BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KW has a very difficult balancing act. A deal is needed to bring closure so the business can move on, and he'll have to give something to BASSA for a deal to be palatable and so they don't lose too much face.
However, taking the temperature of non-CC BA staff there is a very strong sentiment that whilst BASSA has lost in terms of not securing a reversal of the crewing changes and the dissolution of Mixed Fleet, BASSA's behaviour has been so abhorrent it must also be seen to have lost and should be given any concessions which it can use to claim victory. Put another way, BASSA has to learn that throwing hissy fits doesn't get you anywhere.
However, taking the temperature of non-CC BA staff there is a very strong sentiment that whilst BASSA has lost in terms of not securing a reversal of the crewing changes and the dissolution of Mixed Fleet, BASSA's behaviour has been so abhorrent it must also be seen to have lost and should be given any concessions which it can use to claim victory. Put another way, BASSA has to learn that throwing hissy fits doesn't get you anywhere.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
However, taking the temperature of non-CC BA staff there is a very strong sentiment that whilst BASSA has lost in terms of not securing a reversal of the crewing changes and the dissolution of Mixed Fleet, BASSA's behaviour has been so abhorrent it must also be seen to have lost and should be given any concessions which it can use to claim victory. Put another way, BASSA has to learn that throwing hissy fits doesn't get you anywhere.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPN11
As usual with me, I didn't make my point clear enough. I wasn't trying to stretch your point, but try to make a comment about how reasonableness can vary. It is impossible to get the tone of a post right and I was trying (and failing) to discuss rather than question.
Dawdler
I agree entirely with LD's comment.
Sadly there are worrying signs that some within the company are reluctant to defend at least one Volunteer Cabin Crew (VCC) member from BASSA's attentions because of the "sensitivities" surrounding negotiations between BA and BASSA. If KW and the leadership team are now willing to close a blind eye to the continuing excesses of some in BASSA in the hopes of smoothing the way to a deal then the post-conflict enviroment in BA will be truely awful. Letting an unreformed, unreconstructed BASSA continue to exert influence will mean we will be discussing yet another strike in the not to distant future and I rather suspect that if it happens again BA will fail to get volunteers from any department.
I hope KW is aware of that.
regards
I agree entirely with LD's comment.
Sadly there are worrying signs that some within the company are reluctant to defend at least one Volunteer Cabin Crew (VCC) member from BASSA's attentions because of the "sensitivities" surrounding negotiations between BA and BASSA. If KW and the leadership team are now willing to close a blind eye to the continuing excesses of some in BASSA in the hopes of smoothing the way to a deal then the post-conflict enviroment in BA will be truely awful. Letting an unreformed, unreconstructed BASSA continue to exert influence will mean we will be discussing yet another strike in the not to distant future and I rather suspect that if it happens again BA will fail to get volunteers from any department.
I hope KW is aware of that.
regards
Last edited by wiggy; 20th Apr 2011 at 08:52.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At least they're being honest about most things
....over in the SWP.
Unite delays strikes at British Airways - again|23Apr11|Socialist Worker
The obvious exception being the pregnancy scam.
Unite delays strikes at British Airways - again|23Apr11|Socialist Worker
The obvious exception being the pregnancy scam.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: essex
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unlike IATU Butler over on the CC thread
Who blames BA for the:
...ignoring the obvious deficiencies in BASSA's procedures and records.
At the same time BASSA's own peculiar attitude to democracy, exemplified below in an excerpt from its rules regarding the Branch Committee's ability to self-declare the circumstances under which full-blown democracy by postal ballot is relegated to a dodgy show of hands at a branch meeting never attended by more than a fifth of its members, is conveniently overlooked.
Can anyone tell me the last time BASSA held a postal ballot for anything apart from strike action (about which they have no choice but to ballot)?
...perverse use of the legal system to utilise tiny indiscretions in the balloting process to void a democratic ballot,
At the same time BASSA's own peculiar attitude to democracy, exemplified below in an excerpt from its rules regarding the Branch Committee's ability to self-declare the circumstances under which full-blown democracy by postal ballot is relegated to a dodgy show of hands at a branch meeting never attended by more than a fifth of its members, is conveniently overlooked.
Voting on general matters as determined by the Committee, may be put to the Branch meeting and decided by a show of hands. On all issues of a substantial nature voting shall be by means of a postal ballot of the relevant section of the Branch Community directly affected.
Where an issue is deemed by at least a two-thirds majority vote of the Branch Committee to be of such an extreme importance and urgent nature and where a postal vote would be impractical or inappropriate decision could be placed before a BASSA 1/2000 Branch meeting for an immediate decision.
Where an issue is deemed by at least a two-thirds majority vote of the Branch Committee to be of such an extreme importance and urgent nature and where a postal vote would be impractical or inappropriate decision could be placed before a BASSA 1/2000 Branch meeting for an immediate decision.
