I can see from that, that it is not about the fact that she works on a UK registered aircraft. Thanks Litebulbs.

It seems to be about the fact that she spends other time working in the UK, like turnaround times and training so the result of this case would NOT affect other companies with overseas staff except airlines of course.

Just from a perspective of fairness to these girls I really do think a fair outcome would be for them to be able to retire when other crew do and I am glad that the union has been able to make a case for this in whatever way is legally possible.

I have no knowledge of the intricacies of employment law in the airline industry but, like JdS, as an employer I am aware there different rules of evidence and onus of proof between employment tribunals and the courts with the former being more pro-employee and the latter being more pro-employer.

Just because two tribunals have decided against BA I suspect that BA has driven the appeal to the high court to actually get a legal ruling on the matter which may be more in its favour.

Don't get me started on tribunals where I've been found guilty of constructive unfair dismissal against a former employee who was openly stealing company tools and property in front of my nose! I didn't actually dismiss the guy but attempted to operate within the law and clip his wings a little to stop the thieving. Alas, apparently I did not follow the correct procedures - the fact that the individual was a brazen thief was of no interest whatsoever to the liberally-minded, do-goody, tribunal. What made it worse was, as a small employer, I had to pay for legal representation whereas this individual had an entire slew of government-funded resources advising on his rights and what he was entitled to that didn't cost him one pretty penny.

Now he has our tools, our stock, six month's pay and it cost him nothing whatsoever. I couldn't dream-up more efficient employment laws than we currently have to positively encourage employees to behave in this manner!

AV Flyer,

Using you experiences to return the thread on topic, Employment Tribunals are all about procedural fairness, not whether somebody deserves to be sacked (that is the law, not the views of individual tribunals), and this is exactly why BA is now being criticised by some non-strikers for not rewarding them, or them feeling unwanted. BA have to be very careful at the moment that they don't commit any low level procedural error that could be used by the strikers/union to BA's disadvantage. Your own unfortunate experience shows why it is more in the employers interests to rigorously follow procedures, and in some cases sack somebody rather than take a more conciliatory approach, and also leave well alone when a group of employees are being exceptionally helpful, because the risk is there that somebody will use this to bite back using Tribunal rules.

It is immoral that a thief can harness the power of the law and public funding to "rob" the employer again. However, it can work both ways - you can "fairly" sack individuals or groups for the most flimsiest or immoral reasons, but as long as it is procedurally "fair", a Tribunal has to find in the employers favour.

BA has initialy played it by the book in suspending CC who have been inculcated in any way with some of the bullying, harassment, repute, etc., etc. issues. They have also used process fairly to find some of the suspended "not guilty" without any change to their employement status (or perhaps then invoked lesser disciplinary action than dismissal if partially guilty). That all smacks of an employer who now recognises that they have to play by the book, even if some of the good guys think that they are being unreasonable.

Strike ballot to run from 21/12/10 - 21/01/10
 

No attempt whatsoever it seems to seperate the forthcoming ballot from the current dispute.

I guess Unite are calling either or both of BA and BASSA/CC89's bluff.

Will be very interesting to see what communications are passed to their members with the ballot. Will it contain any warning that stike action will most likely be unprotected and the possible consequences of this?

FOLLY
 

Should this nonsense go ahead, BA will wait in the wings, then, after several days of strike action (which will not have any noticeable effect the flying schedule) their lawyers will pounce. Strikers will be sacked, but, of course, the real troublemakers will not have gone on strike. They will be on leave, or off sick, or skulking down route, leaving the poor cannon fodder to take the rap.

Predictable? You bet.

The turnout will be interesting.

If there is strike action, I don't think the company will sack strikers. It will want to retain the moral high ground in this dispute. However, there is still the risk of the company making a claim for damages against the union.

But does the ballot and notice period not give BA time to ensure thatknown troublemakers are rostered to report for new trips early in possible strike periods? And to deny new requests for lengthy spells of leave around that time?

Real sickness cannot, of course be controlled, but should be capable of being verified.

Dairyground

I am sure BA could arrange the roster so that the BASSA hierachy are flying through the proposed strike dates. As the strike dates are not announced it will be a hit and miss affair. Some will get caught out others will not. So not 100% foolproof

keel beam - In response to your post on the CC thread regarding BASSA & Unite's latest strike issue over BA employing MF CC on lower pay/Ts&Cs thus showing they still believe that they are running the airline, with the news (at last!) of the strike ballot it is now clearer than ever that BA simply has no choice whatsoever but to hold its ground until BASSA is defeated.

