I've just read DH latest ????

I now need some help. There's now a pile of vomit all over my lounge carpet. Can't blame the dog as don't have one sadly. So any ideas folks on how I can explain this to my dear wife mañana.


( message to the mods. Sorry but we as non strikers have their fill over the last couple of years, so please allow us a little leeway to be flippant. Thanks)

I'm amazed. I don't know whether to pity the guy for his stupidity or get angry at the overweaning self importance, bloated ego and arrogance that enables him to lie so glibly.

The tent revival meeting attracted a few hundred supporters according to the media - In my book that is not a 'massive gathering' . The document is actually no better than that negotiated by Willie Walsh and Tony Woodley last year, but admitting that would really stick in Duncan's craw. I don't think he could ever have brought himself to recommend any deal that had been assembled by Willie Walsh. Hard to deal with someone who you have made out as the bogeyman, but then that highlights the difference between the two. Walsh never considered it as a personal thing, it was always on a business footing - what was best for the company. I do wonder how Mr Holley sleeps at night knowing that his actions have caused somuch pain to so many other people. He admits to the impact on cabin crew, but casually omots to consider the impact on other BA staff and BA's customers. But then I suppose he reckons they weren't important. In fact once he knew he had goofed and got himself sacked, he had no skin in the game at all, but could dictate from the sidelines secure in the knowledge that he was untouchable - the worst had already happened to him so he had nothing to lose by prolonging the dispute, in fact he retained an income stream as a consequence.

The offer of assistance in setting up new branches made me laugh. It would be an absolute fool who employed him in such a capacity. His apparent scorn for governance and due process means he is the last person who should be called in for advice.

I'd also suggest that any endorsement from Duncan is the kiss of death for any hopefuls looking for branch leadership. So the three reps he advocates at LGW can feel reassured !

Last thing that struck was it is somewhat ironic that BASSA must be one of the few branches in trade unionism that can claim to have had successive branch secretaries sacked for misconduct. Is it something they've been putting in the tea in the union offices ?

While it appears Duncan has been bought off by Unite, where do CC89 and the rest of the Bassa leadership stand with this new old deal? Maybe someone such as MissM could comment.

three questions
 

1) Does NSP stand for National Sectional Panel?
2) What is the NSP and what does it do?
3) What is ACC and what does it do?

The arrogance of the man is breathtaking. He is so thick that he cannot see what he has done to the CC over the past two years. His hatred of WW is of no consequence because its WW and KW who have won - not him.

I am surprised that this wasn't picked up, but for me it is the most important part of his 'statement.'

Along with his hypocritical mates, Holley caused a two year 'war' that was unnecessary. Happily he will shortly be gone but his pathetic legacy will be a reminder to take the right steps at the right time and not Holley's way. He can NO comfort in fooling himself that HE achieved this agreement.

Good luck to all the CC for a future that looks much better today than it did two days ago. You really do deserve a happy life now.

In Miss M's absence, I recall she described the last deal as "crappy". When we pushed her on this forum to say why, she amongst other things mentioned her concerns that the top-up pay was non-contractual.

It appears that this will now become (partly) contractual, so to be fair, that is some improvement, perhaps substantive improvement seeing BASSA were convinced BA were acting in bad faith and would remove anything non-contractual. It appears to me however that the rest of the "improvements" in the offered deal are purely cosmetic - BASSA gain nothing without a change in their own attitudes and behaviour.

Whether that's enough to change a deal from crappy to honourable remains to be seen. Personally, I think that if WW had offered this very deal, it would still have been perceived (and spun) as the former by BASSA :rolleyes:

They will have their own branch, constitution etc and I have offered my help in setting up any structures they feel they need.






This is akin to getting King Herod to help open a new branch of Mothercare!!!

Dorkan Holy - For it is he.
 

Trade Unionism will never be the same without this great man.

I can't think of anyone better to be their permanent Treasurer for life - as a heriditary post to pass on in his own family.

Betty Girl,

I actually have no difficulty with the concept of Staff Travel in retirement equalling length of service, except that that is not what was offered, and promised, when we started, and for some, older than me, who cut their service by taking Severance that was dangled before them to help the Company, Staff Travel for the length of ones' retirement was written into to the Severance packet, albeit with the usual caveat of 'concession' not 'entitlement' of course, so there is no legal recourse against this retrospective attack. ( I've seen such a document )

I know of one old codger ( 77 now ) pilot who took severance at age 48, 7 years before the normal retirement age, then, of 55 for pilots, sure it suited him, to deal with a "mid-life crisis", but it suited the company too or they wouldn't have offered it. Had he not accepted the company carrot he would have retired 7 years later ( on a better pension, too ) and had 7 years more service ( that the Company would have had to pay him a salary for ) so he has effectively lost 14 years of his staff travel in retirement, and living out of the UK really feels kicked in the guts by WW and his gang.

Even pilots retiring at normal age of 55, have effectively lost 20 years travel in retirement over general staff working to 65 ( 10 years later with 10 years more service )

The number of old codgers like this who would actually take advantage of Staff Travel during their 80's and 90's must be almost negligible, so this retrospective action against them is just cruel and totally un-ethical, especially as retired staff from other airlines will enjoy our old retired geezers seats available without such a restriction, including Iberia retired staff, one presumes, or does anyone know if WW is going to try an attack them, too ?

Best of British if he does, he may need Drake and the Armada behind him if he tries it on them !

But I'm sure you're "Alright, Jack" ( or Betty, as the case may be )

BA must try to be the Good Guy
 

As a complete outsider I strongly agree with YorkshireTyke._ The cost to BA is slight, but much more important is the non-morality of a retrospective change of this particular benefit to those already retired._ BA should give it back to those who retired before the announcement by BA of this particular cost-cutting exercise.

