Lack of trust?
 

The thing is Litebulbs is that if the 5,000-odd who voted yes (and perhaps some who couldn't be bothered with having a say in their own futures) dont believe or trust anything their employer says then no agreement BA propose would ever be satisfactory. Even reinstatement of the sacked, return of ST, and allowing CSD's to put their feet up again on their current agreement will not be satisfactory if they don't trust BA not to change things in future.

If this lack of trust is genuine at CC level rather than just posturing by the union, then the only solution is for the CC concerned to go and find an employer elsewhere that they do trust. Or be booted out (with assistance from BASSA if they do go ahead with what BA will say is an illegal strike) if they won't take the initiative and leave

Tough maybe when they've got a mortgage to pay, but what is the alternative?

The working rights of the the MF CC are the same as they are for the heritage CC.

The rest of what you say has some truth, those that need to connect into LHR are more likely to be affected by the strike than those starting a LH journey from LHR. I think that BA is looking to a longer term game than just the days of the strike. BA must ensure that they run and manage the business rather than one group of employees determining how the business should be run for the benefit of them alone.

JT,

Mixed Fleet crew are working to very different agreements to current crew, so their working rights are different. They can achieve less time off after trips and trips where current cabin crew and PILOTS would trigger 2 nights down route, like Las Vegus and Hanenda, they only get one night. So they can go into a destination with one set of pilots and leave with a different set because their first set of pilots is having a second night's rest, while they are not.

Come off it Juan!

Isn't it true that this new fleet can be binned if they're off sick for a few months? Can't they be binned if the company decides they have no use for them? All this for a paltry 11 grand a year and two pounds forty pence an hour.

Off sick once (in an area of work where you're at high risk of contacting all sorts of bugs, viruses) and you'll miss out on pay (call it a bonus if you want).

I was under the impression that this was written into their contracts? Dunno about you but I'd say that they were pretty crap conditions myself.

Wouldn't it be simpler if pilots and cabin crew worked to similar agreements as was the case in B.Cal. I remember moving up to Heathrow after the merger and operating 6 consecutive sectors with 5 different sets of cabin crew.:confused:

Betty Girl
 

I always thought they upmanned the flight crew, to share the flying, if they're flying to destinations like Singapore, Narita and so on? Why would they need extra time off?

Moses - you are asking the question the wrong way round.

Mixed Fleet currently get less time off between flights than both pilots and "heritage" cabin crew however the rest time must comply with legal minimums. It does.

Whether that (and the other terms and conditions you describe as "pretty crap") is sustainable in the long term remains to be seen, but commercial reality says will largely depend upon market forces. If enough people of sufficient quality are prepared to work on such contracts there will likely be little change.

Mariner - I'm not doubting that BA are meeting the bare minimum legal requirements for the new cheap fleet.

"....commercial reality says will largely depend upon market forces". I think it's you who has it the wrong way round.

Market forces, particularly labour markets, can be and often are exploited and manipulated by business. BA set the heights in terms or previous T&C's. They've now set the lows.

Moses
They don't need extra time off, in the pilots and current cabin crew agreements some trips trigger a two night stop, because of time change and length of duty.

All I was saying was that Mixed Fleet crew are different. I only mentioned the fact that pilots at the moment get the same days down route to current cabin crew on these flights, so that you could see that it was not just current cabin crew that have this time off.

Yes Fly380, we are often on different itineraries to the flight crew because different departments roster itineraries differently but in general our downroute rest is similar, sometimes longer, sometimes less but on these long range flights we both get two nights whereas Mixed fleet will not.

Just pointing out that they are working to different agreements. Don't really want to get into a detailed discussion about rostering rules because it is a long and complicated subject and you really need the relavant book in front of you to hope to understand the subject.

You won't get anywhere here with that, although I agree entirely, a majority of the posters think that workforces are there to be exploited. This is regardless of the BA dispute.
Nothing changes the fact that people in their thousands are unhappy. The popular train of thought here is that they have been bamboozled. I don't believe that to be the case.
BASSA may have gone about things in entirely the wrong way, but, it would seem that a large amount of people have experienced the down side of the company.
There is also the assumption that those who moved are happy and satisfied rather than scared or financially forced.

Sorry Moses30u - it is BASSAs refusal to negotiate on existing T&Cs that has caused the rapid growth in Mixed Fleet. Yes, it would have come over time but mature discussion rather than "NO NEGOTIATION" would have achieved a lot more.

Lets face it, why has not other department at BA got the same problem?

Why does no other department mistrust WW so much?

Why is there such a queue of VCC from every other department out to break this strike?

And if Mixed Fleet is so poorly paid in relation to the competition, why are there thousands going through the application process at the moment?

Every other department at BA worked with the Senior Mangement (WW if we want to personalise it) to achieve a consensus. God forbid - even Unite have worked with WW to achieve agreement over pensions. Sadly much of this dispute is BASSA and Cabin Crew wanting control over the company. The right to tell everyone else how they will work. And that is why EVERY other department in BA is lined up against them. Just take a look at PC767 on the cabin crew thread talking about a power struggle as to who runs the company ... and PC767 is cabin crew who seems to think it is their job.

