The only person who has equated Dingbaticus with DH is you, Herr Stosser.

Chuchinchow -to whom were you referring?
 

Chuchinchow

CC89 have put the settlement documents on their website. It is a pity that their introductory statement is not more positively worded and conducive to the spirit of the proposed settlement:

. LATEST NEWS UPDATES

Ld 12986
 

Thanks for posting the link. Having read the agreement document thoroughly & narrowly refused the urge to slit my wrists, I'm not convinced that the Bassa members will give their agreement.

I therefore pose the question, where do they next go?

Watersidewonker
 

You know, in a funny way I'm going to miss him. :ugh:

Oh, and what is the 'other so called union beginning with B'? Bunion? :hmm:

Roger.

Watersidewonker
 

He actually believes it!

Watersidewonker
 

persona non grata, perchance?

ST letter and ballot prediction + Willie removal
 

Like naughty children the CC who have had their ST removed are being put on the naughty step until their 'behaviours' have normalised and all necessary change has been implemented. If you read the letter regarding ST from KW to LM you'll see that BA can withhold return until such time as KW sees fit. These are the criteria he'll be using to make this judgement:

1.Industrial relations becoming more positive, respectful, open and understanding to the needs of the company and its managers.

2. Completion of streamlining of the facilities agreement including putting in place new structures to allow this including merging two branches under a UNITE banner.

3. Communications by new UNITE branch to be more accurate and balanced than previously.

If anyone thinks that all this will happen before the end of this year then forget it. Elections have to take place following agreement of a new constitution at the very least. That'll take at least 6 months. Add in a bedding in period - ST back by next spring.

I imagine an emotional and irrational hardcore taking exception to this in a big way and voting NO, but the YES vote will carry the day


Ballot prediction - YES 4700 NO 2500.


PS Willie with devil eyes has gone from UNITE BA website. Times they are a changin'. CORRECTION WILLIE STILL ATTACHED ON HOME PAGE AS PER BETTY GIRL"S ADVICE

PPS The 'rediscovery' of Willie as per my correction above of course means that the first communique issued by CS89 after peace talks have concluded goes out under a defamatory and insulting banner on its home page. The message also includes unnecessary references to those who did not strike and to VCC.

mrpony
 

A very interesting ballot prediction. Perhaps the most interesting part is that, assuming 9800 eligible Unite members, you have predicted only a 74% turn-out. Which I could well believe.

Apathy continues to rule - OK!

P.S. Incredible - I've always found that picture to be the most profound statement of the mentality of the people that BA management was up against in trying to 'negotiate'.

Written by a professional in a professional manner. BA is back in the hands of a manager who knows what he is about. KW has clearly indicated that he will perform as agreed. He has, once and for all, made it clear that BA will deal with industrial matters with one branch - UNITE.

IMHO this new perspective is just what was wanted, that he took a relatively short time to achieve it proves that he intends to get BA back 'in charge.' Have you noticed that Len McCluskey has said little - for a change show his ability to keep shtum when required.

There will be some NO voters but the majority will be YES this time around and the changes will install themselves more quickly than imagined.

The driver's seat has been reclaimed.

All best wishes to the CC - the sky is yours.

It is clear that KW has used his extremely professional approach to help him carry the way. He went into talks with LMcC in a highly professional, no nonsense, manner which makes it very hard for people to argue against him. If they do they are essentially admitting they are not wanting to work professionally and at the highest level of their game.

This then cascaded to LMcC talking to BASSA/CC89 (the epitome of the defiinition of the word 'unprofessional') in helping him to say 'look guys we're dealing with professionals now and that old c*** is not going to cut it any more'.

I might add that I found the letter P in the PCCC to be a very refreshing outlook and if you read the stipulations in KW's letter to LMcC regarding the return of ST you will see these are not dissimilar to the PCCC's mission statement:

1. Industrial relations becoming more positive, respectful, open and
understanding to the needs of the company and its managers.

