Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Misc. Forums > Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)
Reload this Page >

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your questions here?

BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V

Old 7th Apr 2011, 00:05
  #401 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Swiss Cottage
Age: 57
Posts: 24
harrypic

No, I don't get your point.

In industrial action, all union members get a vote, regardless of which way they vote.

Three 33% workers going on strike has the same effect as one full time worker going on strike.

The only difference I can see is that it might take a little longer for 3 x 33% strikers to lose staff travel, due to rostering patterns.

A big rabbit hole, methinks.
Frognal is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 09:24
  #402 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Forgive me for putting this down on paper - it's a question really:

5700 vote to strike but only 5000 ever will. Of the 5000, 2000 are part time at an average of 50%. Everyone is rostered for flying duties 50% of available time on any given day ( a complete guess ).

Strikers rostered to fly on a given day =

[(5000-2000) + (2000x50%)]x50% = 2000

Is that about right?
mrpony is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 09:41
  #403 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Three 33% workers going on strike has the same effect as one full time worker going on strike.
Are you sure? If 3 full-timers call a 3 day strike, the company loses 9 man days. If it's 3 33% workers who are each rostered for one day the company only loses 3 man days.

Therefore the original point stands - i.e. that, although part-timers boost a strike vote out of proportion to their working hours (unfairly according to some), when it comes to actually striking their one vote is not as powerful as that of a full-timer.
Haymaker is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 09:56
  #404 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
From the update posted by BASSAWitch, the branch reps are not involved in the talks between BA and Unite.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall when Len reports back to BASSA....
LD12986 is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 10:34
  #405 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 59
Posts: 1,197
And further, no less than 4 of the senior BASSA decision-makers have been sacked by BA, and thus their interest lies only in prolonging this dispute as settlement would see them out of a job.

I woulder if Unite will employ >5000 should BA decide enough is enough?
Mariner9 is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 10:42
  #406 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Swiss Cottage
Age: 57
Posts: 24
Haymaker

This
If 3 full-timers call a 3 day strike, the company loses 9 man days
is true in an environment where everyone works every working day.

But it seems to me it is all about crewing planes, not about productivity in an office environment. If you don't have enough crew to despatch legally, the flight must be canceled.

So if you are one down, it does not matter whether they are FTE or 33%, the effect is the same, the flight is cancelled.
Frognal is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 10:45
  #407 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Thanks to BASSAWitch on the other forum we now have an update on what is going on. According to DH only Unite (LM) and BA (KW) have had any discussions (negotiations) and thus BASSA & CC89 have not been involved at usual. We've been here before and it didn't work last time.

Much bluster and bravado sounding like BASSA is in charge with an implied short window of opportunity for BA to capitulate before announcing strike dates with still no statement of the reality (possibly because in the delusion there is genuinely no comprehension of the reality) that it's Unite's call whether to take the risk of an unprotected strike or that there are severe consequences to individual CC should they choose to take action.

Further, continuing denial of knowledge of the outcome of the ET even though BASSAWitch believes the outcome is known but not yet published.

With all this interim preamble Unite/BASSA are heading for a big disappointment from their loyal members should they not now call the strike. As they say the clock is indeed ticking - but most certainly not for BA to feel any pressure to capitulate - as BASSAWitch says "projection" - that most wonderful of delusions!

Last edited by AV Flyer; 7th Apr 2011 at 17:04.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 11:29
  #408 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
Such is BASSA's incompetence, we are in the very strange position that the best outcome for BA would be for Unite to actually call a strike!
VintageKrug is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 11:37
  #409 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 19
Frognal

So if you are one down, it does not matter whether they are FTE or 33%, the effect is the same, the flight is cancelled.
But you only have a third chance of being one down with a 33% worker. See mrpony's post for a reasonable guess at the impact.

Anyway, this is all getting a bit academic, so I suggest we agree to differ and put it to one side.
Haymaker is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 11:47
  #410 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
VK - Yes indeed!

In the event that Unite calls a strike then BA's dilemma will be "do we warn Unite of the consequences of unprotected action and risk them calling-off the strike" or "do we keep quiet this time as a strike is actually the best possible outcome for us"!

Last edited by AV Flyer; 7th Apr 2011 at 12:31.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 12:01
  #411 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 250
Um... I think you'll find that Unite have a duty to advise members of the possible outcome of striking if they think that it might be unprotected. Now the union may weasel and claim that they have legal advice that indicates that the actually will be protected. All of which will be very interesting if it comes to court.
Colonel White is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 12:24
  #412 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
If it wasn't for the fact Mark and I have been sacked and we now employ Ken/Penny in Unite House, BASSA would not be able to function at all so bear with us.


That'll all be shown in the accounts then will it, the money being spent on you, Mark and Ken/Penny? And the admin records will show how and why? The membership having first been consulted?

