BALPA and BA talks breakdown
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hants
Age: 49
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.......or BA Management have stalled the strike beyond financial year end 07/08, thus protecting the 10%. They have already stated that 10% is not achievable in the next financial year so although a strike would be painful it won't hurt nearly as much as a strike in March would have?
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Barking
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots Accuse BA Of Misrepresentation
www.baplane-bapilot.org
Sums it up well.
Pilots Accuse BA Of Misrepresentation
12/03/2008
The British Airline Pilots' Association today accused British Airways of misrepresenting their position in their dispute with the airline and expressed concern as to whether BA really wanted a negotiated settlement.
When talks between BALPA and BA broke down on Friday night of last week, BA announced if strike dates were given it would go to the High Court to seek an injunction preventing the strike, basing their case on a novel approach, the use of Article 43 of the Treaty of Rome.
BALPA did not accept this argument but rather than announce strike dates it took the initiative and referred the matter to the High Court to seek a ruling on whether BA's reliance on Article 43 of the Treaty of Rome had any bearing on the industrial dispute.
The Court has agreed to 'stop the clock' on the 28 days during which the union must serve notice of a strike to allow the High Court to decide the matter.
'We have been shocked to learn today that BA has entirely misrepresented the position to the media,' BALPA General Secretary Jim McAuslan declared.
'BA said that BALPA recognises that the airline has a strong legal case that any strike action would be unlawful. Nothing could be further from the truth.'
BALPA said that such tactics are clearly unhelpful and are likely to hinder a negotiated settlement. Perhaps, BALPA says, that is BA's objective.
'What has happened is that BA has raised a novel point of law, using the Treaty of Rome.' Jim McAuslan said.
The Court's determination will have huge implications for all employers and trade unions.
'Our view is that the point raised by BA has no bearing on an industrial dispute such as the one we have with BA because it plans to outsource BA pilots' jobs and our actions are both legitimate and proportionate.
'What makes matters worse is that BA is saying publicly that our decision to take the matter to the High Court and not announce a strike is proof that we accept that BA has a "strong case". This is outrageous. We have not announced strike dates because we wish the Court to consider the matter with great care and without pressure. We also thought it right to make clear to the public, with whom we have no dispute, that there will be no industrial action over the Easter period.
'BA's misrepresentation of our position is a disgrace and one which has angered their pilots.'
12/03/2008
The British Airline Pilots' Association today accused British Airways of misrepresenting their position in their dispute with the airline and expressed concern as to whether BA really wanted a negotiated settlement.
When talks between BALPA and BA broke down on Friday night of last week, BA announced if strike dates were given it would go to the High Court to seek an injunction preventing the strike, basing their case on a novel approach, the use of Article 43 of the Treaty of Rome.
BALPA did not accept this argument but rather than announce strike dates it took the initiative and referred the matter to the High Court to seek a ruling on whether BA's reliance on Article 43 of the Treaty of Rome had any bearing on the industrial dispute.
The Court has agreed to 'stop the clock' on the 28 days during which the union must serve notice of a strike to allow the High Court to decide the matter.
'We have been shocked to learn today that BA has entirely misrepresented the position to the media,' BALPA General Secretary Jim McAuslan declared.
'BA said that BALPA recognises that the airline has a strong legal case that any strike action would be unlawful. Nothing could be further from the truth.'
BALPA said that such tactics are clearly unhelpful and are likely to hinder a negotiated settlement. Perhaps, BALPA says, that is BA's objective.
'What has happened is that BA has raised a novel point of law, using the Treaty of Rome.' Jim McAuslan said.
The Court's determination will have huge implications for all employers and trade unions.
'Our view is that the point raised by BA has no bearing on an industrial dispute such as the one we have with BA because it plans to outsource BA pilots' jobs and our actions are both legitimate and proportionate.
'What makes matters worse is that BA is saying publicly that our decision to take the matter to the High Court and not announce a strike is proof that we accept that BA has a "strong case". This is outrageous. We have not announced strike dates because we wish the Court to consider the matter with great care and without pressure. We also thought it right to make clear to the public, with whom we have no dispute, that there will be no industrial action over the Easter period.
'BA's misrepresentation of our position is a disgrace and one which has angered their pilots.'
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: England
Posts: 145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Confirmation would be appreciated
BALPA have applied for a "Fast Track" High Court ruling. This is estimated to take 6 weeks!
The clock then will tick again on 21st April when 7 days notice of strike can be given on either 21st, 22nd or 23rd. So strike will be starting last days of April (my deduction) unless an agreement is reached in the meantime.
Many thanks in anticipation.