I suspect that the Butler character is not DH. For a start, Butler sounds intelligent, but more importantly the words and phrases are straight out of the SWP hand book of spin.
Earlier someone asked about when the SWP got involved. The answer is "from the beginning". They now have controlling power in CC89 and have a lot of "helpers" with bassa.
The SWP just want the spin and publicity. They do not care about, and in many cases do not like, real BA CC. They certainly do not have the BA CC interests at heart.
Earlier someone asked about when the SWP got involved. The answer is "from the beginning". They now have controlling power in CC89 and have a lot of "helpers" with bassa.
The SWP just want the spin and publicity. They do not care about, and in many cases do not like, real BA CC. They certainly do not have the BA CC interests at heart.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gems from the past
BASSA - Latest News REPORT BACK FROM TODAY’S BRANCH Oct 5th, 2009 by admin
At today’s well-attended branch meeting Steve Turner (joint National Officer for CAT) and the BASSA committee reported back on last week’s meeting with BA held at Acas offices in Euston, London. The membership heard how over the 3 days BA did not want to engage in face to face dialogue and how, despite BASSA asking, they did not seem inclined to put any fresh proposals on the table. The only hard fact that emerged was BA announced (through Acas) they intend to save £140million from the crew budget.
BASSA informed BA (again via Acas) that the improving financial situation meant that all previous proposals were now off the table and a blank sheet of paper between us would be a good starting place for fresh negotiations. Sadly BA could not or would not add anything to this blank piece of paper.
Also the membership were told that the Amicus (CC89) side of UNITE, led by Brian Boyd (Steve Turner’s counterpart representing AMICUS interest) has agreed in principle to finding the £140m... much to our dismay. The committee then reported back how BA were now back to their old tricks of playing one union off against another and how the political situation within the Amicus section of UNITE could seriously undermine any potential BASSA ballot on industrial action. The membership were very angry, especially as CC89 now have so few members within BA (est 500-700) and that the "tail should not be wagging the dog".
With all this in mind three proposals were made from the floor and all accepted by 100% of those present.
1.Because of concerns over Brian Boyd using UNITE’s money to publish letters criticising our own union BASSA, alongside the fact that he has agreed in writing to accept the target of saving £140m, we call upon Tony Woodley to now remove him from the talks and that this issue is also dealt with by the NEC (a governing committee within UNITE).
2.It is unacceptable to again use our money to fund representatives who are undermining the interests and motions passed by this branch. Specifically the use of a separate consultative ballot.
3.The T&G UNITE section have total control of any ballot of industrial action within BA and if this does not happen the AMICUS section is specifically excluded from any future branch of BASSA 1/2000 for industrial action.
After a unanimous show of hands it was reported back how one of the AMICUS reps taking part in the talks was taking VR in 3 weeks and how unethical it was for him to be part of a negotiating team involved in the futures of remaining crew. It was also relayed back that this same rep had asked BA to initiate a bullying and harassment investigation against many of the committee for requesting that he not participate in the talks and how BA had now indeed opened a formal procedure against certain named BASSA representatives.
The committee apologised to the floor for "the political nature" of the report back but stressed it was vital that the membership knew just what was going on backstage and, despite BASSA on many occasions holding out the hands of friendship to CC89 reps, how BA and AMICUS leadership seem determined to exploit the divides of the last 20 years.
One member then said that in her opinion BASSA should now give BA absolutely nothing by way of savings and we should all prepare for inevitable industrial action. Needless to say the speaker got the biggest cheer of the meeting and a standing ovation.
At today’s well-attended branch meeting Steve Turner (joint National Officer for CAT) and the BASSA committee reported back on last week’s meeting with BA held at Acas offices in Euston, London. The membership heard how over the 3 days BA did not want to engage in face to face dialogue and how, despite BASSA asking, they did not seem inclined to put any fresh proposals on the table. The only hard fact that emerged was BA announced (through Acas) they intend to save £140million from the crew budget.
BASSA informed BA (again via Acas) that the improving financial situation meant that all previous proposals were now off the table and a blank sheet of paper between us would be a good starting place for fresh negotiations. Sadly BA could not or would not add anything to this blank piece of paper.
Also the membership were told that the Amicus (CC89) side of UNITE, led by Brian Boyd (Steve Turner’s counterpart representing AMICUS interest) has agreed in principle to finding the £140m... much to our dismay. The committee then reported back how BA were now back to their old tricks of playing one union off against another and how the political situation within the Amicus section of UNITE could seriously undermine any potential BASSA ballot on industrial action. The membership were very angry, especially as CC89 now have so few members within BA (est 500-700) and that the "tail should not be wagging the dog".
With all this in mind three proposals were made from the floor and all accepted by 100% of those present.
