|
And the hysteria continues, by Ava Hannah:
Why? BA were being unreasonable and would not participate in serious negotiation. You are represented by a Union that refused to view financial documentation, refused to sit in the same room as other union representatives, and sent text messages during a confidential negotiation session. They played a nasty trick on us commuters. It wasn't a "trick", it was a statement regarding BA's position that they followed through with. BA thought they could scare us by threatening to remove our most valuable benefit should we go on strike. By all means, they removed it but good luck getting a deal with our union which has some 10.000 members unless Staff Travel forms part of it. Good luck with the 10,000 members when the majority of them came to work during the last strike. BASSA is down to 2,000 or at the most 3,000 hardliners and losing members daily. Unite have repeatedly said they will never recommend a proposal which does not include full reinstatement of it. Bassa have also given us reassurance that they will not either. I for one will never accept a proposal which does not include full reinstatement of Staff Travel. I for one would never accept a proposal that doesn't include my being a natural blonde and my gardener actually listening to my suggestions. Both of our suggestions have equally as much impact upon BA. To take industrial action is a democratic right. To punish people for taking industrial action is not. Willie Walsh and his regime seem to think they are above the law. If BA is acting outside of law Unite/BASSA is more than welcome to take them to Court. Many of us have been at BA a long time and have great pride in our careers. We have created BA. No sweetie, you haven't "created BA", you've simply worked for BA. You may have been a very positive employee, but you no more "created" BA than the guy in the mailroom "created" MicroSoft. Look what has happened to this company because of Willie Walsh. Was one airline not enough for him to destroy? Let's ballot again. I know where I am putting my X. Better yet, let's see BASSA actually put an offer up for vote to their members. They haven't done that yet. |
Teesider53: Wouldn't worry too much. There are loads more volunteers now being trained and now lots more in the pipeline. BASSAmentalists just do not understand how much the rest of staff outside CC are against these strikes.
Willie Walsh will continue to deliver everything he has said he would. This, with the help of BA staff excluding the nutters within BASSA and they are very much in the minority. There are some really great people within the BA CC community who have taken very brave steps to come into work and been prepared to face some of the intimidation that is around from BASSA CC. How BASSA members can hold up banners stating Willie Walsh has bullied them and called the airline Brutish Airways is laughable. I do wish the press would pick this up !!!! rgds EB ps Thanks for sticking with us, that includes all SLF ( not a term I had heard until I started reading this site ).:ok: |
Dairyground
Perhaps BA should insist that all commuters have at least as much local rest near LHR (or LGW) as BASSA or BALPA would require them to have after an on-duty positioning flight of the same duration To be fair most commuters I know are very careful about pre-duty local rest..... |
If you need to refer to a post on another thread or in another forum, please post a link rather than the text of the post - Many thanks.
|
I see from the Mail that 25,000 want those "poorly paid" Cabin Crew jobs.
25,000 want BA ¿scab¿ jobs airline is creating to beat the strikes | Mail Online There is 20 applicants for every single job available. BA could effectively sack all of their cabin crew and re-employ them twice over. I wonder if that will concentrate some of the BASSA minds. |
Ooh they just said on the Andrew Marr show that they have just heard the Unite Union has postponed the ballot.
|
|
Soo, if the offer new T&C is accepted, would BASSA/UNITE still ballot for industrial action over their published grievances of disciplinaries, staff travel and bringing in staff to break the strike?
Certainly to those CC who have lost staff travel as a result of striking with union advice it would be returned in 5 minutes. It would appear that the union is deserting them if it is brushed away by BASSA/UNITE. In essence how can a union and its members throw away its grievances which it was prepared to ask staff to strike over? If i was a union member who had lost staff travel i would be going mental at my BASSA rep demanding to know what they were going to do to reinstate my travel or ay for it as i had lost it " under advisement" from them. |
Johno said (and sorry mods, I don't know how to make a link...)
