By making the Union membership date the same day of release is even better. As Diplome said, it now forces BASSA members to stand up and tell their union they want ths deal.

If BASSA don't put this offer to their members I predict a large number of resignations. The offer is there for everyone to see, no cloak and dagger theories or room to create conspiracies.

It would indeed be funny if none union members had better working contracts than none union members..and they would only have themselves to blame.

Not so sure about this, although I am only speculating.

A number of people have resigned, but the floodgates have not opened yet, despite BA making offers.

If non BASSA members accept the deal and have superior T&C's, this will just add to the sense of martydom.

I take the view that there are probably quite a lot of CC who strongly dislike the management of BA and are prepared to "stick it up them" by voting for IA and then come to work out of necessity.

Their 'payoff' is seeing the company finances hit.

For the avoidance of doubt, I am not a BASSA supporter.

I think that BA had to put the union membership date as 25 June. They are prohibited from offering a benefit to employees to induce them to leave a union. Making an offer that is capable of direct acceptance by non-members would - as shown by the comments on this thread - clearly be a potential inducement.

Betty girl on the CC forum...
 

Well Betty girl, welcome to the real world, 10 years of Nulabour (supported by Bassa and Unite and the majority of the UK population led you to this situation). No immigration policy? No financial policy? No tax policy? The list goes on as to how the voters are now learning the error of their ways over the last decade.

As an individual though in employment, with a well respected employer, I would be gobsmacked if you have the individual means to manouvere, that you did not take up this offer. As an individual, what is your alternative? If you are tied to Bassa... Who knows where you might end up.

Isn't it about time that the strikers got real.
I have been watching developments and it seems to me that most cc just want to get back to work and provide the good service that is normally provided.
An offer of an annual increse (even if only for 2 years) is more than most people will be getting. Many people in the public sector will not even have a job in 6 months and even if they don't lose their job pay will be frozen.
My wife works in a call centre for a major bank and has just been told along with several hundred others that her job is going to India - this will cause real hardship to many - not so bad for us as I have retired but my wife has not. How is that for a kick in the teeth - we bail out the banks and they ship our jobs to India. This makes BA look like employer of the year.
Sorry for that rant .
If this keeps on much longer all of the respect that has been built up over the years for cc will be lost, I know it is not all of cc but it is hard to be reasonable when the holiday you have saved for all year is being affected . It is also obvious that the timing of IA is meant to cause as much misery as possible.
I am due to fly with BA for the first time in September and was really looking forward to it but there is still a worry that IA might affect it. The flight was booked last October befre this all kicked off. I would probably have flown Virgin if I had known.
Just do what is right and end it asap.:sad:

Navel gazing
 

The CC on the other forum are acting like public service workers, sqabbling over meal allowances & payment guarantees, even when they're stuck at home on their fat backsides.

I don't think that any of them are living in the real world. It's time they woke up to what the rest of the world is suffering.

Teesider53:

If your flight is a long haul I wouldn't stress too much. BA is stating they will accomplish 100% of their long haul flights in the event of another strike and so far they have delivered on each of their promises.

BA seems to be attempting to handle this in the most productive way possible while still not leaving the airline open to threats from a small militant band of light thinkers. The latest offer shows that they are trying to address concerns of staff and I for one am not willing to withdraw my support when the airline is doing the right thing.

Hope all works out well for your flight.

Thnks for that Diplome - we are going long haul but there is also a connecting BA flight from Newcastle.
It's nice to see that people still care enough to offer information ,help and advice to total strangers. I hope for all the decent cc that the issue is soon resolved and that BA can get back to normal.

It amazes me that some individuals think that they can dictate terms. From the main CC board by Ava Hannah:

Quote:

---

Unless Staff Travel is given back, I am not bothered with this new proposal. They can stuff it. I commute from JNB and I can't wait for years until the Staff Travel issue appears in the European Courts.

They have replaced MTP with a 'top-up payment' which includes a no strike clause. That itself indicates that you will lose a huge amount of your pay if you take industrial action. A two year pay rise? Are BA trying to bribe us to accept a proposal? They have also based the top-up payment, which is £1500 less than the MTP in previous proposals, on last year and this year's schedule which includes three industrial actions and the ash volcano incident. Either way, MFH is going to take all of our lucrative routes and we will have to rely on a silly top-up payment. I don't even want to think of how long it is going to last before they rip that up.

