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 8th Apr 2011, 19:05
  #441 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 75
Posts: 5,725
Humour is temporarily cancelled, as "Crewfriend" has joined a couple of others in the Sin Bin.

However, the latest missive from HQ BASSA is on the CC Thread. It includes ...

As cabin crew, we still have ten points of dispute between British Airways and ourselves; these still remain and must be resolved.
Ooops ... continuation of previous dispute

Strike action is still very much a tool at our disposal, AND LEN HAS STATED THAT HE WILL NOT HESITATE TO ANNOUNCE STRIKE DATES, IF REQUIRED.
Once he's sure that the strike would be legal

However, as long as there remains a possibility of achieving that without resorting to strike action, then obviously that must be the preferred path.
Which is why we keep calling for a vote for strike action


MPN11 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2011, 19:06
  #442 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
The last time Duncan said "there's nothing to worry about" was before Unite went to see a QC about the previous strike ballot...

I really can't see BA changing its position significantly.


BASSA - Latest News BASSA STATEMENT Apr 8th, 2011 by admin

Firstly, please accept our sincere apologies for the lack of updates this week; this was not deliberate but a prudent necessity.

Please be assured that there currently is no need for concern, though concern is of course understandable. Be reassured, things are happening behind the scenes involving your senior BASSA reps and the highest levels of BA management, it is the first time this has happened, it is tentative and exploratory, the fragile first green shoots if you like of a possible peace; it remains a fragile peace, but it is encouraging that there are even signs. There is a long, long way to go, but everything has to start somewhere and we would be irresponsible if we did not at least play our part in allowing this to be given oxygen.

Mr Williams brings with him a different perspective, and we intend to give him the opportunity to solve this dispute if we possibly can.

This will not be at any price.

As cabin crew, we still have ten points of dispute between British Airways and ourselves; these still remain and must be resolved.

Strike action is still very much a tool at our disposal, AND LEN HAS STATED THAT HE WILL NOT HESITATE TO ANNOUNCE STRIKE DATES, IF REQUIRED.

However, as long as there remains a possibility of achieving that without resorting to strike action, then obviously that must be the preferred path.

Every opportunity will be given to British Airways to join us in that aim.

We totally accept that it is extremely frustrating for you not to hear specifics, but please bear with us a little longer, we know what needs to be solved and your reps will be directly involved in trying to do so.

This does not mean that we will be successful in this dialogue and the fact that we have remained fairly silent, communication wise, does not mean strike action has gone away, it has not, far from it, but we hope you will see the sense in exploring every opportunity first.

A cynical view could be that this is just a stalling tactic to delay any action until after the Easter holidays, but we do not believe this to be the motivation, we will accept these approaches as genuine, until proven to be otherwise.

We will update you further after the weekend but for now, enjoy the sunshine and let us do what we do best, look after you.

We havenít come this far to let you down now.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2011, 19:41
  #443 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Full marks can be obtained by answers to any two questions

1) Is Duncan Holley a reliable source of information?

2) Does anyone have a reliable source of information to support the statement that Mr Holley has taken his case to Appeal?

Candidates can answer questions in any order - however candidates who answer question (2) first, should state the relevant UKEAT number in their answer.
notlangley is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2011, 20:05
  #444 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
I've just had a translation of the post above the one above sent to me:

Look, we haven't got a hope in hell of winning this thing, we can't strike anyway. The hole that has been dug by BA that I told you about isn't actually a hole in the ground. It's more like the diggings from a hole that's been made into a platform from which BA can dictate the terms of a settlement. It's still a hole though. I told you to keep the faith. Well I've had a bit of a think about that and faith is very subjective. When I've decided what faith should now be, I'll let you know. Keep paying your subs.

.

Last edited by mrpony; 8th Apr 2011 at 21:10.
mrpony is offline  
Old 8th Apr 2011, 21:16
  #445 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
In terms of the ten items in the dispute, BA will give on some of the relatively superficial issues (eg, pay for crew on sick during the strike) to give Len something to take to the membership, but will not give any ground on the fundamental issues (Mixed Fleet, save for some general promises to consult etc). Unite will not give BASSA the strike it is salivating for. BASSA will try and spin this as a massive "victory".

Unite know BA will challenge this strike on the basis it is unprotected. BA told Unite this over 9 months ago.

The members have been led up the garden path and tens of thousands of members' funds has been wasted on futile ballots.

Last edited by LD12986; 8th Apr 2011 at 21:37.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 03:51
  #446 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 73
Thought About the Numbers

Unite has over one million members. Bassa and CC89 have less than 10K members. Bassa and CC89 are less than 1% of Unites total membership. How far will Red Len go for 1%?
pcat160 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 11:31
  #447 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,646
pcat
In the system that Mcgrumpy is in, it is very seldom about the numbers. It is more about his personal position in the UK's "Broad Left". If he can gain more credibility within the Broad left by having a strike, then he will do so.


