There are no prophets in BASSA, that's for certain.

But DH thinks he is.

Lessons to learn from BASSA
 

BASSA says that it is the biggest branch.

I can see that if a Branch or Lodge or Chapel has less than a hundred members, then it is tough work on the shop stewards - and certainly would be inappropriate for the "parent" Union to impose bureaucratic systems like auditing of accounts._ But size changes relationships and opportunities._ Relationships are easy to talk about._ Opportunities are something to privately think about.

It seems to me that 100 members is a threshold and at some point slightly above that, the parent Union should require that accounts are published every year (say within 3 months after the year end).
At a higher threshold - somewhere between 500 and a 1000 members - the Union should require that the accounts be annually audited, published and there should also be a facility for questions and answers and these questions and answers should be available as information to all those members of that Branch (and the timescale should be defined by the parent Union in the form of rules that apply to all branches without exception).

If there is someone in either Unite or any other Union reading this, then I say thank you for reading this, and I respectfully suggest that what I am advocating can only be to the advantage of the Union movement.

I'm sure that a patient poster on here can tell me what I've got wrong..............I'm sure there is something.........

Diary of a striker....

I went on strike. I don't know why. I lost a few days pay but gave the BMW an outing. It was like a nice little holiday. I was going to go sick, as usual, but the Union said that I might not be paid. Took the kids to some place quite near Heathrow, had a good shout, and an interesting bus ride. My employer took away my free travel, so some of the cash that I used to get from various mates from giving them freebies was reduced.
I'm told we won whatever the strike was about. I haven't got my free travel back yet, but I'm told I will get it back, with extra compensation for losing it in the first place. At one stage, someone said in 5 minutes, but I have got used to not holding my breath.
There is one less person on some of the planes that I crew on, but I haven't noticed as I'm senior and I get to sleep for lots of the time.
Someone has been leaving lights on in the bunks. That earns us some extra money for some strange reason. I always use eye-shades, so I don't notice, but the money comes in hand.
There are some new, and younger faces at the CRC. I'm told that I shouldn't mix with them as they are New. My Union rep says that the Union battled hard to keep them off my planes. I haven't seen any on the Sin and NRT routes, yet.
There appear to be some pilots and engineers and even some beancounters training up as Volunteer crew. Clearly, we are so important that every one else has to be trained up in our job.
I hope they take their sickies on a regular basis. I would not want our sickies to be lost - they come in very handy at some times of year.
The money keeps rolling in now, so I'm happy enough.
I still have not met my manager. I saw him (it would be a him) once, in the distance. The TU rep, who is around much more, has warned me to avoid managers. I'm told that the Union dislikes managers nearly as much as it dislikes pilots. When I was younger, I used to enjoy being with the pilots, in all sorts of ways, but as I've got older I don't fancy them so much.

I'm going to retire in about 3 years. I am very pleased that my Union has kept a very close eye on my pension plan, and that it is very healthy,and guaranteed by the Union. I once heard that it was owed 4 billion pounds by BA, but that can't be right.

9/10 A.O.

I would have given you 10/10 if you inserted a sentence blaming the pilots for something, anything, or indeed everything.

Keep up the good work :ok:

wiggy
thank you
Done.

Please?
 

Sorry mods, I promise this will be the only repost -

Range of Reasonable Responses Test for Employee Misconduct Survey

Thanks to the 44 who have completed it so far.

Thank you for saying what I wanted to say, but more lucidly and without me straying into hyperbole and ad hominem. :ok:

There does seem to be a major problem with the way DH runs his fiefdom, and the only way that gets resolved is either by the members of BASSA [if they're allowed to express a contrary view] or by Unite the Union itself.

There could be a swift resolution to the entire farce if Unite's Gen Sec actually chose to take a firm [if non-public] grip of what is happening within BASSA. Then BA could talk to an adult without background noises from the SWP play-room.

Sadly, I'm not optimistic. 'Red Len' has bigger fish to fry.

Litebulbs, I would do the survey but I cannot answer the very first question as it depends on the circumstances. Let's face it, depending on the circumstances, any one of the answers is possible.


PS. There are too many questions there that are not answerable with the options you've given

As a slight aside, may I just wish everyone a pleasant weekend? The UK weather looks nice, and for those who are travelling it seems there's no BA Strike either.

Happy Easter :ok:

hellsbrink
 

Thanks for the feedback. Looking back on it, I should have asked less questions, but branched each one off depending on the answers. But the initial point was to see what the reasonable person would say, when faced with a question of misconduct. We all look in at examples and there have been many discussed on the two threads (well numerous threads, but in cabin crew and SLF).