Stoic
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The clock will tick again as soon as a judgement is given. Six weeks is an estimate. It may be more or less. I presume 21st April is six weeks from today.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: England
Posts: 730
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA have been out-foxed and are firmly on the backfoot
The 1st Openskies 757 is still under modification at LHR and I can't see that being stopped at this stage. Just a matter of time before a deal is done to end this dispute.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West London
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Justinzider posted:
BALPA have called their bluff on the legal side and are "playing a blinder"
Who is playing the blinder?
BA advised BALPA of its legal claim and BALPA understood that it might face "bankruptcy" (not my words) in order to test the legal point. They obtained an ex-parte order that is eminantly challengeable (and if BA wants to , I'm sure it will).
Meanwhile BALPA has to watch as its mandate ebbs away.
The BACC Team understand that in order to protect their own skins they are better off hiding behind a legal decision than achieving what they view to be a "poor deal" (i.e. not BA Plane BA Pilot).
My view - not a BA pilot as I've said before, but a BA employee with an interest in this as it affects my livelihood - BALPA has misread BA management's resolve and is running out of places to go.
They will get personal soon and angrier. I await the first knockings ...
BALPA have called their bluff on the legal side and are "playing a blinder"
Who is playing the blinder?
BA advised BALPA of its legal claim and BALPA understood that it might face "bankruptcy" (not my words) in order to test the legal point. They obtained an ex-parte order that is eminantly challengeable (and if BA wants to , I'm sure it will).
Meanwhile BALPA has to watch as its mandate ebbs away.
The BACC Team understand that in order to protect their own skins they are better off hiding behind a legal decision than achieving what they view to be a "poor deal" (i.e. not BA Plane BA Pilot).
My view - not a BA pilot as I've said before, but a BA employee with an interest in this as it affects my livelihood - BALPA has misread BA management's resolve and is running out of places to go.
They will get personal soon and angrier. I await the first knockings ...
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Farnham, UK
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
900
You are such a comedian - Any more of that and you will have this thread sent to Jet Blast.
Wrong - If anything, the delay and the behaviour of management is making the resolve of BALPA members stronger and more united.
BA Management already getting personal and angry with threats of disciplinary action against people posting on the internal company forum.
As am I - I am fighting to protect my livelihood.
T'bug
You are such a comedian - Any more of that and you will have this thread sent to Jet Blast.
Meanwhile BALPA has to watch as its mandate ebbs away.
They will get personal soon and angrier
a BA employee with an interest in this as it affects my livelihood
T'bug
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fargoo
How right you are! Why would we want to stop it? This dispute is not about whether BA should set up Openskies or not. You are also right that it is just a matter of time before we achieve a satisfactory end to this.
The 1st Openskies 757 is still under modification at LHR and I can't see that being stopped at this stage. Just a matter of time before a deal is done to end this dispute.
Since the question of the 10% opearting margin target has cropped up. For anyone intending to go to OS, be aware that as a BA subsidiary, you will be expected to contribute towards achieving this margin but you will not be included in the BA bonus system.
Your managers will cobble together some bonus system of their own with targets which OS will permanently fail to achieve. Obviously, the whole point of having a subsidiary is to ensure that it only ever breaks even or makes a loss.
Enjoy the Christmas £15 B&Q voucher
though and think of your Board as they count their share options
.
If BALPA does any kind of deal and buy into OS, they should be very careful to insist that one of the conditions is that BALPA (the OSCC AND the BACC) have full access to the management accounts in order to ensure that it is actually being run as a true stand alone company, paying proper market rates for services. Until now, subsidiaries have always had their accounts consolidated into those of the main company, making it very difficult to prove the true state of play. The idea is that you are just supposed to believe what you are told and trust your “Leadership Team”.
Better still, insist that a pilot is appointed to the board. (Elected by the membership of course). As someone has pointed out, there are some very switched on and well qualified cookies on the BACC and within the wider community. The precedent is already set. Why would Willy object.
Your managers will cobble together some bonus system of their own with targets which OS will permanently fail to achieve. Obviously, the whole point of having a subsidiary is to ensure that it only ever breaks even or makes a loss.
Enjoy the Christmas £15 B&Q voucher
though and think of your Board as they count their share options.If BALPA does any kind of deal and buy into OS, they should be very careful to insist that one of the conditions is that BALPA (the OSCC AND the BACC) have full access to the management accounts in order to ensure that it is actually being run as a true stand alone company, paying proper market rates for services. Until now, subsidiaries have always had their accounts consolidated into those of the main company, making it very difficult to prove the true state of play. The idea is that you are just supposed to believe what you are told and trust your “Leadership Team”.
Better still, insist that a pilot is appointed to the board. (Elected by the membership of course). As someone has pointed out, there are some very switched on and well qualified cookies on the BACC and within the wider community. The precedent is already set. Why would Willy object.
