BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions IV
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is good news, well done BASSAwitch for not being intimidated by the union bullies. I hope Bw reads through the posts here on this thread over the past few weeks, especially the links to relevant case law, which make it clear that the regulations do indeed apply to Branches:
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...ml#post6277970
I think the complaint can be lodged online:
Certification Officer - Complaints
It might be as well to post the complaint here prior to sending it off, and maybe other posters might be able to ensure it "hits the mark" or make other relevant suggestions to help its wording.
It's still a good idea to copy both BASSA's and Unite's auditors as well as Unite itself in order to get things moving faster.
Bon courage!
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf...ml#post6277970
I think the complaint can be lodged online:
Certification Officer - Complaints
It might be as well to post the complaint here prior to sending it off, and maybe other posters might be able to ensure it "hits the mark" or make other relevant suggestions to help its wording.
It's still a good idea to copy both BASSA's and Unite's auditors as well as Unite itself in order to get things moving faster.
Bon courage!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSAwitch
....might also like to read this re. complaining about financial irregularities :
http://www.certoffice.org/Certificat...f5e59d8799.pdf
I note that BASSAwitch is preparing for a barrage of abuse after complaining. The CO can protect identity as provided for in above.
P.S. binsleepen - litebulbs knows the score on tribunal result link
http://www.certoffice.org/Certificat...f5e59d8799.pdf
I note that BASSAwitch is preparing for a barrage of abuse after complaining. The CO can protect identity as provided for in above.
P.S. binsleepen - litebulbs knows the score on tribunal result link
Last edited by mrpony; 13th Mar 2011 at 13:04.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: England
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr P
A very interesting link. If DH's charge of misconduct is upheld at his appeal tribuneral could this be linked to here:
It also states in Para 37a
My bold in both cases
Regards
A very interesting link. If DH's charge of misconduct is upheld at his appeal tribuneral could this be linked to here:
GROUNDS FOR ACTION
1. The Certification Officer will consider whether it is appropriate for him to investigate the financial affairs of a trade union or employers' association if it can be shown that any of the following circumstances exist:
that the financial affairs of the organisation are being or have been conducted for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose;
that persons concerned with the management of those financial affairs have, in connection with that management, been guilty of fraud, misfeasance or other misconduct;
1. The Certification Officer will consider whether it is appropriate for him to investigate the financial affairs of a trade union or employers' association if it can be shown that any of the following circumstances exist:
that the financial affairs of the organisation are being or have been conducted for a fraudulent or unlawful purpose;
that persons concerned with the management of those financial affairs have, in connection with that management, been guilty of fraud, misfeasance or other misconduct;
Investigation of financial affairs
37A. Power of Certification Officer to require production of documents etc.
(1) The Certification Officer may at any time, if he thinks there is good reason to do so, give directions to a trade union, or a branch or section of a trade union, requiring it to produce such relevant documents as may be specified in the directions; and the documents shall be produced at such time and place as may be so specified.
37A. Power of Certification Officer to require production of documents etc.
(1) The Certification Officer may at any time, if he thinks there is good reason to do so, give directions to a trade union, or a branch or section of a trade union, requiring it to produce such relevant documents as may be specified in the directions; and the documents shall be produced at such time and place as may be so specified.
Regards
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
binsleepin
I imagine that it could be the case if the person in question had been disciplined by the branch or parent union. It is a trade union issue, not an employment one.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the link mr pony.
It appears it's not just past or present Union members who can alert the Certification Officer of concerns about maladministration:
It appears it's not just past or present Union members who can alert the Certification Officer of concerns about maladministration:
Originally Posted by The Certification Officer
WHO CAN COMPLAIN
2. A member of a trade union or employers' association may tell the Certification Officer
of circumstances suggesting one or more of the situations described above. However,
the Certification Officer can also receive approaches from any other source and will
consider these on their merits. In addition Certification Office staff will watch out for
references in the media to situations which suggest that the relevant set of
circumstances exist in the financial affairs of either a trade union or an employers'
association.
2. A member of a trade union or employers' association may tell the Certification Officer
of circumstances suggesting one or more of the situations described above. However,
the Certification Officer can also receive approaches from any other source and will
consider these on their merits. In addition Certification Office staff will watch out for
references in the media to situations which suggest that the relevant set of
circumstances exist in the financial affairs of either a trade union or an employers'
association.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's best we wait for the response from the Certification Officer to BASSAwitch's concerns.
I would hope that other members and former members of BASSA would expect transparency from their Union; that Holley is not prepared to make the accounts available, and apparently has quietly set up "BASSA Ltd." for an as yet undetermined purpose, does raise questions which most right minded people would want answering.
However, it is for the members of BASSA to direct their own Union branch, and members will always enjoy the leadership they deserve.
I would hope that other members and former members of BASSA would expect transparency from their Union; that Holley is not prepared to make the accounts available, and apparently has quietly set up "BASSA Ltd." for an as yet undetermined purpose, does raise questions which most right minded people would want answering.