The actual TU members are, and have always been, an irrelevance, once he has the ballot result. If the ballot result had been against the strike, Mc Grumpy would not involve himself at all.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 12:54
  #448 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
The moment that DH says "Please be assured that there currently is no need for concern........" then any sensible person would realise immediately that there should be great cause for concern. You don't hear BA making any statements like that because they don't need to - any rational person knows that BA is in charge.

After all the financial cost and personal pain experienced by people involved with BA's operations, that have been caused by BASSA's behaviour over the past 2 years (and prior), I really can't see BA (KW) making it easy for BASSA by letting them off the hook and settling at this time. BA would just be allowing DH and others to remain in power, claim a glorious victory, and repeat the entire charade again and again upon any future whim.

It may be that KW leaves the current offer on the table thus keeping it on record how BA have continued to be reasonable and negotiate in good faith while realising that BASSA will never agree to the offer. Remember that the current offer already has partial ST concessions made by BA last time on the agreement it would be presented to the BASSA members upon which Unite then reneged. BA would be more than justified in taking back those ST and any other concessions made and starting the negotiation over again from where they were prior to the last round should it wish.

No, this is BA's and all its backers' moment of glory where, after a long road, while showing extreme and mature patience in the face of thuggish and childish behaviour, it now has a chance to make the BASSA/Unite leaders squirm and reveal to their loyal members the lies, deceit and falsehoods expressed by them right-up to the very end. The more that DH spills his 'everything is fine and we're in control' messages the harder he will fall when the disappointment following the truth that will emerge within the next 12 days is felt.

As LD12986 says, I'd love to be a "fly on the wall" when KW's best offer falls well short of DH's power hungry aspirations and LM explains to DH he can't have his strike particularly after DH has put it out to his faithful that "LEN HAS STATED THAT HE WILL NOT HESITATE TO ANNOUNCE STRIKE DATES, IF REQUIRED." The fact that he feels the need to capitalise the words says much for his real internal feelings of insecurity in this regard let alone the need to have to say it in the first place. Remember that D (I'll strike and strike and stike until I'm sick) H has been wanting his next strike since 10.10.10.10......... and even before then.

If BA were to capitulate by making yet further concessions and settle at this stage then they would be in a worse position regarding DH & BASSA than ever before. They would throw away a very large part of the potential gains they could have made and it makes no sense whatsoever after the patience shown and the efforts that everyone backing BA has expended in the face of the BASSA inspired adversity.

Indeed, having come so far, BA would be doing itself and its supporters a severe injustice if it were not to let this play out until the strike dates have to be announced thus allowing Unite/BASSA to decide the next move. If they don't announce a strike they will look like incompetent fools (yet again), if they do announce a strike then BA has a plethora of preplanned, both defensive and net-tightening, options with which it will be only too keen and ready to respond.

Last edited by AV Flyer; 10th Apr 2011 at 12:10.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 13:28
  #449 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Thanks AV for the comparison with Violet Elisabeth. V. funny.
mrpony is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 13:40
  #450 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
mrp - You're most welcome. Yes, a very memorable character indeed.

Perhaps I should have written - I'll stwike and stwike and stwike until I'm thick!

Last edited by AV Flyer; 9th Apr 2011 at 14:13.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 18:47
  #451 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
AV Flyer, you sum up the position perfectly.

KW knows exactly what he is dealing with. Unite has previously managed to squander every attempt by BA to settle/negotiate in good faith.

BA is not going to give ground easily and any movement on the truly substantive issues on Unite's shopping list (staff travel etc) is going to come with some pretty robust conditions.

One other point on strike action. Even though a full long haul schedule is planned, it is worth noting that since the last strike, BA has merged with Iberia and it has a joint-business with AA and Iberia for all transatlantic travel from Europe. Almost all (if not all) TATL services by AA carry a BA code and again almost all (if not all) Iberia long-haul services carry a BA code.

So even if one of BA's four weekly services to Mexico should be cancelled, most passengers could accommodated on Iberia's twice daily services.

Similarly if some of the CDG-LHR flights are cancelled, any transfer pax to North America could be accommodated on AA's direct flights to BOS, DFW, JFK, MIA and ORD which all carry a BA code.

Last edited by LD12986; 9th Apr 2011 at 19:46.
LD12986 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 19:45
  #452 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 75
Posts: 5,725
LD12986

I suspect BASSA/DH hasn't noticed that, being too busy trying to find a slot at Bedfont for the next demonstration, and trying to get an access pass to Unite's HQ.