I seem to remember Ed Winter becoming very rich of the back of the last airline BA set up from scratch. No wonder the seconded managers are very keen to push this through . Untold riches made from the backs of BA pilots.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ Biddedout
Another very good post from you sir! Very perceptive of the true 'state of play' at work here.
Our bonus scheme is exactly that of unattainable targets. 50% on time! (no way!) is one of the triggers. And this is Mainline BA.
Which shareholder would want a company setup that according to BA's admittance (be it untrue or true) is going to make only marginal profits if a profit at all?
The likelyhood of it loosing money (see BA's track record) is far higher.
Time and time again, the same thing comes up. It's going to be used as an industrial lever on T&C's.
BA have already played their hand as in, we CAN have full access into OpenSkies, just give up some of your paypoints.....
It ALWAYS is about money. Shame they felt they needed to waste approx £400 million of it already on managerial disasters.
Another very good post from you sir! Very perceptive of the true 'state of play' at work here.
Our bonus scheme is exactly that of unattainable targets. 50% on time! (no way!) is one of the triggers. And this is Mainline BA.
Which shareholder would want a company setup that according to BA's admittance (be it untrue or true) is going to make only marginal profits if a profit at all?
The likelyhood of it loosing money (see BA's track record) is far higher.
Time and time again, the same thing comes up. It's going to be used as an industrial lever on T&C's.
BA have already played their hand as in, we CAN have full access into OpenSkies, just give up some of your paypoints.....
It ALWAYS is about money. Shame they felt they needed to waste approx £400 million of it already on managerial disasters.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 132
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was browsing through the TCX crew web portal and found a link to 'Openskies crew leave system'.
https://www.crewleave.com/
Also I heard a rumour that openskies will be using the old TCX AOC, any truth in that? (Thomas Cook has 757 etops approval)
randomair
https://www.crewleave.com/
Also I heard a rumour that openskies will be using the old TCX AOC, any truth in that? (Thomas Cook has 757 etops approval)
randomair
From my experience in a BA subsidiary, I never failed to be amazed at how much effort seemed to be directed at attacking staff and their terms, conditions and status, rather than the competition. BA HR manager implants in particular seemed to take great delight in point scoring often spending far more in legal fees and HR/ management man hours than they actually saved. One can only assume that every little “victory” was another point on their promotion sheet or towards their KPI bonus.
Generally, they would always go for the weaker elements avoiding any conflict with those who might actually stand up to them. When the weak rolled over, they went for more.
There is nothing more demoralising than being managed by people who have been seconded into your company short term just to gain experience in an environment where mistakes are easy to cover up and don’t affect the parent. They have an escape route (BA contract) and have nothing but short term goals and targets.
The fact that they choose to brand themselves as the “Leadership Team” also speaks volumes. They did a bit of managing, but leading – no way. None had the guts to be honest with the staff, tell it as it was and to stand up to Waterside. This will always be the case when managers have no long term ties to an operation and are only motivated by short term targets.
As for your 50% on time target. It is so good to be away from BA where it is now possble to achieve 90% on time with very little effort. BA has (had) some fantatic people on the ground, but unlike the outside world, everyone works in their own litle patch does their bit and palms it off onto the next department. Very little is joined up. Now, the team responsible for geting us off bear full responsibility for on time right up until the Tug drives off. This is what WW should be sorting. Working together as a team, rather than just talking about it. This will never happen in BA if they continue to fight with their staff.
Generally, they would always go for the weaker elements avoiding any conflict with those who might actually stand up to them. When the weak rolled over, they went for more.
There is nothing more demoralising than being managed by people who have been seconded into your company short term just to gain experience in an environment where mistakes are easy to cover up and don’t affect the parent. They have an escape route (BA contract) and have nothing but short term goals and targets.
The fact that they choose to brand themselves as the “Leadership Team” also speaks volumes. They did a bit of managing, but leading – no way. None had the guts to be honest with the staff, tell it as it was and to stand up to Waterside. This will always be the case when managers have no long term ties to an operation and are only motivated by short term targets.
As for your 50% on time target. It is so good to be away from BA where it is now possble to achieve 90% on time with very little effort. BA has (had) some fantatic people on the ground, but unlike the outside world, everyone works in their own litle patch does their bit and palms it off onto the next department. Very little is joined up. Now, the team responsible for geting us off bear full responsibility for on time right up until the Tug drives off. This is what WW should be sorting. Working together as a team, rather than just talking about it. This will never happen in BA if they continue to fight with their staff.
Last edited by biddedout; 13th Mar 2008 at 10:51.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
900
Meanwhile BALPA has to watch as its mandate ebbs away.
The most common reason is, excuse the paraphrasing, 'if this whole issue is no big deal, why is BA pushing so hard? if it's only 6 aeroplanes, why all the fuss?'
I too am worried about BAs future, it is my future as well! I have over 30 years left in the company-unless I lose my medical or licence.