Tamazi,
With respect, we aren't all numpties!
Many of us are genuine, passionate cabin crew who love our jobs and care about our customers and BA. We didn't go on strike, we accepted and recognise change.
If, as you claim you read the cc thread on a daily basis, you would have been able to differentiate real cabin crew from the BASSA trolls.
By the way, I also agree, more power to Willie Walsh and Keith Williams, I totally support both of them.

This is a potential mine field and at best (me being a union person), it will be seen as unlawful. If it goes BA's way, then it could seriously damage collective action in the UK, even more so than this current dispute has.

Now I know that the majority on this thread think that this will be a good thing, but there are a few people who believe that a right to strike, or at least the right not to be punished for it, should be a part of the industrial relations process in this country.

I don't really see why, to be honest, Litebulbs. This just centres around the question of a non-contractual perk, I don't see any reason at all why it would have a wider application in terms of discrimination against strikers. There's no reason to assume it would, because that is clearly stated in legislation when it comes to contractual issues and couldn't be simply overturned by a BA win in court. It's a side issue, ultimately - which of course is part of the ludicrousness of the situation.

I agree with some but not all of your views LB, but I have difficulty in reconciling the withdrawal of an industry wide perk - reduced cost travel, available to travel agents etc. - with a punishment.

It's a bit like your newspaper delivery chap(ess) deciding you have 'punished' them by not giving a Christmas tip this year.

even when ur paid considerably more than the paperboy working for the newsagents down the road - get real!!!!!!

Pap n Knee
 

The point I am trying to make and it would seem badly, is simply that IA is not something that is punishable. The only legislation that I can see for taking IA, is that it is now a fundamental right in all but 3 states in the EU and within the UK there is no precedent either way on the issue. If BA removed the perk for all cabin crew, then my argument would loose some weight, but that is not the case.

Slackness of thought
 

If you are referring to me Cym how do you know the payment either I or my paper round person receive? This is reality not your mistaken supposition.

Incidentally text speak is not the normal mode of communication here. I also suggest you remind yourself of the rules concerning personal attacks.

The level of pay should not come into it.

Litebulbs, I can see your point that only strikers lost the perk (ST) which does, from some points of view, appear as victimisation. Perhaps if the perk had been removed without prior warning, more would see that viewpoint.
However, fair warning was given which, I think, most see as changing the situation substantially.

The legalities of it will, no doubt, be debated for a long time, or until a court rules one way or the other.

(Though to be honest the constant repetition of arguments does get a bit tedious)

Thanks LB (cym). But I still don't believe removal of ST is a punishment, A travel agent that failed to add value would lose access to this perk industrywide. Here's a chance for you to expand on your comments so far - what's the difference?

R Knee
 

Sorry I was supporting the point you made - I am in total agreement!!

Litebulbs
 

Remember how our legal system operates. Something is entirely legal unless and until there is either statute or case law to specifically say that it isn't.

LB
 

So whats your thoughts about prevailing market rates and the impact using those as a realistic benchmarck could have on unemployment rates?

ps I support realistic union participation as well. BASSA - lost cause

OK
 

Understood cym

Then why was it removed from some staff in a bigger group of staff?

BA Strike - Your thoughts & questions
 

Tiramisu, My apologies if my posting came across as if I was referring to all. I was not. My reference was to the band of Bassa hardcases who need no naming. They are the ones who I find difficult to label as genuine BA cc. I have no issue with the majority of postings on that thread and certainly not yours. Sorry.

Folks

I state my position, again, for those not aware.

I am a (recently) retired ex-BA employee with 20 years service, and therefore not allowed to comment elsewhere, by decree of the mods.

I am fully aware of the issues in this dispute.

Can I just post an observation that it really doesn't matter what gets posted here, whatever Duggie/Ava/BACCM (all the one and same troll) say is just hot air.

What matters is that BA have wiped the floor with BASSA ( or more that BASSA have performed an in-house frontal lobotomy and handed victory to BA).

The lack of acumen displayed by BASSA is unbelievable, they have signed their own demise at every step.

Duggie can proclaim till the ends of time that black is white and that all will be ok when WW goes. The fact is totally different. They (BASSA) are history.

If (I doubt it) Unite ballot again, BA WILL operate 100% of Longhaul, and the mis-guided souls wil not have a job to come back to.

As I see it, the only out for BASSA is to prolong the dispute until WW leaves for IAG/TopCo and then settle immediately with Keith and claim victory in that they have got rid of WW.

The truth is that in the meantime that the settlement will have got worse and that the MF will have accelerated.

Another point for the 'Legacy Fleet' - they seem to assume that the route transfer/top up will remain as per previously suggested - I would be extremely surprised if this is the case. BA may well take the opportunity to accelerate the savings by giving MF all the (current) 48hr slip routes and make them 24 hours (think HKG, NRT, BKK, SIN, SFO, LAX etc) savings millions per year in HOTAC.

LB
 

People need to make informed decisions and cope with the consequences.

Did WW say if you go on strike ST will be removed? Did BASSA say no probs - ST will be restored in 5 mins? What is the reality of the situation - Unite want to go to the ECoHR.

Questions, yes or no, good or bad; are BASSA doing a good job for their members? What is the impact on Unite membership within BA?

cym
 

I cannot comment about the BASSA part, as I am not a member. As for Unite, at the start, no. They have raised their game somewhat, but nowhere near the level that Mr Walsh has played, but he does have the balance of UK law on his side. But regardless of that, my union has an awful lot to learn on how a CEO of his ability operates.

LB
 

Thanks for your reply, I appreicate your point of view.

However if you factor in the feelings of the staff that did not go down the IA route, the reduction in BASSA membership as per their website since it began, the lack of consultation with their members re offers tabled, the offence caused by BASSA to their engineering fellow union members re the fitness of aircracft to fly. Added to this the lack of pretty obvious public support the the action to date and the unknown potential damage of going down the route of ECoHR to restore staff travel to a limited number of BA staff, and the unknown impact this may have on the current current legal precedence in the UK for non contractual rights and HMCRC view of these benefits. Also would any such finding apply to BA staff or all CC that are UK based?

A good place for a union to be? Again I totally support TU's, they have a critical role to play. This dispute is deffo in lalaland, Time to call it a day

Btw I am ex BA CC and want whats best for the company as a whole. Swim together or drown as a self interest group is my message to Duncan!