It does not take away the fact that the courts had to rule on a contractual point. They ruled in favour of BA, however.

I note that you made no comment about the content of the original post. So very British probably stems from colonial times.

Litebulbs - The court had to rule on the contract law issue because it was put forward by Unite! The High Court had no difficulty in (as expected) finding in favour of BA. Unite's appeal to the Court of Appeal on this issue is yet another complete waste of time and money. BASSA and Unite would do better to accept that they've learnt a hard lesson not to stonewall the company.

As someone who has been a manager involved in the removal of "perks" from employees in the past I'd like to make the following observation:

Perks are an employers method of demonstrating it's appreciation of "goodwill" from employees.

The employer reciprocates this "goodwill" by allowing easements or additions to the strict requirements of the working relationship.

The provision of these "perks" is not contractural and is subject to removal at the whim or choice or either party ....... for example, no-one is compelled to actually use staff travel concessions when flying !


I've been involved in the removal of some perks from some staff when they refused to flexibly work in a manner that was normally done but was beyond contractural requirements.

The perk was removed only for those staff who had refused to work flexibly and who made it clear they intended to continue with that approach.

They were informed that in doing so the company considered they were withdrawing their goodwill from the working relationship and so the company would not continue to allow them to benefit from the perks which were the return of that goodwill.


The employees and the union tried to claim that this action was breaking an unwritten contract and was also discrimination against those individuals.

They got nowhere on both of these claims.

It's my understanding that their legal advice was that:

"perks" are not contractural (sound familiar?)

if an individual or groups clearly act in a way which inconveniences or costs their employer then the employer is at liberty to withdraw it's goodwill (perks) from only those who have acted in such way.

It is not discrimination to continue offering perks to employees who continue to demonstrate their expression of goodwill towards the company.


In my case it was made clear to the group that the company would be prepared to return the perks, but only after a period of time when the company considered they had seen sufficient examples of goodwill being demonstrated.



To me it seems that BA have done the correct thing with staff travel, the strikers clearly have no intention/wish to give BA their "goodwill" ... the company should not (you could argue cannot!) reciprocate .....

Equally, once these staff return to work and have demonstrated their goodwill to the company then the perk gets returned.

Should they return to work but continue to "work to contract" then there would be no obligation for the company to return any perk as "goodwill" would clearly still not being demonstrated.

You may very well be right, but clearly there are questions being raised and answered about contractual obligations.

42psi
 

Looking at what you have said, it would appear that the people involved were carrying out unofficial action short of a strike, which could have all sorts of consequences, especially if flexible working was either an express or implied term of their contract.

Litebulbs

May I enquire as to whether you are are current BA staff?

No I am not.

This back and forth...and then back and forth discussion about staff travel can be interesting but there are a few absolutes in play.

Can BA remove Staff Travel from striking cabin crew members? Yes. The proof is in the fact that they have done so.

Was BASSA correct in telling their members that they would have Staff Travel back in "five minutes" if it was removed. No. My watch says they missed that call.

Will the removal of Staff Travel stand an examination of a Court hearing? No one knows because the only party that has an interest in such a hearing has failed and/or refused to bring an action forth on behalf of their members.

The fact that neither BASSA or Unite have done so should be of concern to those Cabin Crew who have lost staff travel due to their reliance upon their Unions' representations.

Any member deciding to participate in future IA should do so with the sure knowledge that BA can and will withdraw this perk and it will stay withdrawn for more than the "five minutes" BASSA represented.

Boxkite
 

This is a response from a Mod on the CC thread.

Diplome
 

Absolutely agree with all of your last post.

BA may receive notice of another strike ballot today.

Unite plans third holiday strike, blaming 'vindictive' British Airways | Business | The Guardian

I'm not sure that this is the best way of protecting their members as the issues are:

1. Use of Temporary Cabin Crew;

2. Disciplinary procedures against BASSA members;

3. Demand for return of full Staff Travel privileges.

Rather than demand that their members, following one lengthy round of strikes, undergo another with the associated loss of income, staff travel, etc., why isn't Unite/BASSA asking for a Court to rule regarding the use of temporary crew and staff travel?

Both issues could be heard on their merits without undue pain being felt by members.

As for the disciplinary procedures they have a built in appeals process that can be applied as needed.

It seems as if BASSA and Unite may have lost sight of the end goal, which is to GAIN THE BEST POSSIBLE RESULT FOR YOUR MEMBERSHIP AS A WHOLE. Rather than continuing to try to inflame the emotions of a militant minority with ancillary issues that can be solved in other arenas the priority for BASSA should be trying to gain back as much of the positives as possible that were contained in the initial offer of last year.

Diplome,

Rationally you are correct that BASSA should be looking after the best interest of all their members but that has not been the case for over a year now. What seems to be the driving motivation of this union is to maintain the power they have OVER their member's lives by maintaining their grip on the operational structure of BA IFCE.