1.Because of concerns over Brian Boyd using UNITE’s money to publish letters criticising our own union BASSA, alongside the fact that he has agreed in writing to accept the target of saving £140m, we call upon Tony Woodley to now remove him from the talks and that this issue is also dealt with by the NEC (a governing committee within UNITE).
2.It is unacceptable to again use our money to fund representatives who are undermining the interests and motions passed by this branch. Specifically the use of a separate consultative ballot.
3.The T&G UNITE section have total control of any ballot of industrial action within BA and if this does not happen the AMICUS section is specifically excluded from any future branch of BASSA 1/2000 for industrial action.
After a unanimous show of hands it was reported back how one of the AMICUS reps taking part in the talks was taking VR in 3 weeks and how unethical it was for him to be part of a negotiating team involved in the futures of remaining crew. It was also relayed back that this same rep had asked BA to initiate a bullying and harassment investigation against many of the committee for requesting that he not participate in the talks and how BA had now indeed opened a formal procedure against certain named BASSA representatives.
The committee apologised to the floor for "the political nature" of the report back but stressed it was vital that the membership knew just what was going on backstage and, despite BASSA on many occasions holding out the hands of friendship to CC89 reps, how BA and AMICUS leadership seem determined to exploit the divides of the last 20 years.
One member then said that in her opinion BASSA should now give BA absolutely nothing by way of savings and we should all prepare for inevitable industrial action. Needless to say the speaker got the biggest cheer of the meeting and a standing ovation.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What a brilliant glimpse into the past notlangley.
Note the comment about BA refusing to hold face to face talks whereas the court evidence was clear that BASSA and CC89 refused to sit in the same room.
The claim that CC89 had only 500-700 members is also wrong.
Also, note the comment that it would be "unethical" for a crew member leaving BA to take part in negotiations! What does that say about the sacked reps!?
And how many times has BASSA claimed that they offered BA savings just short of its target?
Note the comment about BA refusing to hold face to face talks whereas the court evidence was clear that BASSA and CC89 refused to sit in the same room.
The claim that CC89 had only 500-700 members is also wrong.
Also, note the comment that it would be "unethical" for a crew member leaving BA to take part in negotiations! What does that say about the sacked reps!?
And how many times has BASSA claimed that they offered BA savings just short of its target?
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LD12986 said
But presumably perfectly ok in those innocent days for a "leaving BA" member to cast a vote to strike.
Also, note the comment that it would be "unethical" for a crew member leaving BA to take part in negotiations!
Join Date: May 2010
Location: west yorkshire UK
Age: 78
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Accounts
At the begining of this sorry saga BASSA stated that they would not avail themselves of the opportunity to inspect, in confidence,the BA accounts because they were not accountants and therefor would not understand them.
Would this same lack of understanding be the reason they are unable to produce the branch accounts?
Would this same lack of understanding be the reason they are unable to produce the branch accounts?
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wiggy - Dawdler - LD12986 - et. al.
I don't suppose that anyone of you or anyone else you may know is in a position to whip-up and circulate a brief letter for signature by the (13500 - 5811) of BA CC who didn't vote to strike plus all the ~2000 VCCs and any one else caused significant hardship by BASSA's behaviour in all other BA departments within the next 28 days?
The letter should be presented to KW as he conducts negotiations basically pointing out how pi**sed-off you all are at BASSA's behaviour and that any settlement leaving the remote chance of BASSA claiming a victory would be met with a lasting ill-feeling, or even a potential back-lash, from the rest of his company.
There is an almost palpable ground-swell of feeling against the militant BASSA members that a mass letter of this nature to KW would help them all feel they had a chance to have some say in the matter.
At the least KW will receive a very strong message and may even be able to stipulate language either for BASSA to issue a public apology for its demeaning behaviour or even to gag BASSA from crowing to anyone about the settlement otherwise they will be in breach of the settlement agreement.
At the most he might just pay attention and let BASSA/Unite go ahead and meet their strike mandate deadline and have to make that strike call. After all, who is more important to him the 5811 renegades or the 40,000 loyal staff?
BASSA would certainly be given a message at just how upset the entire BA workforce has become at their behaviour which might help to sow a few seeds of doubt in their minds leading them to realise they were totally out of line - but then again I'm thinking rationally!
The letter should be presented to KW as he conducts negotiations basically pointing out how pi**sed-off you all are at BASSA's behaviour and that any settlement leaving the remote chance of BASSA claiming a victory would be met with a lasting ill-feeling, or even a potential back-lash, from the rest of his company.
There is an almost palpable ground-swell of feeling against the militant BASSA members that a mass letter of this nature to KW would help them all feel they had a chance to have some say in the matter.
At the least KW will receive a very strong message and may even be able to stipulate language either for BASSA to issue a public apology for its demeaning behaviour or even to gag BASSA from crowing to anyone about the settlement otherwise they will be in breach of the settlement agreement.