If you look at the fighting questions, I honestly thought that both questions would give dismissal as the most likely outcome. Neither did. Now if I was to just ask what would you think would be the outcome if two people were caught fighting, then I think the result would have been the sack.

Still, I am up to 53 responses now, so hopefully it will be seen as worthwhile (TV adverts can say 83% of people preferred it when 113 people are polled!)

I would ask that you have a go based on this, but I will understand if you don't want to.

I think you meant to write "fewer questions".

I did fill it out, against my better judgement.

Most of the responses were in the written warning/written warning with sanction.

However, I have to agree with others who have looked at it that without the exact detail of the misdemeanour, the previous employment and disciplinary history of the individual, and the contrition or otherwise of the individual, it really is very hard to make a definitive judgement.

You'll probably end up with a nice survey which tells you what you want to hear - that BA acted much more aggressively than your respondents would have under similar circumstances.

Sadly, like the GCSE-level survey on Bullying which Unite cobbled together last year, your survey will have more holes in it than a colander.

You'd be better off focussing your energies on ensuring Unite has compelled BASSA to produce accounts, have them audited and make them available to members. That's where the real danger lies for Unite.

VK
 

Thanks for the feedback and taking time to complete it.

Pas de probleme.

I am also linking to the BA Offer put to non-union members in October 2010 as it's getting quite a bit of mention on the other thread, and might usefully be linked to there:

http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/151010_...llectivev6.doc

LB
 

I also answered your survey and have to agree with VK. The most relevant for me was not knowing the past history of the employee. If this problem was reoccurring then my answer would have been quite different.

pcat160
 

Others have also made that point. I added at the head of the survey, that in each case it was a first offence.

Or even "offence"....

It's worth taking a look at Litebulbs' survey if you have time over the long weekend:

Range of Reasonable Responses Test for Employee Misconduct Survey

Though of more interest are notlangley's stats:

Even at £500,000 per year I am perplexed about how the money is actually spent. It's not just salary we should be looking at, but also things like expenses, company cars (BMW M3s aren't cheap!) and pension contributions which I would reckon are not inconsiderable.

I don't have a problem with people being remunerated for work they perform, but to do so without transparency, and especially when required to do so by Law, is anathema to any professional.

LB
 

I also responded to your survey and found, with the information you had given in the questions, I was easily able to make a judgement....you can always look for further detail as others have noted, but as in real life thats not always available.....so you judge on the information you have...

One point though, different discipline Managers will have differing views on relevant action....a classic example is the top salesman question who gets involved in a fight...a HR Director would recommend a harsher course of action than a Sales Director, who will not want to lose his best salesman and therefore may be more lienient....

I realise these types of surveys can grow arms and legs once you start to get feedback, but a function filter as well as senirioty filter on respondants may yield you more valuable results...?

But, great survey and I hope it helps you in your studies :D

harrypic
 

Thanks for that harrypic. I have since been shown how to set more questions within the rules of free survey monkey.

The question I ask now, looking at the results, is although dismissal has not been the first choice in any of the questions, would it still be in the reasonable range? Dismissal has been the answer in every question, by at least one person, so should it be included?

Oh for a 1000 responses, rather than 60, but an interesting 60 anyway.

Great points and I agree that would have been more informative, rather than just having it as a tick box at the end. Hopefully I will learn from this learning exercise in researching a researching task.

Okay, here's another question of a more philosophical nature and I'm not sure it isn't a bit naughty, but there is a relevant basis for it.

How much better off would BASSA members and cabin crew in general be, if Litebulbs had been their General Secretary? And what of BA? Would it be in worse shape, the same as at present or even better?

I think I know, but what say you? :ok:

Roger.

I looked at Litebulbs; survey, but I rally can't be bothered to fill it in because the questions are so obviously designed to ensure the answers put BA in a bad light. Let me just re-phrase a couple of them. For example:-

1. An employee, repeatedly ignores a work colleague in a similar job role, when at work and working in a customer facing role and approached on issues not related to work.

An employee's locker is searched randomly in line with company policy and some low value company items are found. Similar items have been going missing for the last few months. The employee admitted to putting the items into the locker, but claimed he never intended for the items to be removed from company premises.

An employee has been repeatedly requested to smarten up in appearance (non uniform position) and attend to his personal hygiene as other members of staff have spoken to management, to meet the requirements of line management, with the reason being because there was a possibility of meeting third party clients, but not as a representative of the company

An employee had very strong religious beliefs and openly shared views whenever in conversation with fellow employees who had asked him to desist. The line manager repeatedly requested that the employee kept all views private unless asked, but request was ignored

An employee has been involved in a fight. This employee struck the other and a fight ensued. Witnesses say that a heated discussion was taking place where another employee was making accusations about fiddling the books to exceed sales targets. The employee has been employed for two years and has been the best sales person that the company currently employs. (lets be even handed, in the last question you said that he didn't start the fight.)

