It appears that Unite has decided to wait until its GS ballot result is announced before going back to BA which means that any approach to BA will now not be by TW but by its new GS. BASSA seem happy to wait believing that the new GS will be Len McCluskey whom they believe to be a staunch BASSA supporter and thus a strong negotiator on their behalf.

Thinking back to last Winter, then LM was very vociferous and invovled in the dispute prior to the strike calls when he very notciably went silent and withdrew. It was widely thought he withdrew as he was concerned being publicly mixed-up with BASSA's dispute could damage his GS aspirations.

Should this be true then BASSA would be ill advised to raise any hopes of LM stepping in upon his becoming GS. It would not be the first time a politician had made false promises privately to gain votes and I could imagine BASSA's state of desperation making them very susceptible to voting in misguided belief.

We will no doubt see ........

with the greatest respect av flyer I never suggested any different but my own view is that BA haven't got the b*lls due to the inevitable repercussions elsewhere.

BA don't need a mandate to terminate the agreement as numbers and support are irrelevant.

The GS election will resolve this dispute one way or the other.

SC - With a 12999 CC not being members I think even BA would have the confidence to terminate the agreement.

You seem to think that BASSA's leadership is somehow invincible and untouchable. Can you explain the basis for this confidence as I seem to be missing something?

no i just think the reality of potential issues right across the board (everywhere unite has its finger in a pie) is too much of a risk for BA.

Its a big loss for unite to lose an agreement. You seriously believe they will let go just like that?

SC - So you would be thinking that the new Unite GS would support BASSA far better than TW ever did and also be prepared to extend BASSA's IA to other BA related Branches within Unite?

There would be very many "ifs" to resolve before other Unite Branches that have already settled with BA would take IA in support of BASSA's CC.

Is this the basis for your confidence in BASSA's leaderships power base?

SC - I may be misunderstanding something from your earlier posts.

Are you saying that both BA & Unite would have to agree to terminate a voluntary agreement or is it sufficient for just one party to terminate for the agreement to be terminated?

no my own view is that len will continue on the current path whereas les will bring this to an end very quickly. Most commentators are expecting a len victory.

ba is a prestige company and so brings prestige and status to any union involved with it. The reality of breaking a voluntary agreement under such circumstances has very little to do with the members or lack of them in any given workplace.

I would be very surprised if both have to agree to terminate the deal.

I doubt if both parties will need to agree a termination, but I imagine the notice will be reasonably long, but only somebody with access to the recognition agreement will be able to clear that up.

If BA thought that it was anywhere near 50%-1 of the whole cabin crew community, then I am sure that it would be general knowledge. If you add the alleged 7000 strikers to the CC89 non striking membership, then you are a long way off 6750 not in Unite.

If BASSA and CC89 use check off, then that would be another indication of numbers.

just to ensure we are all talking about apples.

voluntary agreement- can only be terminated by one of the signaturies
statutory agreement - numbers are significant and can lead to a derecognition ballot driven by the workforce

so union members cannot terminate a voluntary agreement, there is no mechanism in place for such an action.

SC
 

I agree. However numbers do come into it inasmuch as if BA were to terminate the recognition agreement, then Unite would immediately show that it had over 50%+1 membership, so not requiring a ballot, as I understand it. I am happy to be proved wrong though.

No quite what I am saying. I am saying that if the voluntary agreement is at risk of being terminated then members views and numbers will be totally irrelevant in the discussion that would ensue. It would then all be about politics and nothing else.

Whether you feel that unite represent your views now or not, only the individual can determine.

litebulbs it would make no difference. Voluntary agreement terminated process reset.

of course unite would be free to go down the recognition route again but you can't force a company into a voluntary agreement.

end result is that numbers are completely irrelevant.

AV Flyer
 

I personally will be looking at my membership of Unite if a certain candidate is elected. That candidate will have to say and do quite a few things to change my preconceived ideas. Time will tell and hopefully the 24th will make this post irrelevant, but I doubt it.

SC, nobody can force a voluntary agreement, but what happens if BA serve notice? What would Unite do?

I suspect they would follow the statutory route in the hope that they can overturn the decision to terminate in the mean time. All in all bad news for unite which is why it will never happen.

consequences for BA would have been clearly explained and BA doesn't want to risk facing them in my opinion.

Litebulbs - Sorry to hear that. It is always unfortunate when, because of significant changes by the leadership/mamangement of one party, another party feels sufficiently compromised that upon principle they have to walk away. Particularly if that relationship has strong personal elements developed over a long period of time. But who are we other than our personal value systems? We have nothing else to base our decisions on and would be compromising ourselves completely if we were to let it pass.

Union de-recognition by BA
 

Unions do not like de-recognition. If BA gave notice to terminate their arrangements with bassa/Unite, then Unite would be upset.

However, Unite being upset is nothing new. The cases of de-recognition of the T&G that i can think of - without doing any Internet research include:-
BP. Shell. ICI. Unilever. Astra Zeneca. The list goes on.

All of these are much much higher profile and higher prestige than BA.

For the oilies, the T & G tried to mount a campaign, with National press releases, a determination to "picket" their petrol stations and all that stuff.............Now, here's the test ............does anyone reading this remember any of that? Did you refuse to buy Shell petrol? I thought not.

Does anyone remember any of Len's campaigns in Liverpool, (which, of course, led to the end of the jobs that he was allegedly trying to protect.) ? I thought not.

If BA de-recognised bassa, what exactly are bassa going to do about it? Would the engineers come out in sympathy?? Of course not. Would BA CC strike??? - Not enough of them care enough.
It would be a modest risk, but easy to achieve, and forgotten in a couple of years.

The new GS, whoever she is, would make all the right socialist sounding noises, but would know that she has about as much power as a cough in a hurricane. She's going to much too busy worrying about Government budget effects to worry about BA.

Just announced on the rolling BBC News 24 channel. Len McCluskey has been elected the new GS of Unite. The BBC said "he received more than 100,000 votes which is double that of his nearest rival".

With an alleged 1.5 million members (the BBC's news article went on to say "over one million members"), am I the only one who continues to be disturbed by these so-called union and branch "resounding majority votes" from what amounts to minority membership turn-outs?

If I were Unite I would be looking very closely why so few voted as it could well explain its rapidly diminishing membership.

I'm with litebulbs on this one if Len is confirmed and my membership will be terminated.

No vote is stupidity

SC - Sorry to hear that too.

Further to the BBC News 24 announcement there is a PA news article here:

The Press Association: McCluskey elected new Unite leader

Barely a 16% turn-out, if that.