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 16th Apr 2011, 05:44
  #541 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Cardiff, UK
Age: 59
Posts: 1,197
The BASSA victory claim mentioned on the other thread reminds me of the Monty Python duel scene were the (by then) armless and legless knight asks "can we call it a draw?"
Mariner9 is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 06:07
  #542 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Escaped from Aberdeen
Posts: 40
After reading the latest DH rambling, I don't think it will be long before

gobfa is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 09:20
  #543 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 81
the fat lady's singing

i think the 28 day extension says it all. unite have been granted extra time to dig their own grave.

we know that, barring something unforeseen, unite will not agree further strike action: the cause is too inextricably linked to the earlier action.

they have been given a further period of time to accept what must look very much like the settlement tony woodley thought he had achieved. that extra time also moves the threat of a strike further in time from the ballot that authorised it - extra time for tempers to cool and interest to wane. even if a strike were then called, the response is likely to be so small as to be derisory.

BA do not need to do any more to 'destroy' BASSA as some have wanted. The key players in this dispute are now ancient history and will be replaced. Those who replace them in BASSA or Amicus will be starting from a totally different point and perspective and will be aware that power has shifted elsewhere. If BASSA regains credibility it will have been earned by reps who have accepted that fact and truly represent the community of members.

time for the academics to start competing for the book (and film?) rights-serialisation in the Daily Mail perhaps?
rethymnon is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 09:30
  #544 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,840
The key players in this dispute are now ancient history...
Sadly one of them certainly is not; DH is still in a position to "poison the well" and continues to do so. Until he is denied his position and the soapbox that goes with it the unrest will not end.

gobfa
wiggy is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 10:32
  #545 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Wiltshire
Age: 79
Posts: 184
Key Players

Don't forget the quiet one (now) - I seem to recollect seeing a few times in the past 3 - 6 months that Malone is now on the executive committee of Unite.

Now if true - will/is that enough to buy her away from BASSA and DH - and have they left her coming into a BASSA pension later this year?
Entaxei is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 10:47
  #546 (permalink)  
Cleverly disguised as a responsible adult
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: On the western edge of The Moor
Age: 63
Posts: 1,099
Don't forget the quiet one (now) - I seem to recollect seeing a few times in the past 3 - 6 months that Malone is now on the executive committee of Uni
From posters I see at work they seem to be re-electing this committee at present
west lakes is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 11:20
  #547 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
It is only after reading DH's latest missive, and the continuing comments directed by striking to non-striking CC at work, that I have to keep reminding myself of the extreme heights that DH and his followers' collective delusions have reached.

These people really still do believe that they are going to 'win' and really are discussing 25% pay rises and DH being appointed CEO of BA, etc., etc. BA's granting Unite a reprieve has been read as nothing short of "we have won and BA have completely capitulated thus the current talks are now between DH and KW to discuss the terms of BA's surrender".

"Oh and, by the way, ya-boo to the pilots!"

KW, in choosing to grant Unite/BASSA a reprieve from embarrassing themselves, has inadvertently allowed the misguided to pump themselves to even greater heights. With hindsight it may have been better to have allowed Unite/BASSA to reach the legal strike-announcement deadline and squirm if for no other reason than to make it abundantly clear to all BA-backing staff that BA has won.

It is going to be fascinating to watch the disillusionment experienced as the air comes out of the balloon and the truth emerges. Most will probably never accept it but one thing is for certain that DH won't be around in any official capacity to feed their delusional minds any more.

If there is to be any hope of of moving forward with a cooperative legacy CC then this has to be foremost on KW's list.

Last edited by AV Flyer; 16th Apr 2011 at 16:07.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 12:13
  #548 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 217
KW, in choosing to grant Unite/BASSA a reprieve from embarrassing themselves, has inadvertently allowed the misguided to pump themselves to even greater heights.
But think how much further they're going to fall now.
Yellow Pen is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 12:59
  #549 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,669
Deluded or not, BA has to deal with someone to represent the 5,800 "yes" voters.......
Whilst one would prefer it to be PC3 or a re-formed bassa, no Employee Relations situation that I have seen has enabled the employer to walk away from such a large yes vote, and their representatives.

Neither can BA recognise PC3 just because they are not bassa. BA have to live in and deal with the real world.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 13:35
  #550 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
AO - I agree. Which is why I see the very mimimum acceptable to BA being that DH is no longer involved in an official capacity when combined with LM's move to Unite central and several of the other key BASSA reps' dismissals may be all that BA can hope for in a revitalised Unite/BASSA combination.

It will be interesting to see where CC89 fits into all this. Something tells me we haven't finished hearing from them as they triggered the putting the spanner in the works with the BA/TW deal.