Unfortunately since that lies at the heart of the dispute, I don't see any resolution is ever possible. You are completely correct that they are balloting over issues that should and could be litigated - except of course they would probably suffer the same defeats of previous court appearances.

Even a failed ballot won't resolve the issue because the union has vowed to wage guerilla war on the company.

TB

A very interesting post Baggersup and a point that has me baffled too. OK, so membership is decreasing and sits at 9811 today according to the BASSA website. But why is it decreasing so slowly? Why are these people hanging on in there and what do they honestly hope that BASSA could ever do for them in the future?

According to an article in the Guardian today, Unite will soon be balloting it's, "11,000 members." Am I correct in assuming then that the balance of 1189 are members of Cabin Crew 89?

If their members keep voting overwhelmingly in support of their ballots I think they would argue that they are doing just that.

Snas,

If BASSA had negotiated starting a year ago now, then the members would never had to vote on IA. That would have been looking out for their members.

TB

TrakBall
 

I’m not defending BASSA, far from it.

My point, perhaps clumsily expressed, is that it is the members that are equally responsible for dragging this lunacy out for they can put a stop to it at any time.

The above comments all, in my opinion, contain some very valid observations.

At the beginning of this saga I had significant sympathy for Cabin Crew regarding the conduct of their leadership. At this point I'm rather of the mind that at times "You get the leadership you deserve".

For all the rhetoric from BASSA regarding Mr. Walsh he is actually one of the few in a leadership position who has conducted himself appropriately. Disagreement may be had regarding his decisions, but he has made and enforced those decisions in a respectful and businesslike manner.

Unite and BASSA on the other hand have been a virtual cornucopia of missteps.

We have all observed the failure of the Unions to properly negotiate on their members' behalf, the botched ballot, Ms. Malone's inappropriate postings, pornographic websites, text messaging during meetings, use of the term "guerilla tactics", and a Public Relations approach that selected horrendous images and messages to be put out to the public.

Significant damage has been done to the Cabin Crew's reputation by their own advocates and it is met with silence by many of BASSA's members. If someone who had considerable control over my employment terms behaved in such a manner I would be livid...yet so many of them seem to accept it as a matter of course.

I know some may object to this observation but its almost as if there is a core "Chav" culture in BASSA where professionalism and results matter less than noise and talking rough. Fascinating.

BA should actually start requiring university graduation as an entry level qualification (Before you bite, I can think of at least one flag carrier that mandates this). We're always hearing, after all, that the job is more difficult than we think.

In the current climate, I'm sure they would find an ample supply of unemployed graduates gnashing at the bit for a job.

And people with a better education may be better placed to understand the external factors that affect the well-being of their employer.

...and as a timely example of how logic gets lost in the way of emotion Miss M posts this on the CC thread:



Reasoning like that used above is now why BASSA is forced to ballot over issues that ARE THE DIRECT RESULT OF THEIR OWN ACTIONS.

Oh yeah?
 

Longtime lurker. SLF not CC - hence here.

MissM also states "No-one wants to strike..........."

On the contrary, my dear, the fact that certain people wanted very much to strike seems to me to be at the heart of this. The fact that those self same people haven't a clue what to do now makes it even more painful to watch.

:ugh:

You make the basic error of assuming that an education also provides the individual with some common sense. I have never found this to be the case.
It is also wrong to assume that those who do not have degrees would only vote for strikes.
I am sure that there are many unemployed out there without degrees who would want employment.
So many graduates out there these days, the degree has become what the A level was and the O level before that. If all it gives you is the elitist attitude you show then what a waste of four years and a large debt.

johnowhiskyx - post 126
 

Apologies for going a little off thread, but I must correct you to the fact that Civil Service Pensions are free, they are not, it is little publicised but staff do make contributions, and there are 3 schemes operating, Classic, Classic Plus and Premium, and depending which scheme you are in determines what you pay in contributions.

Most Civil Servants around the country are youngsters not earning much more than £15K gross, and some not even that, they don't receive any perks, and have much the same difficulties to deal with each day as anyone else who has 'customers'.

Sorry to intrude on this thread, but having read a few references to free pensions in this debate, thought it time to enlighten - some of us were stupid enough to try and enhance our civil service pension by way of equitable life!!!!

Thank you for your indulgence.

Call100:

I don't believe ChicoG was showing an "elitist " attitude. Not at all.

Though I am not sure I agree with his/her proposal I can see that in certain circumstances it has merit for an employer.

May I disagree?! :) Some of the most rabid militants in our cabin crew are those who have such qualifications.

They are paid similar salaries to those they would get with their qualifications elsewhere but for a vastly better lifestyle. They are very much overqualified for the actual job, often only intended to do it "for a couple of years after Uni" but stayed. They have no chance of promotion/change, with the result that several years on they are now thoroughly sick of being treated as just another steward/ess by the airline and passengers when they think they are something better.

They are often the ones who think that BA crew are the best in the world, that LGW crew are of a lower grade entirely and wouldnt deign talk to a loco crew member.