If BA were to settle with BASSA's leadership (and most militant members) still intact then a monumental victory would be claimed by BASSA and they would simply keep kicking-up again and again at the slightest opportunity.

Although my instincts agree with LD12986 that BA would not want to lose the moral high ground by sacking strikers, the extreme nature of BASSA's position may well require BA to take this action in finally crushing this power crazed entity.

Dairyground
 

AV Flyer

I agree with you that BA have no choice but to go through with it.

I think it is a fair bet that the vast majority of non cabin crew employees of BA want the Cabin Crew situation to be sorted, with the kid gloves off.

The BASSA "Leadership" team have shown through the years that they are not capable of negotiating, they are just bratish kids that want their own way, all the time.

Will this latest strike ballot lead, finally, to the finishing of the dispute? I hope so.

I would not want anyone sacked for being legally on strike, but these dis-satisfied people really need to think whether the job is for them in its present and future form. Shape up or ship out!

Stunning achievement..............
 

We customers of BA who take an interest in this dispute must admire the recent stunning achievements of bassa.

"We now want to go on strike again in order to regain the 4 things that we lost last time we went on strike, when we lost 22 days pay. Oh, er, also, we now want to negotiate about that new crew thing that we have refused to negotiate about before".

Don't you just love it???

Bassa's achievements in the past over useless BA managers included pay levels of up to UKP80,000 for alleged supervisors. I'm not sure they'll ever gain anything ever again.

Hello everyone, I'm a passenger that's come on here for a bit of reassurance I guess... lucky me, I have a flight booked for January 30th, Long Haul from Heathrow - looks like it'll be slap-bang in the first phase of the new strike.

I know BA say they'll fly 100% long haul - is this a realistic prospect or is it time to consider serious disruption? I only ask because it's vitally important I fly on that day, and people on here seem very knowledgeable about this dispute. From the reading of the thread, it seems things look positive, but, as I say above, reassurance would be helpful as well!

Many thanks!

Mr87 --

Any reassurance you get from here isn’t really worth the screen space it’s typed on, not really.

Having said that, I don’t have any concerns about my own flights (LH) during that period – make of that what you will.

I guess my point is that us in here have a view but it is not really worth much more than that however informed that view may or may not be.
I hate to repeat what’s often shouted out in times of disruption but, “speak to your airline” and gather reassurance from them.

Whatever happens I wish you good luck matey, flights aint cheap and none of us book them just for the joy of it, we all have to get somewhere after all, it’s no small thing when it goes wrong.

Mr87

I disagree (politely) with Snas. BA has said they will operate 100% of LH and, while they may have many faults, overpromising coverage is not one of them. If your flight is cancelled it will not be due to the strike.

Ll

Well that won't be the reason given.....:)

baggersup, There is a link to a page on the front page of ba.com with an update following yesterday's announcement.

As to whether BA will meet its promise of a 100% long haul operation at LHR, last time it under promised and over delivered. That said, I expect Unite to not waste any time in calling strike dates and they will go for the end of January to overshadow the launch of IAG. This traditionally a very quiet time for travel so some long hauls on high frequency routes could be consolidated.

Mr87, the ballot finishes on the 21st, but I am not sure how long it would take them to count up the votes and verify them.

I would expect that the result would take some days to be announced because based on the previous legal goings on Unite are going to be extremely careful to check and double check before announcing.

They do have to give 7 days notice of a strike, so it is extremely close, assuming of course that you dont believe that BA will operate 100% Long Haul services as they have stated.

I have a flight going long haul just before you, and at this point im not worried.

Mr 187 - How many flights per day do BA have to your destination? Less profitable routes will go before more profitable ones ... routes with multiple flights per day might well get some consolidation.

A target of 100% Long haul means just that ... a target. No guarantees. In fact no airline will be able to guarantee you get away that day as the aircraft may have technical issues \ there could be weather delays etc. But you are taking an additional risk with the strike as well and, personally, if you have to fly that day then I would look elsewhere. Nobody on here knows anything yet and won't until after any strike dates are announced so asking on the forum is, sadly, pointless.

Ultimately it is your call. You have to live with the decision.