If i was a union member who had lost staff travel i would be going mental at my BASSA rep demanding to know what they were going to do to reinstate my travel or ay for it as i had lost it " under advisement" from them. Just another couple of thoughts.. If a perk is withdrawn, after advisement, then what is the way forward, and what are the consequences of persuing the same road? Given that Bassa/Unite have actually formally drawn breath on this one may be an enlightenment. Time will tell. If you were to sack, for example 10,000 cabin crew, and look at re-employing, 10,000 cabin crew the next day/minute, what would the cost be? Assuming those you sack are earning 25k basic, and those you go on to employ earn 11k. There has been a lot of talk about the standard of service BA offer; yet it is proven (previous posts that BA CC do not feature in the top 5 airlines for customer service). So that becomes a red herring. Just what does your extra 13k a year give you? Not safety as all are trained to the same standard; not experience, as few have been involved in an a/c emergency (and I know this has been done to death so please dont go there). Ah but the cost of living is higher in London? Ok so give the job a London weighting, lets call it 10% above market value... Tightslot: if I quote from other forums in the future, I will include the link . My apologies. Betty girl: I have read all posts on both the CC forum and this one since October last year. I have read all of your posts. Mine was not an affront to you personally. I did not introduce UK politics to the thread, I merely replied. I did not take your post out of context. I did use your post to highlight how inadequate (in my opinion) a labour government has been for the UK. I will not comment on (UK) politics here again; and if it is of any help I was surprised at the post you made in light of your previous posts. I do respect you as CC working for BA, whether or not you support Bassa/Labour/any other party or union was never an issue. I do not make any judgement, it is only an opinion that I profer. Litebulbs: As I found out recently on changing jobs, there is no requirement to be part of a union (although pressure may be applied to join). You have to way up the pros and cons. Again as has been said previously, in this day and age it may well be better (and cheaper) to go for an individual agreament, rather than a collective (union) 0ne. |
On one occaision in my life, I was hampered by belonging to a Union and was intimidated by Union members - the print unions in late 1970s.
On one occasion in my life, I was hampered by NOT belonging to a Union and found out too late they could have helped me - broadcasting in the early 1980s. So I'm even handed about Unions, but many of these folks have never worked in any other line of work or employer or Union (yes there are many that HAVE) so it is not surprising that they have a narrow view. In the years to come, many will have the leisure to see what happened. We are now in the end game of this dispute. |
Whereas I would like to hope it were so, I don't think this is the end game of the BA v BASSA dispute. The Unions have invested too much capital in their war against BA and would never allow a company to achieve what most impartial observers will see as a thumping victory.
What might happen is Unite/BASSA recommending acceptance of the latest offer (having secured extra assurances on the assurances). With that out the way, they will take up the cudgles again over Staff Travel and disciplinaries. It's interesting to see BA has already put the Unions on notice that such bases for balloting might place Union members in jeapordy. However, remember, BASSA wants a guerilla war.. and just announcing a ballot is sufficient to put would be travellers off booking flights with BA and thus keep inflicting financial pain on the company. The current BASSA leadership has nothing to gain from industral peace within BA. The only thing it has left is to bring the company down, Samsonlike, on its own and its members heads. |
Company's latest offer to Unite:
http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/230610RevOffer.doc Letter to Unite's Joint General Secretaries: http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/Coverletterrev.doc This note on the Unite website is dated 25 June, and seems to have been superseded by today's announcement. This afternoon Unite General Secretary, Derek Simpson met British Airways with ACAS where an amended proposal was put forward to the union for consideration. The majority of the offer is as before, however there are two specific changes. An amended offer was not entirely unexpected, as cabin crew concern over the imposition of mixed fleet, which was announced on Monday, had begun to escalate. We are your union; our job is to represent you responsibly and that is exactly what we intend to do. So to be absolutely clear, we will seek your views on this latest offer. If this offer is the basis of a settlement or not, will be strictly your decision. General Secretary Tony Woodley will be in contact with British Airways over the weekend seeking clarification on several areas. There will then be a briefing on specific details and any additional points - including staff travel, that are not contained in the offer. This will be finalised on Monday -when a further statement will be issued, as to our next step. Our ballot is still scheduled to be issued on Tuesday |