I can't believe anyone would believe this insulting pile of bullsh!t. The way is being paved for full time employees to represent BASSA after the anticipated embarrassing climb-down and subsequent reorganisation of the Branch. Now, I can't imagine who'll be up for that number, can you?
mrpony is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 13:10
  #413 (permalink)  
77
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 115
Frognal

So if you are one down, it does not matter whether they are FTE or 33%, the effect is the same, the flight is cancelled
Just to be pedantic BA and many airlines normal cabin crew is in excess of the minimum crewing levels for departure.
It is not unusual to depart with less cabin crew (or possibly pilots when heavy crewed) than the industrial agreement requires, providing the crew agrees.
Of course this needs good industrial relations and the crew having taken the interests of passengers and company into account.
77 is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 13:19
  #414 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 458
Um... I think you'll find that Unite have a duty to advise members of the possible outcome of striking if they think that it might be unprotected.
Bearing in mind the often repeated advise “you can’t be sacked for striking”, I wouldn’t place money on the Union being more accurate on this occasion than they have been on any other.

ST in 5 mins anyone?

Personally my advice to any member of crew considering going on strike would be to gather independent and professional advice on the possible consequences.

I think we can all agree that BASSA is not independent on this matter, I’ll let you form your own judgements with regards to their being professional or not – I certainly have mine..!
Snas is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 13:55
  #415 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Swiss Cottage
Age: 57
Posts: 24
But you only have a third chance of being one down with a 33% worker. See mrpony's post for a reasonable guess at the impact.
Final word from me, the above is not a valid analysis.

A 33% worker is a 100% crew member of any given flight complement.

77

Your are right, my 'one down' was in reference to the legal minimum crew, not the industrial agreement. Apologies for any ambiguity.
Frognal is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 14:29
  #416 (permalink)  
77
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Europe
Posts: 115
Frognal

Understood...no ambiguity now.
A lot of cabin crew will go the extra mile. They are not all BASSA fundamentalists.
Finally cancellation is not the only option. On some occasions it may be possible to offload a few pax if less than the minimum cabin crew so that the pax load is within the parameters for the number of cabin crew.

Not up to date on current regulations but on some small a/c it used to be 1 CC per 50 pax.
99 pax = 2 cabin crew
101pax = 3 cabin crew
77 is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 14:31
  #417 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: GB
Posts: 135
I think the effect of the many part-timers on both the ballot result and the operation in the event of a strike should not be underestimated.

Having part time staff voting to strike artifically inflates the actual damage the withdrawal of labour could inflict on the operation; having one crew member down is less of an issue as BA does not crew to minimal levels, and it's even less of an issue if that space can be rapidly filled by a VCC or Mixed Fleeter.

Originally Posted by mrpony
I can't believe anyone would believe this insulting pile of bullsh!t. The way is being paved for full time employees to represent BASSA after the anticipated embarrassing climb-down and subsequent reorganisation of the Branch. Now, I can't imagine who'll be up for that number, can you?
Did I understand that correctly; the Malone/Everard/Holley show could continue as they could potentially become permanently salaried BASSA reps even though two of them don't work for BA any longer???

Weird and Wondrous indeed!

It's just so very important that people within BASSA take an interest in the internal workings of the Branch and are in a position to nominate themselves to run the branch once Holley et al. step down in October; if they remain unopposed, this embarrassing shower of an "leadership" could continue misrepresenting the interests of cabin crew.
VintageKrug is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 14:38
  #418 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Of the sacked reps one, Nicky Marcus, is now employed by Unite. Mark Everard was able to build a successful kitchen fitting business whilst working for BA so I doubt he'll be looking for a job.

I doubt DH has any chance of gaining full time employment with Unite and the fact that he hasn't a year after being sacked by BA speaks volumes.

BASSA will cease to exist when this farce is finally over as the dissolution of the two separate branches is inevitable. Unite will not a repeat of this.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 15:36
  #419 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Did I understand that correctly; the .....show could continue as they could potentially become permanently salaried BASSA reps even though two of them don't work for BA any longer???
I don't know this to be the case. Though these people have been remarkably bad at strategic thinking in the interests of BASSA's members, they didn't get to be union top dogs without a certain amount of tactical animal cunning. They must know, whatever they say, that the game's up on this round of IA.

I'd start planning for the future if I were them, and the only paying one available is staring them in the face.

I think the members need someone to 'Braveheart' the situation. No luck thus far.
mrpony is offline  
Old 7th Apr 2011, 16:01
  #420 (permalink)  
RTR
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 127
I still cannot agree that people like Holley and Everard can negotiate with BA when they are no longer employed by them. How can it be, whichever way you point, that these dismissed individuals could enter the office of KW to 'represent BASSA!' It is absurd. And if, as is suggested by VK, that they could become "salaried reps of BASSA even though are no longer employed by BA" they could still represent BASSA.

That is even more absurd and I really do doubt that part of the discussion KW is having with LMcC is that he will not allow BASSA reps in the ilk of Holley and Everard in his office. I'd say that is right and proper. It is so ridiculous it is in the realm of a black farce - even a comedy!

Btw. Did we hear after all that DH failed at Watford?
RTR is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.