SC suggest you read a few more AOI's. For years at my place of employ it's been 30 mins prior to departure.
If there has been a delay the Captain may ask for permission to run the APU for passenger comfort. This is usually granted.

SC - The big difference between shutting down engines during taxi and saving on the APU is that there is no negative affect whatsoever from shutting down an engine, everything still works as advertised.

Wrong! Prove it.

Night Vision - Apologies Mods, thread creep.
 

Juan T- That is a simple half-way house measure to help your eyes adjust from bright to dim light. The theory is that should a landing accident or incident occur and you have to evacuate the aeroplane you will have a better chance of survival as your eyes will already be part adapted to the dark.

Agree - only if you allow at least 20 minutes will your eyes (the rods or cones I forget which) fully adjust, red lighting was supposed to assist adapting. This does not take into account the individual overhead spotlight however.

I do agree however it's better than nothing.

gcal TheOtherThread
 

It is a good and common sense arrangement to properly prepare the aircraft for embarking passengers and crew.
As said a lot of UK airports are woefully unprepared for high temperatures and have little or no ground air conditioning.
It is a matter of common decency not a matter of Bassa!

About the same preparation as they have for snow and ice clearance.

BASSA Flight BSA101 to Nowhere
After take-off:
This is your captain speaking “We welcome you on board this BASSA flight, please check your T&C in the pocket in front of you, this will explain your obligations to the cabin crew for their safety and comfort, especially during their rest periods”
After landing:
This is your captain speaking “We thank you for not making too many demands on our cabin crew, please, before you leave the plane can you lower the blinds it might be too dangerous for the cabin crew to do so and if you find any litter can you collect this and deposit this in the nearest bin in the airport lounge.
We thank you for flying BASSA Airways – we look forward to you helping our cabin crew again in the near future – strike action permitting”

Joining Date - Aug2010
 

No one thinks for a moment here, that perhaps it is Walsh who has the personal vendetta? Surely an appraisal of his performanceso far, could also be described as "militant". His actions have all the hallmarks of union busting.
I can understand that there are a lot of people here who must be disappointed that BASSA have not rushed into a third ballot as quickly as they would like.
If intelligence is being questioned, then you must ask why Walsh allowed 800 cabin crew to take severance just before the first ballot. Not a very 'intelligent' thing to do in hindsight. To seek an injunction over the notification, or lack of it, of 11 spoiled ballot papers, was also not very intelligent when on appeal BA lost. In fact the whole position of BA seeking injunctions is questionable, as it has not solved anything, but simply run the disopute on for longer than necessary. Hiding behind High Court judges is perhaps not the most intelligent thing to do

Duncan Holley has said many times that the action to defeat imposition would be a "marathon". You would need to be a patient.

Here they come again!

800 cabin crew on high wages and pension commitments - not that poor a move.

R Knee
 

Sorry R Knee and your point is???

Many 2 engine airplanes taxi in on one engine and 4 engine airplanes on 3.
All works well. Plenty of redundancy in the systems. Standard procedures for saving fuel.
APU restrictions on the ground are usually environmental. IF the ground facilities are good then ground air and ground electrics will be used where possible.

After 90 years of operation another "national" airline
as it files for bankruptcy protection.
Perhaps some BASSA reps might find something to do there.

edit:
Perhaps this is their long term plan:

BillS
 

You omitted the last part of the press release which said that the Mexicana pilot's union had rejected both scenarios. Who does that remind you of ?

Shame in some respects as Mexicana joined oneworld around 18 months ago. Doesn't help the overall oneworld brand when this sort of thing happens.

I hope to $EITY you are not CC

Jack McH

So you have never completed a proper apprentiship then?

The first initial rule is to keep your workspace clean and tidy
Sweep up after you and leave it as you found it

So NOT fully trained then, just enough to do the job, this worries me
I thought cabin crew were fully trained before flying, as in professional crew

Not as in professional tradesmen qualified apprentiship compared to
tradesmen who can manage the job?

Often referred to as chancers

Jack McH

What is interesting, time and time again, regarding this dispute, is that BASSA advocates will deflect issues, doing everything they can to not discuss their objections.

This is not about pilots, not about other airline's practices, it's about BA and the militant faction of BASSA.