Or possibly another couple of questions that may be pertinent to this thread:-

An employee is recorded on surveillance camera damaging a colleagues car in the company car park. When asked about the incident, he first denies it and then says the other person deserved it,

An employee repeatedly refuses to follow the instructions of his manager, saying he has far more important things to be doing.



Its why I have such a low opinions of unions - (having once been in Amicus myself). There is truth, and then there is the union's truth - post manipulation.

Landroger
To use tha Australian term, they would all have been better off if the GS had been the proverbial "Drover's Dog."

Although it had been around since the 1940s, usually as a less than flattering term, it became more widely used after Bill Hayden infamously commented in 1983 that a drover's dog could have led the party to victory.

pvmw
 

All I can say is that it is not my intention to put BA in any light, but you will have to take my word on that; or not.

Forgive my cynicism!! However.....

My interpretation of every question was that is was phrased to ensure that no reasonable person would say "Dismissal". Phrase the questions a little differently, or add a couple of words to tilt the bias the other way slightly and dismissal certainly becomes an option.

As this is a thread which is discussing employees who have been dismissed for gross misconduct - bullying, vandalism, refusing to work as requested - and where every question is designed to make it appear that dismissal is an unreasonable choice then....??

To me it clearly demonstrates a bias - intentional or subconscious.

pvmw
 

If you take the survey, as 76 people have, you will see the actual results to date. As the questions are not based on the current dispute, you will see that dismissal has been chosen by some, as the outcome for a fair percentage of the questions.

If I had wanted to ask questions about the current dispute, I would have done, but then it would have been with an intention to act as you state. My reason for choosing this thread on this site is that there have been numerous postings on all sorts of issues around the current dispute, so people have taken time to post on pprune to share their thoughts. I was hoping that the same would be the case for this survey. There have been 5500 views of the thread since I posted the link and I thank the 76 people who have responded.

If I go and post blah, blah, blah and that BA are wrong, then I expect and deserve the full weight of any and all who have taken time to fill it in. I will not do that and again you have my word.

My apologies for doubting your good intentions, it was easy to make the assumption that, as the survey was on a thread about the BA dispute, the questions were informed by it.

I'll go off and do it, tho' I still think the questions are lacking in sufficient detail to make a reasoned judgment possible. My responses will also be coloured by my experiences in my career. One example. In my previous job there was a fight between two staff. The younger, who had only been there a year or so, was out the door immediately and never seen again. The elder, been there many years, knew the right people, union man etc. got suspended for a week. In my mind, he was more culpable and should have been dismissed as well.

pvmw
 

The lack of information has been the most common feedback to date. I will include it with the work I submit and will probably suffer when it is assessed. I was going to clear it and redo with fewer questions and a different structure, but I do not want to loose the 78 responses that I have had so far and I would probably be pushing the mods patience.

Whichever, you gave it a good shot ... and kudos for trying. :ok:

It's an imperfect science, and easily manipulated to skew the desired result. I'm not in any way suggesting you did that, but that's one of the biggest difficulties when composing the questions and framing the scenario.

Litebulbs
 

The fighting question was an interesting one. In such cases in my factory days, both participants were immediately propelled through the main gates on an automatic three day's suspension - without pay. Usually what happened then was at least one of them (often both) was subsequently dismissed. This was in the 1950's-1960's

I have to add that this was a factory situation with lots of dangerous machines running, heavy castings and sometimes molten metal about, hence the immediate action. Your question I took to mean the incident took place in an office. When I read it again, it didn't specifically say that of course.

Best of luck with your studies.

BASSA is a branch and that means it is controlled (or supposed to be controlled) by Unite. BASSA does not have the power to authorise the calling of strike action. It is impotent, and especially so in the face of the many Unite VCC members.

BASSA and Unite are separate entities and there is no automatic link between the two; Unite could terminate the arrangement as its discretion, as you have been made aware, Duncan.

BASSA, in its current dysfunctional guise, will never be granted collective bargaining rights for Mixed Fleet.

The pay on MF will be reviewed in the normal course of events, is likely to have a basic + flight pay component which is at or a little more than other airlines offer to new hires, with a performance related element which gives the "approx 10% above market rate" for those who meet the criteria.

This £1,800 per month suggested, without any evidence (as usual) as a typical Easyjet new recruit cabin crew take home pay is fantasy as I set out using referenced quotes on the previous page.

