed changes quite ring true.
P.S. If you do go to the link have a look at page 19. For any who dismiss CC's role with ill-thought out comparisons in the leisure industry, this should correct your thinking.
Last edited by mrpony; 11th Mar 2011 at 10:30. Reason: added P.S.
According to the Press Association Virgin Atlantic are to expand their fleet and create 450 more jobs.
Quote: Corneel Koster, director of operations, safety and security for Virgin Atlantic, said: "We have enjoyed a good year of recovery and can now look forward to expanding our network and welcoming a new fleet of aircraft.
"With the increases in flight rotations from our London airports and the new Las Vegas flight from Manchester, we will be creating jobs in both of these areas."
link
So if they can do it...
Quote: Corneel Koster, director of operations, safety and security for Virgin Atlantic, said: "We have enjoyed a good year of recovery and can now look forward to expanding our network and welcoming a new fleet of aircraft.
"With the increases in flight rotations from our London airports and the new Las Vegas flight from Manchester, we will be creating jobs in both of these areas."
link
So if they can do it...