However, it is for the members of BASSA to direct their own Union branch, and members will always enjoy the leadership they deserve.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But surely your post 965 means that you can pursue the issue and as you have spent so much detailed time on it, why not use your research?
If your post means that you personally can approach the CO and you are clearly upset by what is going on at the branch in question, then I would have thought that legislation would allow you to get the information that you require.
Or you could trust to luck that the CO is a member of pprune.
If your post means that you personally can approach the CO and you are clearly upset by what is going on at the branch in question, then I would have thought that legislation would allow you to get the information that you require.
Or you could trust to luck that the CO is a member of pprune.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA's audited accounts
Who are all these self-important, non-airline employed, busybodies who apparently have nothing better than to poke their noses into the affairs of a trade union in which they do not, have not, and probably will not ever be subscription paying members?
Have they got nothing better to do than to display their self-importance and their propensity to stick their (uninvited) oars in?
Let BASSA members inquire about their branch's account for themselves if they so wish. It is absolutely nothing to do with potential passengers, probable passengers, past passengers - or anyone else, apart from the branch members themselves.
Have they got nothing better to do than to display their self-importance and their propensity to stick their (uninvited) oars in?
Let BASSA members inquire about their branch's account for themselves if they so wish. It is absolutely nothing to do with potential passengers, probable passengers, past passengers - or anyone else, apart from the branch members themselves.
Chuchinchow,
when I first read your post I had a lot of sympathy for what you were saying. If I were a member of a private club which only did legal things legally then I would not want the outside world to be probing in to us.
However, bassa are not a private club. Further, they have expressed on a number of occasions their desire to muck up MY and other people's lives.
If I fly with BA, bassa's strike threats are a real pain. They want to ruin my passenger/customer experience.
They are probably unable to deliver on their threats, but they make it clear that they wish to negatively impact the passenger.
If I fly with BA I do not get hot towels in econ+, courtesy of bassa and weak BA managers.
I could go on with this, but it becomes boring.
By expressing their desire to muck up the lives of SLF, bassa have said that they want a public debate. They want to be with the big boys and girls.
A public debate includes Accounting for each and every penny that they have had over the last few years.
I hope that some bright QC picks up this case and gets all the dirty laundry - if there is any - out in the open.
when I first read your post I had a lot of sympathy for what you were saying. If I were a member of a private club which only did legal things legally then I would not want the outside world to be probing in to us.
However, bassa are not a private club. Further, they have expressed on a number of occasions their desire to muck up MY and other people's lives.
If I fly with BA, bassa's strike threats are a real pain. They want to ruin my passenger/customer experience.
They are probably unable to deliver on their threats, but they make it clear that they wish to negatively impact the passenger.
If I fly with BA I do not get hot towels in econ+, courtesy of bassa and weak BA managers.
I could go on with this, but it becomes boring.
By expressing their desire to muck up the lives of SLF, bassa have said that they want a public debate. They want to be with the big boys and girls.
A public debate includes Accounting for each and every penny that they have had over the last few years.
I hope that some bright QC picks up this case and gets all the dirty laundry - if there is any - out in the open.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London (Babylon-on-Thames)
Age: 42
Posts: 6,168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let BASSA members inquire about their branch's account for themselves if they so wish. It is absolutely nothing to do with potential passengers, probable passengers, past passengers - or anyone else, apart from the branch members themselves.
Chuchinchow is online now Report Post Reply
Chuchinchow is online now Report Post Reply
Seems like a quietly put, reasonable request for transparency. Being so obviously reluctant to be open with members and former members leads one to conclude they are keen for people to remain in the dark. One rule for the rest of the world, another for the BASSA-mentalists?
Last edited by Skipness One Echo; 14th Mar 2011 at 18:02.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well thats three who could contact the CO and make a complaint, who, despite stirring things regally here, with no evidence, choose to do nothing when they have the opportunity.
If someone at BASSA has cooked the books then they will eventually get caught and dealt with as appropriate. To this date we have seen no evidence of any wrongdoing.
If someone at BASSA has cooked the books then they will eventually get caught and dealt with as appropriate. To this date we have seen no evidence of any wrongdoing.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by churchinchow
Let BASSA members inquire about their branch's account for themselves if they so wish.
Former BASSA members are now making the right moves to obtain the transparency which BASSA is legally required to provide. It seems prudent to await the CO's response before making any further waves.
No-one is alleging any "cooked books"; it is the lack of transparency itself which is against Trades Union legislation.
The legal position is that the general public have the right to raise concerns. As a BA shareholder, it is very much "my" business. Should further obfuscation be forthcoming from BASSA, it might be an option to become more involved.
But I wouldn't be surprised if the findings from DH's recent Employment Tribunal have already piqued the interest of the Certification Officer.
The bullying aggression shown in the rest of your post says a great deal more about what BASSA might have to hide, than I ever could.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
chuchinchow
Your tirade is difficult for me to understand since you asked:
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?