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.

I couldn't go to the mid week meeting. I spent most of the day on the net trying to ensure that I've got the correct Wimbledon tickets. A friend went. I'm told we have won a great victory. I'm looking forward to hearing about what we have won.

Bye bye.

Sorry NSP had already been explained by several posters e.g.
link
Also a Google search throws up
from the near past

Quote:

---

National Sectional Panel (NSP)
Where agreement is not reached locally or on cross departmental issues the NSP becomes involved. Most GMB members are represented at the Administrative Staff NSP, although our members in Engineering, IFCE and Management Grades have their own NSPs. The Administrative Staff (A Scales) NSP meets quarterly at LHR.

---

And from the far past

How many WERE in the tent?
 

I seem to recall hearing Lennie say there were five thousand there, which seems an awful lot of people.( as opposed to a lot of awful people):)

Now that the fight is over, both BASSA's collective and DH's individual pathological insanities (hereinbefore "the BASSAmentalist culture") continue, yet again, to help BA in its otherwise difficult final task of quickly restoring CC relations to normality.

As a result of having had his back trapped against the wall, DH has irrationally and completely delusionally switched his position on what amounts to almost identical offers made by BA between March 2010 & May 2011 from 'all bad and totally unacceptable' to 'all good and what we were fighting for' (while conveniently choosing not to mention his recent specious 10 points for strike action) and in doing so has the majority of his 5811 strike-supporting CC running around partying (yet again!) saying 'My God I can't believe it but we've actually WON!'

To summarise AO's post above, the BASSA and legacy CC's indoctrinated mantra is "BA want change", "we say NO", "BA don't back down", "we go on strike have a party and behave like children", "BA back down and we WIN". CC have no reason or wish to comprehend the content or realities of what they are being asked to do and appear to have no knowledge or even seem to care that they are now worse off. BASSA says "the strike is over" ergo "we have WON".

Its deluded CC's perceived realities matter not one jot to BA as long as it has achieved everything it wanted, and ideally more, which it has infact done. The fact that this delusion has made these CC ecstatic instead of mortally shamed in their abject defeat just adds to BA's skill and accompanying good fortune in dealing with this dispute.

To us rational, intelligent and sane people this has been an amazing lesson in watching the unthinking, herd, mentality of some of our fellow beings. I would never have thought to witness such immature behaviour and stupidity among a relatively large group of people who are employed in a role giving them responsibility for the safety of hundreds of us passengers on commercial airline flights. This, in itself, is a somewhat troubling issue if viewed in isolation and should probably be a topic for another thread.

BA management must be laughing all the way to the start of their next round of customer service and productivity improving measures.......

Absolutely un - bloody - believable!

AVF

AV Flyer:

Duncan knows BASSA lost, the BASSA members know they lost...but what else is there for them to do but try to declare some sort of victory?

They can't say "Wow, this is horrific and we absolutely messed this up from the start." So, they try to forget the reason for striking, forget what they were fighting for, and rewrite history so that they can squeeze out whatever drop of dignity there is left for them in this result.

I'm impressed as can be what BA accomplished with this settlement and it could only have happened with the cooperation of Unite who must have been darn tired of the BASSA problem. BA gives away less than in previous offers, gains MF, and they also manage to reorganize a dysfunctional union.

BA Legacy Crew are rather like the Mel Gibson of the airline world and all self-inflicted.

From a business standpoint you have to say "Well done BA".

Legally obligated ? I agree no, Morally obligated - absolutely.

So why unnecessarily alienate those unable to fight back ? That's the action of a bully. Those affected weren't consulted during the 3 years of "secret" negotiations, they were eventually told to " get used to it " . ( BA words, published in the retired staff magazine Touchdown )

No they didn't, if accepting Severance S.T. concessions were immediately available, and promised for life, if resigning otherwise and being eligible for a deferred pension, ( Minimum 10 yrs. service ? ) then ST was available again upon eventually becoming a "pensioner" at normal retiring age.

So you don't have to worry then, ST - with benefits undreamed of to those now kicked out when they were still employed pre. ST 2009 - will be available to you for many years yet to come. Well done.

Back on topic:
 

Quote by The Moo on the other thread:

"Finally people who go on about " It's all about the removal of 1 off the A/C " are ignorant to the facts.

We went on strike due to imposition ( not the reduced crew comps ) and as this was the only thing that had been imposed this was the only thing we could cite."

If anybody wanted objective evidence of why WW had to take a sustained "hard" line (note in some industries, it would have been perceived as pussyfooting) in this IA, this quote is it. The Union went on strike because of imposition - ie after refusing to negotiate, it was disputing the fundamental right of management to manage. This was a very overt act of mutiny.

IR in major economic entities is a big-boys' game, not a nursery school romp, and it appears that many BASSA and CC89 supporters still don't understand this, which is rather worrying for the future.

New Mangement, New Hope
 

Travel for the length of ones' retirement was written into to the Severance packet, albeit with the usual caveat of 'concession' not 'entitlement' of course, so there is no legal recourse against this retrospective attack. ( I've seen such a document )

Prior to the changes staff that resigned lost all ST

No they didn't, if accepting Severance S.T. concessions were immediately available, and promised for life

delusional
 

If DH can construe the outcome as a BASSA victory, can we really criticise the sheep for following his leadership and believing what BASSA sees fit to tell them?

We have the benefit of viewing this from the sidelines and that gives us a perspective 'the grand old Dukeof York' , lost among the tomatoes, cannot have.