At the most he might just pay attention and let BASSA/Unite go ahead and meet their strike mandate deadline and have to make that strike call. After all, who is more important to him the 5811 renegades or the 40,000 loyal staff?
BASSA would certainly be given a message at just how upset the entire BA workforce has become at their behaviour which might help to sow a few seeds of doubt in their minds leading them to realise they were totally out of line - but then again I'm thinking rationally!
Last edited by AV Flyer; 21st Apr 2011 at 09:57.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the begining of this sorry saga BASSA stated that they would not avail themselves of the opportunity to inspect, in confidence,the BA accounts because they were not accountants and therefor would not understand them...
BASSA informed BA (again via Acas) that the improving financial situation meant that all previous proposals were now off the table and a blank sheet of paper between us would be a good starting place for fresh negotiations.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I now realise that it is bit obvious that the words
were written by the Secretary Duncan Holley
how unethical it was for him to be part of a negotiating team involved in the futures of remaining crew
The way to give the management a message is to run a strike ballot 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
While reading the comments from I.A.T.U. Butler on the other thread (who is suspected of being DH given his constant demeaning of pilots) it really comes home how the BASSA brain-washing of those who do not think for themselves works.
Virtually nothing that the BASSA poster says is based on any facts whatsover and virtually everything that is said is based on an illogical and twisted form of conjecture that has no obvious basis in reality but is carefully selected to whip-up the emotions of the unthinking believers.
When CC thread posters patiently and continually try to point out the facts and the gaping holes in the imaginative conjecture the BASSA poster completely ignores them, makes no attempt to assimilate or understand their opposing view points, and just keeps trotting out more and more fantasy.
It really is incredible to observe. One has to wonder if the BASSA poster is a rational person doing it deliberately or if they are truly a completely deluded and misguided individual?
The amazing fact is that BA's management, and everyone else involved in the operations of BA, are giving them their respect and continuing to communicate patiently while taking these people seriously and negotiating with them as if they are mature, thinking and reasoning adults.
The truth of the matter is they are deluded, non-thinking, beserkers living on another planet and thus society should be allowed to judge them as such, politely ignore them, and move on without them.
In only negotiating with Unite, I guess this is precisely what BA is attempting to achieve leaving Unite to sort-out its wayward CC Branch even though it has chosen to do nothing as yet.
Virtually nothing that the BASSA poster says is based on any facts whatsover and virtually everything that is said is based on an illogical and twisted form of conjecture that has no obvious basis in reality but is carefully selected to whip-up the emotions of the unthinking believers.
When CC thread posters patiently and continually try to point out the facts and the gaping holes in the imaginative conjecture the BASSA poster completely ignores them, makes no attempt to assimilate or understand their opposing view points, and just keeps trotting out more and more fantasy.
It really is incredible to observe. One has to wonder if the BASSA poster is a rational person doing it deliberately or if they are truly a completely deluded and misguided individual?
The amazing fact is that BA's management, and everyone else involved in the operations of BA, are giving them their respect and continuing to communicate patiently while taking these people seriously and negotiating with them as if they are mature, thinking and reasoning adults.
The truth of the matter is they are deluded, non-thinking, beserkers living on another planet and thus society should be allowed to judge them as such, politely ignore them, and move on without them.
In only negotiating with Unite, I guess this is precisely what BA is attempting to achieve leaving Unite to sort-out its wayward CC Branch even though it has chosen to do nothing as yet.
Last edited by AV Flyer; 21st Apr 2011 at 16:09.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Age: 54
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep - "You had to leave BASSA to be eligable for the deal" is a particular bit of rubbish. BA are not allowed to entice people to leave a union. The deal was open to those that had already left.
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: -)
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a letter dated 22 February 2011 from Brendan Gold to Tony McCarthy, Brendan Gold said of BASSA numbers that he believed that they numbered 8918.
On the other thread Rover90 said that the monthly subscription to BASSA is £16.38 from which BA deduct a handling fee of 2.5%. - Most of the money goes to Unite, what is left remains at the discretion of BASSA. - What is left is £5.28 multiplied by 8918 = £47,127.17 per month - or £565,526 per year
Presumably the accounts of BASSA read
_Income_________Expenditure_________Loss_________Prophet
£565,526_________£565,526____________0_____________0
links_____link1_____link2
On the other thread Rover90 said that the monthly subscription to BASSA is £16.38 from which BA deduct a handling fee of 2.5%. - Most of the money goes to Unite, what is left remains at the discretion of BASSA. - What is left is £5.28 multiplied by 8918 = £47,127.17 per month - or £565,526 per year
Presumably the accounts of BASSA read
_Income_________Expenditure_________Loss_________Prophet
£565,526_________£565,526____________0_____________0
Errors and Omissions Excepted
links_____link1_____link2