Nice point
MPN11 is offline  
Old 9th Apr 2011, 22:04
  #453 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
A very good point LD12986 - yet another tool BA has to mitigate the effects of any IA.

I am sure that BA will prefer Unite to call IA so it can determine the true number of named CC who are still prepared to strike rather than the 5811 who anonymously just wanted "to send BA a message".

Once this true number is known BA can form a strategy to bring about resolution. The lower the number the easier it will be to force the issue e.g. derecognition, voluntary redundancy, etc. The larger the number the more likely it will have to engage in a Mexican stand-off and war of attrition while waiting for rank-and-file CC to become disillusioned and finally replace BASSA's leadership either in-situ or by forming another Branch e.g. PCCC, with a leadership who is prepared to work with BA in a mature manner.

Either way, the remaining minority militant 'legacy' CC will never "feel" anything other than hard-done by BA even though the majority are happy enough to move-on.

The whole sad and sorry mess was brought about by a succession of weak, ineffective and generous BA managements allowing the CC Unions/Branches to run IFCE on pretty much their own terms while encouraging CC to believe they were the elite thus making them feel their relative importance to BA's operation was higher than it really is. Indeed, BA's 'weak' generosity continues today when instead of taking the SOSR option, as has been validated by opposing Counsel even, it continues to honour legacy CC's Ts&Cs, including future pay rises, when others have received cuts - not that CC, in their deluded Union-led bubble, even remotely comprehend let alone appreciate any of this.

The epitome of the current madness to me is the compensation payment for a burned-out light-bulb in the crew rest area. Lights bulbs burn-out for Christ's sake. Crew have emergency torches or could be trained to replace light bulbs as they do at their own homes! I don't suppose that Flight Crew receive a compensation payment when a key flight instrument fails? Instead they are trained to keep everyone safe by continuing to fly using a limited panel. As for the significant drop in bulb "failures" during the strikes, well, I'll hold fire as it speaks volumes for why it's long overdue that BA management take-back control.

The complete fairy-tale dream was further supported by an entire UK nation who believed in its colonial heritage along with the romance and excitement of world travel around its empire as represented through its supreme Flag Carrier - the one and only BA!

Interesting how times change.......

Last edited by AV Flyer; 10th Apr 2011 at 17:37.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 17:56
  #454 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
The whole sad and sorry mess was brought about by a succession of weak, ineffective and generous BA managements allowing the CC Unions/Branches to run IFCE on pretty much their own terms while encouraging CC to believe they were the elite thus making them feel their relative importance to BA's operation was higher than it really is.
Oh how true. Only a week ago I was listening to a CSD tell a manager that the reason gold card holders flew BA was the crew.

The epitome of the current madness to me is the compensation payment for a burned-out light-bulb in the crew rest area. Lights bulbs burn-out for Christ's sake. Crew have emergency torches or could be trained to replace light bulbs as they do at their own homes!
To be precise, the problem is not the lights going out but the lights staying on (their default fail-safe status). It's remarkable how many lighting control panels were affected once the payment became known!
Yellow Pen is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 18:39
  #455 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Yellow Pen - Apologies for the misunderstanding, however, what you suggest is happening is far worse than what I thought was a simple service matter. What you describe would essentially amount to tampering with the installed equipment on an airliner.

I'm not familiar with Aviation Law but could imagine that such an offence would carry a considerable penalty if convicted. For the professional CC to engage in such an activity in the interests of increasing their pay sounds pretty bad to me. Who knows what other systems could be inadvertently disrupted in the process?

To your knowledge, how has BA management handled this matter when brought to its attention?
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 18:57
  #456 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Yellow Pen

So you are alleging that a member of the cabin crew would interfere with an aircraft system and this would not be addressed by both engineering and cabin crew management?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 19:27
  #457 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: The 3 Valleys
Posts: 187
You know, i think he is , LB.
AlpineSkier is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 19:38
  #458 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
I think it was addressed in 2 ways. Firstly the procedure was changed to have the Captain involved if a claim was made (any claim without their say so became invalid) and CC management took to inspecting the bunks before the crew boarded on some long range flights.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 19:42
  #459 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
AlpineSkier

So a plane lands and something is reported as broken, to allow an extra payment. Now who looks at the broken thing? Do you not think that if a repetitive problem that was not there, but now is, then it would not be looked into?
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 10th Apr 2011, 21:32
  #460 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
Originally Posted by Litebulbs
So you are alleging that a member of the cabin crew would interfere with an aircraft system and this would not be addressed by both engineering and cabin crew management?
No, I'm alleging that a member of the cabin crew would interfere with an aircraft system to get an extra payment. There is a reason why any claim for 'Bunk lights wouldn't go out' payments now require a corresponding entry in the aircraft tech log and an investigatory inspection by engineering.
Yellow Pen 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.