"And the stupid thing is? Walsh and BA have their permanent and structural changes to cabin crew working terms and conditions. He's brought in a cheap labour resource, paying minimal wages with crap working rights."

As I mention, thousands are going through the application process so I guess it isn't quite as bad as you make out. But you also ignore the fact that BASSA refused to negotiate so BA went ahead without them. You ignore (conveniently forget?) that every other department talked and achieved agreement in a mature adult way. BASSA and their cabin crew supporters took the childish decision to hold on to their toys and not talk maturely. And like a 3 year old, they have now lost those toys and are screaming how unfair everything is and they want their toys back and everything to back as it used to be ... with BASSA running the show. It isn't going to happen. One of the reasons that BASSA held the controls for so long is that previous CEOs didn't want this type of dispute and as such pandered to the BASSA brigade. WW hasn't come this far to hand back to BASSA everything that they have thrown out of their own pram.

The ins and out of the dispute between BASSA and British Airways have kept PPRuNe readers amused/appalled/annoyed/incensed/educated/informed (you choose whichever word applies best) for the last couple of years, at least.

But has anyone noticed that there have been an infinitesimal number of complaints against British Airways by any other sector of the airline's work force - on PPRuNe, at least? Are they all happy and satisfied with their lot?

As BA are perfectly entitled to do.

The strategy will work if quality staff can be attracted/retained.
It will have to be changed if they can't.

“BASSAs refusal to negotiate on existing T&Cs that has caused the rapid growth in Mixed Fleet”. Errmm, I don’t think so! Nobody except BA are responsible for setting up the new cheap fleet. They also set the pace. Unless you’re saying that BA are punishing the strikers for daring go against them, in which case, I’d question any business strategy based on rash decisions, which seek to punish a group of employees.

“Lets face it, why has not other department at BA got the same problem?”. Weren’t BALPA calling for a strike a few years ago, due to a cheap fleet of pilots arriving? BA staff going on wild cat strikes during the Gate Gourmet dispute? There are probably others, I can’t be bothered to Google.

“Why does no other department mistrust WW so much?” Does any other staff employee group in BA have a condition of employment written into their contract, which states they can be binned for commercial reasons or sickness? Has any other department been told they must work alongside a cheap labour resource?

Why is there such a queue of VCC from every other department out to break this strike? Greed, management pressure and a jolly. Do the VCC’s get £2.40 an hour for being away BetterbyBoat?

Tell me BetterbyBoat - what else do you want from the cabin crew? A further pound of flesh?

There is always a temptation on here for people to simplify things too much.

This dispute is very complicated and there have been faults on BOTH sides.

There are many many different reasons why the vote went the way it did.

Here are a few:-

Some crew don't trust BA to be fair in the future with route allocation.

Some crew have read the agreement are ARE happy with it and do trust BA.

Some have not even read it but have relied on misinformation from Bassa.

Some are happy with the agreement but upset about losing staff travel.

Some are unhappy about the suspensions and sackings.

Some have been persuaded by the union that they will be redeployed if they sign the agreement.

Some are just putting their heads in the sand and hoping it will just go away because they can't cope with all this anymore.

You only have to read what DH said to those crew he wants to leave the union to understand why they are all confused.

As I said the only thing that is certain is that both sides have handled it wrongly at times and that this strike will have hardly any impact on BA because in the end the majority of crew will come to work.

From moses30u, 11 January 2011:

And your point is Churchinchow?

Ahhhh, I see. Because I don't buy the BA spin, toe the line on here and slag off the cabin crew, I must be a union member or cabin crew?

I cant speak for BbB, but what I would want for cabin crew is:

A rise in basic pay
A promise that route transfers to cheaper fleets will be done fairly.
As a further safeguard to the route transfer, a system that guarantees allowances at current levels if change of routes means allowance earning is reduced from current levels.

BA have offered all the above and it has been rejected by the union without even putting the offer to their members.

Can I ask you Moses what you would want for the cabin crew? (PS Personal insults will get you banned from here pretty quickly so you may like to edit your last post)

Thanks for the headsup Mariner, duly edited.

You’ve lost me a bit about the transfers.

However, from what you’ve stated, there’s a lot of management promises in that offer. Given the bitterness of this dispute, I’m not so sure I’d trust these promises right now.

This basic pay rise has got to be a management gimmick right?! Certainly is a headline grabber.

A bit of balance..............
 

I would like to restore a little bit of balance here.

Whilst DH is behaving just like the Popes during the counter-reformation, and the believers are doing what they are told, as they did back then, there is a fact that thousands of staff voted to strike, and thousands of staff will go on strike. (Two thirds of those that voted to strike will strike).

This remains a very serious management issue.

The "pope" cannot "lead" without followers. There are thousands of followers, and thousands of strikers. It's not just DH and a bunch of cardinals, it is thousands of people.

What the hell are the BA managers doing? In any other industry, the managers would be out there talking to the staff and finding and fixing the problems.

The longer this goes on the worse the line managers appear to be.