Cabin Crewing (or indeed piloting) does not require a degree level qualification. Many do have one and many make the best use of their talents with businesses etc outside BA. Most dont and are frustrated or just plain bored.

Sorry, but I see his implied logic of those with a degree would be the only ones to see the bigger picture as elitist. Happy to agree to disagree though.
It would be wise to look at the disputes in areas where a degree is held by a majority of employee's before making such an assumption however.
:)

The Divine 'Miss M'
 

Looking at the number and frequency of her posts on 'The Other Forum,' does anybody else share my suspicion that 'Miss M' is not a person, but a group or committee of Bassamentalists? The consistency in style could be accomplished by using an editor (unemployed Arts graduate, perhaps) to keep it all in kilter.
I think we should be told!

MissM
 

I hope the posters on the other forum don't scare MissM away. She is the best weapon BA and working CC have in showing up the attitude and position of the stikers to members of the public.

The Big Picture
 

After the drubbing that Unite has had in the meeja of late, thanks mainly to their inability to control the wayward BASSA, they now need a victory to satisfy their supporters and their bruised egos.
The Unions' reaction to tomorrows cuts in public spending will be all the more vindictive as a result.

Thanks a bunch, BASSA.

Neptunus Rex
 

Disagree old buddy. With the loss of the patronage of their Labour puppet, Unite were always going to thrash around like a wounded animal just as they did when Maggie came to power.

Fortunately the Bassa dispute has served to warn the British public just how malicious & stupid the union movement can be. Bassa have done us a great favour in preparing us for the march of the dinosaurs.:ugh:

No doubt they will soon be joined by the rest of the rabble. Maybe I'll plan a vacation on some distant scented isle!

Miss M : CC Forum-- How Genuine ?
 

I guess most of you also read the cc forum and will thus have read the offerings of Miss M, who is currently the major proponent of BASSA.

Having read all of the thread, I am astonished at how blatant a liar he/she is.

Many times this poster has been pulled up over either the amount of savings offered by BASSA or if they were permanent or not and he/she simply sails over them and drags up the same figures TIME AND TIME AGAIN at a later date ( as now see CC forum ).

He/she is apparently indoctrinated to full-cult level. KEEP your children at home.

Unusually her replies are reasonably literate - unlike most of the UNITE rubbish ( press-releases etc) - but even so, one gets the impression that there is a schedule of BASSA posters for MIss M, WWW, and from times past A lurker and others I have forgotten.



Irrespective of the background personae, until this poster acknowledges that the BASSA initial "savings proposal " was misleading" and offered nothing lke the savings required they are a BASSA Trolll.

Now there's a thought
 

HiFlyer14 in post 156 over on the other thread is wondering of Miss M is actually Lizanne Malone. That could explain a lot. :ooh:

If it is Miss Malone, perhaps she can answer the oft repeated but not answered question about how many, if any, of the BASSA council actually went on strike and lost ST and income.

At the moment it sounds as if none of them did!

Miss M
 

I think you are all seeing conspiracy theories where there are none.

As a non striking member of cabin crew for BA, I may not agree with Miss M's point of view but she comes across as pretty genuine to me. In fact, it's actually quite nice to have someone from the other side of the fence that doesn't just throw out the one liners and run.

But then again, what would I know with my inferior education! :rolleyes:

Lizanne Malone 'outed?'
 

Just when I was beginning to wonder just why Miss M was so blinkered that she can admit of no failure by BASSA whatever, AlpineSkier posts the above which rang bells for me. Then, on the other forum, Highflyer14 appears to become rather exasperated at Miss M's constant reiteration of BASSA soundbytes and little substance.

The last paragraph appears to 'out' Miss M as Lizanne Malone, which makes so much sense, I am surprised the suggestion has not been made earlier. Events will probably prove me wrong, but it seemed to me "a hit, a palpable hit."

Roger.

Let's set one thing straight.

I am NOT Lizanne Malone.

Well Miss M has now denied that she's Ms Malone, but one might question her honesty given that she again repeated the £10 million saving lie in the same post. (Edit: in the official thread, not her post above)

Interesting that she posts nearly every afternoon until very late at night (UK time). Can't be working much at the moment. I wonder if she could be a BA CC off on long term sick based somewhere with a suitable timezone for her posts such as in the US? (perhaps LA?)

And you could be Mr Walsh?

LOL Litebulbs, I wish I was!

Well Miss M seems adamant she's not Lizanne - fair enough, I'll accept her word on this.

You've all got it wrong.

"You are Lobby Lud and I claim the Daily Herald prize of £10"!



[Explanatory note for les jeunes:

'Lobby Lud' was a man hired by a daily newspaper to prowl along the promenades of British seaside resorts. A "photoshopped" picture of him appeared in the paper.

If someone went up to him, carrying that day's edition of the newspaper, and challenging him with the exact words quoted above, he/she would be rewarded accordingly.

Many men were startled to be accosted in that manner.]