...not so long ago.
The Certification Officer has made a deliberate attempt to open the door to outsiders.
What harm could be done by informing about missing records that are meant to be kept as a statutory necessity?
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?
...not so long ago.
The Certification Officer has made a deliberate attempt to open the door to outsiders.
What harm could be done by informing about missing records that are meant to be kept as a statutory necessity?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Hamptonne
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a BA shareholder, it is very much "my" business.
"As a BA shareholder" it is absolutely none of your business to poke your nose into the internal affairs of a trade union you do not belong to, have not belonged to and etc etc etc.
By your logic, because you may pay council tax in a town "it is very much [your] business" to investigate what that town's employees wear, eat for lunch and so forth.
Let BASSA members challenge their branch secretary to produce audited accounts; it is absolutely no business of anyone else - not even the self-appointed inquisitors of the PPRuNe SLF threads.
And for the avoidance of any possible doubt, and before the herd instinct kicks in with snide negative personal comments against me, I am not nor have I ever been a member of any trade union during the course of my entire life.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Bristol
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry but what a lot of tosh...
BASSA is part of a trade union and comes under trade union law. If it is breaking that law and is discovered, the defence of "oh, but we were rumbled by a non-member" simply isn't going to cut it. The law is the law and if you can't run a trade union legally then you face the consequences.
If you came across someone you believed to be burgling a house, but it wasn't yours, do you somehow magically lose the right to call the police?
BASSA is part of a trade union and comes under trade union law. If it is breaking that law and is discovered, the defence of "oh, but we were rumbled by a non-member" simply isn't going to cut it. The law is the law and if you can't run a trade union legally then you face the consequences.
If you came across someone you believed to be burgling a house, but it wasn't yours, do you somehow magically lose the right to call the police?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does seem to me that the demand for legally mandated transparency has hit a particularly raw nerve with BASSA......
But Unite has history in this regard. Unite has been censured for denying access to the accounting records of branches of the Union itself:
1: on or around 3 May 2006
the Union breached section 30 of the 1992 Act by
failing to provide Mr G King & Mr M King with access to the accounting records of the 1/230 branch
of the union
2: on or around 6 December 2005 the
1/230 branch of the TGWU in breach of rule 10.4(a) of the rules of the union
failed to elect the members of the Cab Trade Advisory Committee
But Unite has history in this regard. Unite has been censured for denying access to the accounting records of branches of the Union itself:
1: on or around 3 May 2006
the Union breached section 30 of the 1992 Act by
failing to provide Mr G King & Mr M King with access to the accounting records of the 1/230 branch
of the union
2: on or around 6 December 2005 the
1/230 branch of the TGWU in breach of rule 10.4(a) of the rules of the union
failed to elect the members of the Cab Trade Advisory Committee
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Stevenage
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuchinchow
Who are all these self-important, non-airline employed, busybodies who apparently have nothing better than to poke their noses into the affairs of a trade union in which they do not, have not, and probably will not ever be subscription paying members?
If this is none of our business, then why does BASSA/Unite run full page adverts in our national newspapers?
This union is constantly trying to win public support for this Industrial Action, and as such, we have every right to respond to it. Perhaps you do not like hearing the reasoned arguments that appear here, and dont like the fact that you cannot control what is said, or our opinions?
We have every right to express these opinions, to debate the issues, and to raise any possible shortcomings in the running of the union.
There are people on your side of the fence who join in this discussion, and I welcome it. Please feel free to also enter the debate on this forum, but don't try and silence us.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Over on the CC thread...
Shaka Zulu has posted up a BASSA rant about sexism amongst the pilot/management community. It's a bit of a larf. This is the best sentence:
It would appear that cabin crew, and by de facto, predominantly women, had to be kept in their place at any cost.
I like the faulty use of Latin so much - no-one uses these little phrases in a public forum if they have any sense. It appears a bit conceited to start with, and it doesn't communicate to all who read it either. But when you get it wrong as well. Ha Ha.
Worse still is the logic - it goes like this:
Many CC are women, when one is persecuted on the basis of one's sex it is sexist, therefore if the mainly male BA/pilots/management/forum members etc do not accept our terms they are being sexist.
The Latin for this type of wonky thinking is cum hoc ergo propter hoc!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
It would appear that cabin crew, and by de facto, predominantly women, had to be kept in their place at any cost.
I like the faulty use of Latin so much - no-one uses these little phrases in a public forum if they have any sense. It appears a bit conceited to start with, and it doesn't communicate to all who read it either. But when you get it wrong as well. Ha Ha.
Worse still is the logic - it goes like this:
Many CC are women, when one is persecuted on the basis of one's sex it is sexist, therefore if the mainly male BA/pilots/management/forum members etc do not accept our terms they are being sexist.
The Latin for this type of wonky thinking is cum hoc ergo propter hoc!
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Last edited by mrpony; 15th Mar 2011 at 15:01.