LD12986:
Thank you for the quote. This reads like more parsing by Unite. It does not look like they are going to put the offer to a vote, it seems they are simply going to look for advise. Why does the idea of BA pulling flights some of the more lucrative flights into New Fleet with the explanation that BASSA made it necessary due to their continued cost to the airline not seem unreasonable. The damage that BASSA keeps inflicting upon their membership is appalling. |
ExecClubPax
The current BASSA leadership has nothing to gain from industral peace within BA. The only thing it has left is to bring the company down, Samsonlike, on its own and its members heads. Since a considerable majority outside the union now know that the battle is won by BA, it is only a question of how it ends. Yes, BASSA might yet bring the company down but I doubt it. It has long been my view that BA was in it's own end game, long before BASSA helped. One of the reasons that it is in it's own end game, is all the times that the mgmt have failed to manage in the past. |
I thought I saw previously that any costs arising from the dispute would have to be met from within the crew budgets. I am interested to see that the latest offer to BA cabin crew seems to contain guaranteed pay rises from 2011 for existing crew. I am wondering how this reconciles with all that and how it compares to the position of the rest of the staff who I thought were on a pay freeze. I don't claim to be aware of all the facts but I am curious.
|
I am wondering how this reconciles with all that and how it compares to the position of the rest of the staff who I thought were on a pay freeze. I don't claim to be aware of all the facts but I am curious. New fleet more than covers the cost of IA. The imposition made all the required savings everything else is a bonus. |
Hotel Mode
Many thanks for explaining that.
|
Will bassa explain the risk in any new ballot?
Will bassa explain the risk in any new ballot?
BA have made it clear that they believe that the proposed grounds for a ballot might lead to a strike which is not protected by current legislation. If bassa run a ballot, which gains a majority, and asks its members to break their contracts via a non-protected "strike", then each individual member has foregone their rights to protection for breaking their contracts. They can then have any action taken against them that their employer can dream up - including losing their job, and being sued for the costs incurred due to their withdrawal of their labour. Will bassa forewarn their members of this risk? (Pigs might fly) To any lawyers out there - if bassa do not forewarn their members of a risk that they should reasonably have been able to anticipate, and therefore warn their members about, can they be sued? It might be worth someone's time and effort to strike in an unprotected strike, lose their job, and then sue Mr Holley for damages...... |
Given that one of BASSA's recent communications included a contact at the following address I would have absolutely no confidence in their legal advice!
Lipstick and Law - Blogging of an Air Hostess Law Student |
A "reasonable" belief
My reading of the law is that if an "Official" of the Union had reasonable grounds to believe (whether or not they did believe) that the issues covered in the ballot were not "new" issues, then the ballot - however well constructed, would not give the employees/the TU any protection if they withdrew their labour or failed to work "normally".
The ballot would not give Unite any protection either. McCarthy's letter is not quite strong enough to give the Officials reason to believe. McCarthy needs to send a second letter to the relevant FTOs which is more clear, and which lets them know that if they intend to pursue the ballot, then BA will both seek an injunction, AND use any powers that they have for any reason against anyone they choose, to ensure that unprotected action does not damage the interests of either the airline, or its various stakeholders. BA would have to take on Unite - tempting though it might be to take on the Champagne Charlies/Charlottes in bassa. Holley et al are so far in to their "cult" that they would love to become martyrs to the Champagne cause. I would have thought that Unite had some more deserving causes to take on, rather than BA. How about Simpson spending his time on attacking the low-wage economy??? - rather than the high-wage economy. As to that Grauniad (Private Eye spelling) piece, the writer ought to know that there are lots of unwaged and capable managers who would be delighted to help out at BA, for the price of a New Fleet Cabin Service Operative. Clearly, neither Holley nor Grauniad writers have any empathy with the Unemployed and/or the low waged.. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 02:18. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.