PCCC is always a possibility but they still don't appear to have the mettle to want to come out of the shadows even with BASSA's leadership at its most weakened right now. Somewhat surprising for a budding new CC Branch as its going to have to show some skin some time soon if it wants to stir-up sufficient support to be recognised as a legitimate Union/Branch.

Last edited by AV Flyer; 16th Apr 2011 at 13:45.
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:15
  #551 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Lemonia. Best Greek in the world
Posts: 1,669
AV - you make a good point about CC89. They appear to have a leadership that is even more controlled by the SWP than bassa, so the last thing they want is a settlement.

Maybe part on the behind closed doors deal is a forced branch merger, but the branch constitutions will have to be carefully examined to drive that through.
Ancient Observer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:30
  #552 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
Recommendation

To have, or to have not!
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:42
  #553 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
AO - Yes, indeed.

In further agreement with LD12986 above, it is extremely difficult to see a BA/Unite brokered deal that will be palatable to the branches short of a total return of power over IFCE operations as before which will only be over BA's dead body.

It's rather difficult to see KW doing anything other than repeating the WW/TW deal (combined with a side requirement that BASSA holds new leadership elections and only appoint BA employees!).

Will BASSA (DH) & CC89 accept this - Hell No! - STRIKE! - Ooops!

Indeed, if BA are not recognising BASSA's presence at the negotiations then would KW even accept any Unite/BA brokered deal to be offered to BASSA with a non-employee as its GS making the call whether its members are balloted or not?

Why does this all sound like deja vu?
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:45
  #554 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Betty Girl

From the other thread.
I also don't think you need to worry that KW will give in to Bassa.
I think we do. Already BASSA are crowing and there is no deal yet! DH has issued a statement (on the other thread).

What will happen in the left wing press is BASSA will be portrayed as winners in " this long running dispute" Other papers which have long lost interest in the thing will follows a similar line, (we all know how lazy journalists are). The BBC with its left leanings will report the victory.

KW seems to be handing a face-saving win instead of the deserved trouncing for BASSA. KW should insist, As part of the deal Unite must agree to the disbandment of BASSA and take the members into the heart of the main union.

All of this was so unnecessary if only BASSA had been under control of reasonable people. As it is, the branch must not be allowed ANY semblance of victory in the deal to be revealed in 28 days time. If not, let 'em strike if they dare then sue the pants off them
Dawdler is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:46
  #555 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
AV/AO
As long as Bassa remains constituted as it is, Unite can force nothing on it.
DH and his coterie have effective control over the whole shebang, money and all. It is very difficult to change the constitution: only at biennial meetings; with 28 day's prior notice of the change; only with a 2/3 majority in favour at the meeting; only thereafter by a 2/3 majority at a postal ballot. It's a comprehensive stitch-up to maintain the status quo.

Members pay their subs to Bassa, not Unite.

That's why I said earlier that the carve-up has already been done. DH and friends will be doing all they can to ensure that their 'legacy' isn't tarnished by a new BA-friendly leadership, and Unite don't want any shiny young radicals thinking they can get away with spending the money on a professionally run independent union(much like Balpa) rather than propping up Unite.

Also there's the troubling matter of the branch finances - you don't want people turning over all the furniture looking for that fiver you can't find. More motivation for status quo maintenance.

Just a few thoughts.

Last edited by mrpony; 16th Apr 2011 at 22:11.
mrpony is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:56
  #556 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
mrpony

I think that the Bassa constitution as you portray it is excellent, I repeat excellent.

Every union branch should be lay member driven and lead. Its the alleged money side that potentially lets it down. The only incentive should be to act for the benefit of the membership.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 14:59
  #557 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
mrpony - Understood - In which case this is not going to be settled any time soon.

At some point BA's management may have to accept its obligation to resolve the matter and thus by force if necessary. It simply cannot continue running the company much longer in this dysfunctional state without loosing support of the shareholders and even the Board.

What will finally drive it to stop playing Mr. Nice Guy?
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 15:05
  #558 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
LB - How can you say BASSA's constitution is excellent when it has allowed its current GS to remain in control when he is no longer an employee (thus contravening its own rules) while most certainly not acting to the benefit of its membership?
AV Flyer is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 15:10
  #559 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
AVflyer

Because an employer should not dictate who are the representatives. If you take out how effective or not the current incumbents are, all the employer would need to do to purge an effective branch, would be to just suspend and dismiss, albeit unfairly.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 16th Apr 2011, 15:22
  #560 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
LB - Yes, I agree. The constitution is clearly excellent in stopping the company from dictating who are the workers' representatives. However, does it not appear that this very constitutional excellence is back-firing rather badly when the incumbent representatives are not being very effective?
AV Flyer 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.