Virgin Atlantic strike
It has been my experience in the past that forcing management into having to wet lease has brought matters to an earlier conclusion since it costs them a small fortune on top of their usual outgoings.
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Belfast
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being 30 + years in the aviation
i got trained by good staff. Danair...BOAC.. BMI..,.
Then Flylo era comes in.
Get paid same 20 years later
Yes we do same Job We get them home.
It does hurt to give sub Cass service. But put 3 kids through University on a wage just before the the change.... Lucky
Risk your life.. get slaged off for givg a customer the wrong olive in their drink.
Oh they strike....
i got trained by good staff. Danair...BOAC.. BMI..,.
Then Flylo era comes in.
Get paid same 20 years later
Yes we do same Job We get them home.
It does hurt to give sub Cass service. But put 3 kids through University on a wage just before the the change.... Lucky
Risk your life.. get slaged off for givg a customer the wrong olive in their drink.
Oh they strike....
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Within 3 hours of a suitable alternate
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I wonder what that was doing at Heathrow
(picture of Qatar A320 at Heathrow in case it gets removed)
Edit... picture change to save the clever folk pointing out the previous one was the Amiri Flight.
Last edited by Capt Ecureuil; 7th Jan 2019 at 08:38. Reason: pic change
Bit of light background reading here about BA and that wetlease.
From Para 36 ...
”
36. BALPA also raise two other points: circumvention of the Employment Agencies Regulations 2003 and Article 11 of the Convention on Human Rights (the right of assembly). The CAA does not think that these points are of relevance to the application for approval of the proposed operation submitted by BA. In the case of the 2003 Regulations, the prohibition in those Regulations is on an employment agency, not on an employer or another employer, such as Qatar Airlines. The point in relation to Article 11 is not relevant since the approval, if granted, would not limit or restrict the right of industrial action by the mixed fleet cabin crew.”
So in that case it appears the CAA were OK with approving a wetlease because doing side steps any regs regarding agencies and strike breaking, and using a wetlease doesn’t prevent the workforce from indulging in IA...so that’s alright then...
From Para 36 ...
”
36. BALPA also raise two other points: circumvention of the Employment Agencies Regulations 2003 and Article 11 of the Convention on Human Rights (the right of assembly). The CAA does not think that these points are of relevance to the application for approval of the proposed operation submitted by BA. In the case of the 2003 Regulations, the prohibition in those Regulations is on an employment agency, not on an employer or another employer, such as Qatar Airlines. The point in relation to Article 11 is not relevant since the approval, if granted, would not limit or restrict the right of industrial action by the mixed fleet cabin crew.”
So in that case it appears the CAA were OK with approving a wetlease because doing side steps any regs regarding agencies and strike breaking, and using a wetlease doesn’t prevent the workforce from indulging in IA...so that’s alright then...