Your customers have read (and this is a SLF forum) about your fear of blinds, we are already aware of the burden a simple hot towel service represents to your group.

Seriously, at what point do you present yourself as an advocate for your customers? I'm not speaking of the "We are the face of BA" rhetoric. The face means little to your flying public if the "face" is constantly frowning and complaining about who they work for.

Your customers have no wish for contact with you. Rather than reassurances you give us "Pulling down blinds is too dangerous!".

Gatwick and LCY are gaining advocates due to their customer centric focus.

Heathrow is gaining a reputation as an aging dinorsaur, no mobility and definitely no connection with co-existing organisms.

Who the heck are you paying for your representation?

CSD on a Trolley DUBAI-LHR
 

Had difficulty working out the change for a £169 FINEPIX CAMERA when £180 tendered

No it is not £8

(Inumerate or a thief?)

A young lady CC advised it was indeed £11

The laugh was until I came on here, I usually said "KEEP THE CHANGE" Knowing it was quite a bit

(Due to me usually flying on economy airlines and appreciating the service and aware of CC low wage)

Jack McH

Next week is my first ride on BA. Hopefully I will not be taken care of by anyone with a lanyard. I'm in CW and have high expectations as I did when I booked this ride several months ago.

I have, out of necessity, been following the 2 threads on PPrune to see if my trip would actually go. Looks now that it will be no problem except for changing planes in LHR.

How many would sstrike?
 

If BASSA/Unite call for a strike who would actually strike. It is patently obvious that a new strike will not succeeded. While a strike will be financially painful to BA and thereby please Duncan it will do nothing for striking Cabin Crew. 3500 Cabin Crew who have lost Staff Travel may strike on the basis that they may recoup Staff Travel as a result. They will not and BA will be able to continue to serve most if not all destinations. I am intrigued by the number of part time Cabin Crew there are. Maybe there is a motivation for them to strike. Regardless of the number of members BASSA still has how many will strike?

I am flying home from North America on the weekend, i'm now worried if it is safe on the BA plane to close the blinds, there must be some safety issue if the cabin crew need a health and safety check before doing it......

on another note, and I am in no way having a go at a person I dont know, but how is it that the cabin crew can be properly represented by someone who now doesnt work for the airline.

Surely the union rules would prohibit someone who is now no longer allowed unfettered access to airline premises and therefore would be unable to represent the members???

I am not really familiar with the mental processes that go on inside the head of people who select sexually bestial names as their internet pen names. Life has been kind to me and I have managed to avoid the company of those who find animal sex or group infidelity amusing. It does not surprise me that there might, among the representatives of the anti BA brigade, as in any other of course, be one or two of these strange mentalists. It does surprise me however that apparently, or so I am led to believe by reading and rumour, one or more of these creatures of humankind is able to post in a thread reserved specifically and only for acting cabin crew. That gives recognition to an entitlement which is denied to others whose service and experience in the airline industry would be perhaps be more intelligent and constructive, less biased and just possibly altogether more interesting.

Cavortingcheetah

Nice post and very much on point. It seems the posters on the other thread are polarized to one end of the dispute or the other. There are others of us that have been in similar situations that may share wisdom gained the hard way. But then again, would either side listen?

I was just wondering in a truly altruistically sympathetic way if the BA height requirements for cabin crew discriminated against some of the cabin crew in a manner which could affect health and safety with regard to the window blinds, closing of? Perhaps as a result of any BA maximum height restriction some cabin crew might find themselves bracchium disadvantaged?
This disability could pose serious problems for crew having to lean across rows of seats to close blinds. This could be a task for which, with their short little arms, they are ill equipped to complete. Perhaps that is the philanthropic rationale behind the recent BASSA kerfuffle?

Its all very fishy to me. Red herrings everywhere!

There is strong feeling running against Holley and his vendetta and it gets stronger every day. A vendetta that is vicious while remaining just within bounds. I personally have no doubts at all that he sees the cabin crew as his flock of lambs who follow him where he likes to take them. It is so easy to detect. His brazen ignorance and arrogance is that of a 70's brainwashed union leader. Holley now USES BASSA for his own ends now that he cannot represent its members.