Why did they send out the proposal on a Friday night? And individual offers? BA are trying to divide us even further. Nice try. Sorry Bill Francis and Willie Walsh. Unless you give my Staff Travel back with my original seniority, which I think I have earned after 17 years of continuous service with BA, I am not interested. You could offer me all the money in the world, I still wouldn't take it unless Staff Travel is given back.

---

The objection to the individual offers to non-BASSA members is interesting. Could it be that BASSA is feeling some heat as they no longer control the fate of their non-members.

Does this individual truly think that BA is going to come to a halt if her staff travel is not returned? Does she truly think that her staff travel with seniority is going to be returned? Perhaps she would be wise to apply with other airlines that will cover her commute from Johannesburg and have no problem with her attempts to bring her airline down.

Diplome
 

I totally agree with you, hence my sentiments above from post #216. These Bassa members are just impossible to negotiate with, a fact now fully accepted by Mr Walsh. The time for talking is over & BA will progress without the permanent drag of Bassa.

RE The new offer....

My partner is very pleased she left the union right after the 12 days of Christmas action. She is being told that she isnt alone...some very happy crew about that jumped, some that remained, not so happy as they have to rely on BASSA making a choice for them now - oh dear..!

Snas:

Pleased to see that her decision worked out for her. It could not have been an easy one.

Amazing that right now the individuals who have the most power over their career path are the one's who DO NOT belong to BASSA. :)

Fincastle, while I'm pleased you agree with me that is not my quote.:confused:

How do you commute from Johannesburg? It must be both expensive and time consuming? Lots of spare time?

And hopefully you then take sufficient rest before commencing your period of duty.

Why would that be?

As I understand it Staff Travel will give them upto 90% off the price of the ticket plus tax. So not so expensive. Of course there does have to be a spare seat on the flight...

Hard to find sympathy for someone who commutes from Johannesburg. It's a perk, they could have removed it at any time. They were warned of the consequences of striking.

Also Betty's Girl needs to get into the real world. There are plenty of people who earn what CC will be earning on these new contracts or less and are based in London. Yeah you can't buy a house but who can these days? I bought my house ten years ago. I couldn't afford to buy it now and I'm earning more than double what I was earning when I bought it.

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. Monitoring might be difficult and considered intrusive, but detecting use of staff travel flights in the "rest" period should be possible. And BASSA could hardly put up an acceptable argument against the principle.

As a 40 year service retiree if I apply and get a ST ticket to say America should I wear my flameproof / heatproof underwear for the trips "Sorry about the hot coffee in your lap sir" and be prepared for " everything is off " food wise and be aware of "why should you have St and not me" attitude . I have always enjoyed the friendliness and professionalism of the cabin crew when ever I've flown please keep it that way.

I have no sympathy for crew who are commuting from Johannesburg and have lost their staff travel for going on strike. They are definitely not suffering financially and probably not on a full-time contract either.

Winch Control,

If you want to quote me at least quote all of my post.

If you had read all my posts you would know that I am a hardworking crew member who supported BA through the strike. I do not support BASSA and am not a Labour supporter. I have worked for BA for 22 years and am an experienced E/F Purser and I am happy to accept this new offer.

The post you quoted was a general observation of the problems we as a society will have if wages are forsed down and young people are no longer able to put money into pensions. It was not about BA per say. It is the vast number of people with the right to work in the EU that is causing employers to be able to pay people 11K a year. The cost of living is actually going up especially in the south and around London. It was merely an observation of what is happening to the UK job market and how people in the city are scoffing in the troff while ordinary people are being told how lucky they are to have a job. Not specifically about BA and not in support of BASSA.

Thank you.

I feel you have quoted my comments completely out of context.

And the hysteria continues, by Ava Hannah:

Quote:

---

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
 

I like your logic, must look up what BASSA's requirement is for rest post positioning :ok:

To be fair most commuters I know are very careful about pre-duty local rest.....

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.

Yup, looks like it: - BA Cabin Crew Industrial Action: Unite Leader Tony Woodley Says Strike Ballot 'Will Be Postponed' | Business | Sky News

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...)
 

Quote is from johnowhiskeyx today at 10.39 pprune time.

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.

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.

ExecClubPaxThat's why I said: End Game.

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.

The other staff groups pay freezes end in 2011 too. It was 2009/10. I suspect they will get a better deal than the cabin crew when the negotiation comes round.

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..