2. Completion of streamlining of the facilities agreement including
putting in place new structures to allow this including merging two
branches under a UNITE banner.

3. Communications by new UNITE branch to be more accurate and
balanced than previously.

I don't mean to keep banging on but I really feel that the PCCC should come out of the shadows now and put some serious effort into trying to change the status quo of the old 70s union approach to IR. They have some excellent ideas in the area of a 'mutually cooperative' negotiation style which are far more suited to 21st Century IR than those vestigal concepts that are unfortunately still hanging around inside Unite and its GS.

BASSA Lives!
 

I see there is a move to form a NEW branch of BASSA - BASSA Gatwick. Apparently all current members of both BASSA and CC89 will automatically be transferred (whether they want to or not). The new BASSA GTW will be part of Unite.

Is the BASSA brand not permanently tarnished by it's inablility to include the truth in their comms (something recognised by BA and in future their comms will be monitored as part of the "new behaviours" clause in the offer) and their various nefarious activities in aircraft, websites and in person?

The fact that BASSA has at least twice cut Gatwick staff adrift to the benefit of Heathrow staff, would not I should think, encourage enrolments.

I was interested to learn that BASSA has some members in Thomson. So it would appear that BASSA does not stand for British Airways SSA but possibly British Airlines SSA. Such a possibility should send a shiver down the spines of CC everywhere.

-
 

Dawdler,

BASSA have been a recognised union at Thomson since back in the Britannia days and I have to say, in my experience, they were very good. Maybe the same can happen at LGW. It seems to me and please feel free to correct me if I am wrong, that the sticking point at LGW was always the fact that everything always had to be agreed by the relevant parties at LHR, be they BASSA or the Management. That seems to be changing now. In fact, whilst all this has been going on up the road, our reps have quietly sat down with the company and sorted out some of the issues surrounding one route in particular. I admit I was cynical at the start but I have to give them their due. From all accounts, they were professional, took our worries to the powers that be and got a result that was satisfactory to all.

For me personally, PCCC are a non starter for LGW, not only due to their extreme shyness but also because in my mind, they too are very LHR centric. I do know that the people behind it are dedicated, professional crew who care deeply about their jobs, colleagues and passengers but just as I do not understand their agreements and issues, they don't understand ours and that is always going to be a problem. This is not a criticism in any way. As a fledgling organisation, they have to concentrate on what they know.

I never thought I'd be saying this but maybe we need to give BASSA Gatwick a chance. Lessons have hopefully been learnt from all this. And if it does all go pear shaped, there is another large union that have offered their services! ;)

I wonder about the need to keep a name for a branch.
Looking at the union I'm in: -
it used to be the EPEA (Electrical Power Engineers Association) amalgamated and became the EMA (Engineers and Managers Association) then amalgamated again to become part of Prospect. No separate branch name or anything except to identify employers.

Similarly my Unite colleagues were EETPU, then AMICUS now Unite. Again no special branch name or otherwise.

Yet there still seem to be egos to massage by keeping the BASSA/CC89 names at BA.
Or is it all wishful thinking as the final decision would be with Unite?


(given that in one of the histories of BA cabin crew mention is made of bullying tactics by BASSA, to get members, when they were first formed, perhaps now is the time to lose that name within BA)

jetset lady
 

Thank you for your reply. I hope you are right. Your comment about the PCCC being too HR centric is perhaps ironic bearing in mind the behaviour of BASSA recently. However, perhaps for the first (for ages) Gatwick crews will have proper representation. I do think that they would be better to drop the BASSA name though, because as is often said, mud sticks.

BTW I see on the other thread MissM is still playing the blame game, (at least she is consistent).
It is a line which she has continued to hold throughout the dispute. She seems unconvinced that the whole thing was avoidable, if only BASSA had behaved like adults.

It is important that in the future the Company will facilitate the union in representing it’s members.

And equally important that the union doesn't throw its teddy and withdraw from an agreement with the company that allows them to represent its members.

that won't happen because the right people will participate in the right meetings.

A third quotation