As Diplome wrote:
Absolutely right. For one thing, the pilots and the rest of the huge workforce of BA have done their deals with BA via Unite and are happy enough but mad as hell with BASSA and Holley in particular. The solution to this problem of Holley hanging on to BASSA is reachable. Holley represents no-one but himself. He justifies himself by his little oft times silly 'announcements' to keep the lambs behind him while thousands more want him out.

If enough people tell BASSA they have no confidence in their secretary, Malone and the other militants, I believe that they have to call a meeting to have the miscreants removed.

Just don't follow Duncan Holley!

Diplome

With the very greatest of respect, you sound like a PR for BA.

I don't care what happens to BA or BASSA, but I do recognise a nasty industrial dispute, where both parties get themselves locked into fixed positions and there is no good will left to ease the way back to normla relations.

This ongoing state (which must be damaging the brand) does no credit to management or union.

BUIt I say again, it is of no impact to me, so I don't care too much about the outcome.

Why bother to post then? Oh! By the way, I suggest you read a few of Diplome's other posts - you might get a surprise.

Lotpax, welcome to the world of the group, or mob if you like. Woe to those that do not conform.

All the elements that make up the dynamics of group psychology are here.

Yes but slowly and surely balance is beginning to creep in here. It's been my main point, I am absolutely against what Bassa are doing but equally against lynch mob mentality. Unfortunately exactly that has been prevalent probably even more so on the other thread.

The fact is management haven't behaved impeccably either. I am also astounded how much support a company has that openly admitted it was involved in illegal activities which cost the company a quarter of a billion pounds in fines.

So who does have the moral high ground, management or Bassa exercising their legal right to challenge?

The BA illegal* activities SC didn't affect me personally SC. Whereas BASSA's activities have.

Accordingly, I recognise that I and perhaps most SLF on here have a natural bias. Union supporters also have a bias. Thus the debate continues.

Would you prefer that this thread is only posted on by SLF who have never actually flown BA, are not Union members or Management of any company, and thus are strictly neutral?

If you found such a person who was sufficiently disinterested to be strictly neutral, do you think they would have enough interest in this dispute to post here?

*Though whether its correct to them illegal is dubious at best given that the criminal case collapsed and the fines have not yet been paid.

its not about being neutral mariner its about not being savaged because you didn't agree that all Bassa members should be hung drawn and quartered and what a horrible bunch of company killing fools they are.

BA activities remain illegal regardless of the collapse of the case as BA themselves admitted they did it. To be clear on the size of the fine, all CC could have been given a 2,000 pound a year pay rise, each year for the next 10 years.

Who is actually costing the company money and why haven't management been vilified for their behaviour?

SafetyConcern:

With all due respect the issue of price-fixing has nothing to do with this dispute.

Again, I don't believe you will find a member of this forum who does not believe that BASSA has a "right" to strike. However, BA, its employees and the flying public have a right to disagree with BASSA's actions and to support BA in its battle against this rather disagreeable group of individuals intent on inflicting as much damage as possible on the airline.

Moral high ground has nothing to do with it...though it is hardly owned by BASSA in this instance.

Lotpax:

Your insinuation that I may be BA PR carries as much weight as SafetyConcerns accusation on another thread that someone who was expressing a differing view was a "management stooge".

http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearme...scussions.html

More than happy to engage in a debate regarding issues and I don't care if you're a Union rep., etc.. Facts are facts.

RTR: I agree regarding Mr. Holley's communications. They are starting to read like the "fill" you see in a young student's report as he tries desperately to reach the 500 word minimum required by his instructor. Lots of words, very little substance.

What a complete non-sequitor. So the undoubted mistakes of previous BA managers give BASSA a licence to behave the way it has? What utter drivel.

No-one is going to defend BA's involvement in price fixing and those who were responsible have paid a very high price for it. Their careers have been destroyed. The losses from fines were taken in previous years and had no bearing on the losses of the past couple of years. In fact, the company has not yet paid the UK fine, and is seeking to get it withdrawn after the collapse of the criminal trial.

Who holds BASSA accountable for the needless £150m of damage they've inflicted on BA?

Perhaps the reason for an apparent lack of "balance" in discussion is BASSA have never actually stated their case. All we can say fir certain is they have a pathological obsession with Willie Walsh.