Something in the £1,000-£1,300 range is typical, and that is what MF delivers to most cabin crew currently, and this without the performance related element, which will become clearer during the course of the year.

Plus MFers are (almost) all saving £200 per annum in Union contributions which go into an unaccountable £1.5m per year BASSA black hole.

BASSA members and former members concerned about this illegal lack of accounts can email the Certification Officer to ensure this is properly addressed:

http://www.certoffice.org/Nav/Complaints.aspx

You'd be quite right to take your skills elsewhere STC if you could get a better deal there; but until there has been a full year of earnings, and the performance-related element of the package is fully evidenced, it's hard to say what your total remuneration will be, which I appreciate mustn't be easy when times are tight; however, the basic plus flight pay and Duty Free commission does seem to be the same or more than Easyjet and Virgin offer, and they don't have performance related options on top of that.

I really hope that MF continues to be the success it appears to be becoming and that as a consequence of that the bonuses will ensure that the market rate plus 10% can be adhered to for those crew who exceed expectations.

Judging by BASSA's success in "negotiating" a better deal for its current membership, I wouldn't be signing up to BASSA very fast.

Why entrust my financial future to a bunch of legacy fleet longhaul CSDs earning twice/three times my wage with most of my Union dues going direct to the Labour Party rather than to providing Union administration and support services?

Anyway, I hope Mixed Fleeters are treated reasonably by BA and in the interim are able to influence management directly to ensure transparency about the likely levels of performance related bonuses which should address many of the very valid concerns people like STC set out, and hopefully provide the financial rewards originally set out to those who joined the new fleet.

From another thread, an illustration of the twisting of words.

That is quite different from what tomkins wrote:

There was no implication from STC that you may earn less than £1,100.

While it may be the case, there is no evidence in Smell the Coffee's statement that "you would be lucky to achieve [£1100]"; what was clearly stated was that MF crew would be lucky to EARN MORE than £1100 after tax. A very different perspective.

My understanding is that BF did NOT offer market rate + 10% when compared to currently employed equivalent staff; it was market rate when compared to equivalent current UK hiring packages at other airlines.

And BA's package will include the performance bonus about which we haven't enough data to make a judgement.

That's why your example of Easyjet crew taking home a not unimpressive £1,800 net isn't a valid comparison (if indeed you can provide any tangible evidence new recruits get paid this); that would require a basic of £18,000ish not including flight pay etc. so at least £25,000 total gross per annum so it cannot be accurate, based on (anecdotal) evidence presented below:

I can only find info on Easyjet from the dreadful cabincrew.com site, which states new recruits start on £10,207 gross plus an estimated £5,103 as flight pay - so about £15,500 per annum gross plus Duty Free sales on top of that. After they are confirmed as permanent, they can expect another £2,000 per annum (and I think there's a similar step change for MF crew after a certain period of employment).

CabinCrew.com: EASYJET NEW RECRUITS WAGES

From that perspective it does seem BA's £17,000-£20,000 per annum is a little better than market rate, possibly not quite 10% more, but certainly not outside that ballpark.

I don't know what the MF monthly £1,100 net works out at gross, especially when you consider that flight pay is partially tax free. But over twelve months it amounts to £13,200 net, I estimate around £15,500 gross. If you then add in four quarterly payments of £500 as the performance related incentive component, and any additional Duty Free sales, then that gets us right to the £17,000-£20,000 per annum range, which is what is quoted in the BA MF ad below:

Cabin Crew Latest Jobs - Updated Daily with cabin Crew Jobs


Of course as more longhaul and 747 routes move to MF then the flight pay proportion should increase, ensuring that across the year things do improve for MF. I would imagine the clientele on BA spends more on in flight Duty Free than an equivalent bmi or EasyJet passenger?

The only comparative data I could easily find was for Virgin (positions now filled), in the same link recruiting at a base of £11,564 gross p.a but that does not include flight pay or performance bonus; what it does do is illustrate that BA are not wildly out of kilter with prevailing alternative employers. I have no doubt that other airlines recruiting in the UK (eg Emirates/ flybe /EasyJet) pay less well than Virgin, and have other drawbacks not encountered by those working for BA (eg less longhaul flight pay component, less duty free commission, less attractive routes).

Market Rate plus 10% would have been based on the levels of remuneration for new roles available in the market at the time the offer was made (I believe this was in mid/late 2009).

Inflation will have eroded this already (by about 5%, or £800/year) in real terms. I do think that BA needs to be more transparent about the levels of likely performance bonus for MF crew as this does seem to be where the 10% differentiation is expected to come from.