KBPsen
 

Funny old mob this. A few dozen people having a, sometimes lively, debate.
When you say 'woe' what do you mean?
Nobody has to conform apart from to some basic rules of the forum.
You can say, virtually, whatever you want.

Here's what I say:

BASSA are lying about the membership numbers. They will find themselves in court within two years as a consequence. If a ballot was held now on strike action the number voting 'for' would be less than 5000, probably nearer to 3000 - in both cases a majority of actual members but also a minority of cabin crew.
It is all over bar the shouting.

The point is with the price fixing situation is that you all remained silent. The sum involved is just as valid as the claimed sums involved with Bassa so by default can cause the same amount of damage.

Diplome please look at your quotes:

Yet where's the fact in your next quote

That is your take on the situation, it isn't fact.

However LD I may agree with

Then comes Mr Pony

If only that were true. I am banned from the other thread because some snitch has claimed I am not airline staff. Now who would make such a claim, a Bassa supporter?

But enough of all this. Balanced discussion is what I seek and not opinions dressed up as facts Diplome.

Mr pony we agree apart from the lying. I think its incompetence.

"snitch"?? Come now. If you are an employee of an airline it is rather easy to communicate with the Moderators here to gain access.

If I posted on the Cabin Crew thread I would rightly be removed. It has nothing to do with our opinions and everything to do with the rather simple rules of the forum.

....and this is an opinion. You will post them from time to time, I will, as will others. It does not take away the facts that are also sprinkled through our posts. ;)

SC,

So that we can lay the much worn out (by BASSA) "price-fixing fine" issue, the fines imposed (which I believe have yet to be paid) were supposedly for what is in effect illegal profiteering, yes? Ergo the money paid out is probably comparable to (or who knows, even less than?) the amount of illegal profit made.

So this isn't money that's just been thrown away. Just money that in effect has been given back.

Move along now, there's nothing further to discuss here (and nor is there any point in dragging up fuel hedging, as that's not related to this dispute either, despite Duncan Thickett's pathetic attempts at making it so).

:}

Diplome you are missing the point again. I am airline and I don't feel the need to prove it because of the unsupported claims of a snitch. I would rather not post.

You should be concerned that some individual goes to such lengths. Rather sad really when you think about it.

But lets draw a line under all this and get back to "balanced debate".

What do we think will happen next?

A neutral factual view might be that given the low ballot turnout BASSA would never get a majority (of the entire CC) vote in favour of IA.

Another neutral factual view might be that it will be difficult for BASSA to come up with a reason for further IA unconnected with the previous dispute, thus putting strikers at risk.

My biased view is that BASSA will likely attempt to ballot for further IA, given that their leadership is intent on inflicting damage on BA regardless of the cost to their members and they are likely to get ~3000 votes in favour of action and an unknown number (probably lower than 3K due to declining membership)voting against.

mrpony:

Your posts regarding membership numbers are intruiging. I know that BASSA has lost members since this issue started but are you aware of a site that has the complete numbers for membership represented and voting results.

I'm actually hoping to not have to go and hunt them out on the CC thread myself :)

safety concerns:

I know. Tears are falling on my keyboard as I type this.

How about this scenario. A deal will be done. Bassa are in trouble now with the numbers and Willie knows it but he isn't prepared to actually finish them off.

So he drags this out to make them sweat and then a compromise is found to avoid any further strikes.

Would Bassa survive in the aftermath of such a scenario?
Would Unite be damaged by this?

I have been away for a few days and am now playing catch up with the thread with a comment in the blinds issue.

During that time away I was privileged to fly the Air France A380 LHR/CDG and return. On the return the Captain informed us that the take off weight was 370 tons and that there were 500 pax on board. The CC sat opposite me said that there were 17 CC. During the 40 minute flight every pax was served with a drink and snack. Now I wonder what BASSAs comment would have been had they been requested to to the same. :oh: The CC that I spoke to did say that they were not happy with doing the service but that it kept her in a job. Despite the reluctance all the crew that I witnessed were very pleasant.

Quote from SafetyConcerns:

"In fact all your office staff, why can't you clean up the office before you go and I don't need to employ a cleaner. Where does it end? Where does it start?"

For your information I work in an office and we do clear up at the end of the day leaving the cleaner to mop the floor and polish the windows. Quite normal in the real world I believe and the cost saving probably helps keep me in a job too.