I think it is clear BA needs to ensure its MF crew are remunerated at a level which slightly exceeds market rate. The performance related component and the increased proportion of longhaul and new routes may well balance this out across the year. It is simply too early to tell.

BA Cabin Crew Managers are now a lot closer to those they manage and valid concerns about pay will be directly referred to senior management and that changes can be made when appropriate, without the involvement of a meddling Union Branch.

Let's hope MF does get some sort of collective representation soon from a non-dysfunctional collective bargaining entity, perhaps Unite itself or possibly PCCC (though I don't see any evidence yet that PCCC is capable of performing such a role). Without wishing to stray OT, there is an open market for collective representation and the BASSA leadership does not hold a monopoly on such roles!

Having some sort of business-minded collective representation is important in lower paid, cyclical industries and especially where employees are positioned in multiple locations.

It is clear that the passenger feedback for MF is broadly positive, and the savings made elsewhere in the company and within the legacy fleet (despite the largely neutralising effect of the costs of the strike) are slowly returning BA back to modest profitability, and that bodes well for the performance component of the package. Long may that continue.

P.S. What does I.A.T.U. stand for? Possibly I Am Totally Unhinged? :eek:

VintageKrug
 

Your guess is probably more appropriate, but I'm afraid it's rather more prosaic than that VK. Possibly before your time :eek: but think seventies (?) sitcom with Reg Varney - On the Buses - with Varney playing the part of a wide boy driver called Butler. Psychotic Inspector would endlessly repeat;

"I 'ate you Butler!" :rolleyes: Geddit? :ugh:

Roger.

For the younger reader it's here, at 6:10 into the clip:http://

It's gone very quiet on both this and the other thread - signs that the storm has finally blown itself out, or the calm before the (final) storm.....or are other factors and powers now in play:confused:

I would guess the factors and powers are simply that it's a 4 day bank holiday weekend in the UK and elsewhere and everyone has better things to be doing!

Was there any feedback from the person who requested to see the BASSA accounts? It must be well past the thirty day limit now.

I am afraid we must assume that Bassawitch has been unsuccessful in persuading BASSA to observe it's obligations under TU regulations. We have yet to be told whether other avenues are being pursued.
On the other hand, the member may have been shocked speechless by the figures or the fact that they finally did comply. Perhaps we will never know.

I recall BASSAwitch gave an update last week that he/she was still making enquiries with the Certification Officer to gain access to the BASSA accounts, which are legally required to be made available to current and past members of any Union.

Current or former BASSA members who are interested in knowing what happens to the £1.5m+ annual subs paid to Duncan Holley by the 9,000 or so (and falling) BASSA membership needn't wait for BASSAwitch to get a response, they can ask the Certification Officer directly to look further into the matter, via email:

Certification Officer - Complaints

In my view, the matter should also be directly pursued with BASSA and UNite's auditors as a matter of questionable professional conduct, as this is likely to bear more fruit, faster.

This was the last response from BASSA, back in March:

There has been considerable focus on what BASSA "pays" its reps.

Setting aside whether you think they should be paid or not (and personally I don't think its unreasonable to be paid something if you are delivering a valuable service to members) DH has stated he receives an "honorarium" of £25,000 per annum, which is 50% of his entitlement. Good for him.

However, this does mean he has deniability when asked what he is "paid" or what "salary" BASSA compensates him with, as an honorarium is not the same as pay/salary.

There are many other ways of "rewarding" people, as MPs have proven, from employing relatives for administrative tasks, expenses claims, travel and entertainment allowance (Bedfont, anyone?), company cars (eg a BMW M3), additional payments for other duties performed, pension contributions (an area of specific focus in this situation, given typical union remuneration structures), medical insurance and any payments in connection with his recent dismissal for gross misconduct.

All of which should be looked into, though are not legally required to be disclosed as part of a request for the accounts.

It will be interesting to learn of The Unhinged One has anything to say on this matter.

the BASSA reps claim a daily payment for attending meetings or doing anything connected to the union.

This is in excess of £100 per day and I think that the senior reps get £125 but cannot be 100% sure now.

Also lap tops, mobile phones, phone calls, are claimed.

There is no system of control and it may be that a rep pops into the office for 30 minutes has a chat and then claims a days allowance.

The taxation of this is not clear the Revenue have persued the BASSA reps in the past for full tax and Im pretty sure that an outstanding bill was paid from the BASSA funds.

DH should not be entitled to any of this but I would bet that he claims the maximum daily attendance every month plus his commission. When he was employed by BA he was earning as much as a senior BA Captain if all was taken into account - not bad from someone who hardly ever put his cabin crew uniform on:E