Virgin & PPU / BALPA
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin & PPU / BALPA
I know it's airline specific but I would be really interested as an observer to know what is going down at VS re BALPA & The PPU.
I have read that PPU now have a significant portion of the pilots as members and there is even talk of the PPU gaining a recognition agreement and BALPA potentially not being the recognised union for Virgin Pilots in the UK.
I have also read there is concern that if this happened then some people perceive the current terms and conditions would disappear in a puff of smoke ?
Do your current agreements e.g. Scheduling pay rostering etc all form part of your contracts of employments or are they not quoted in the terms of employment and could be pulled the moment BALPA is not the recognised airline ?
I understand where all this has come from having read the Ewing report and a few other things, bit would just like to understand if what is being suggested elsewhere is a real risk, or is it just that it is the risk of the new recognition agreement within the PPU would not be as thorough covering all areas as current recognition agreements do ? Surely a pilots current employment terms, through printed or custom and practice can't just disappear because the employee association changes ?
I have no axe to grind,have no agenda and am purely interested in the facts regarding the situation please. Whilst I'm sure it's not the most comfortable place for Balpa as an association I can't deny that I think competition in any sector is a bad thing for ensuring customers (in this case pilots) get value for money.
In every other aspect of daily life we seek the best deals we can and if we feel a provider is not providing we switch, but we check we are comparing like for like and the downside of any move vs the upside (risk v reward).
Thanks for reading and I look forward to factual information if anyone would be so kind.
Please don't let this become a BALPA OR PPU mud slinging thread.
Ps I apologise if there is already a public thread on this, I couldn't find it.
I have read that PPU now have a significant portion of the pilots as members and there is even talk of the PPU gaining a recognition agreement and BALPA potentially not being the recognised union for Virgin Pilots in the UK.
I have also read there is concern that if this happened then some people perceive the current terms and conditions would disappear in a puff of smoke ?
Do your current agreements e.g. Scheduling pay rostering etc all form part of your contracts of employments or are they not quoted in the terms of employment and could be pulled the moment BALPA is not the recognised airline ?
I understand where all this has come from having read the Ewing report and a few other things, bit would just like to understand if what is being suggested elsewhere is a real risk, or is it just that it is the risk of the new recognition agreement within the PPU would not be as thorough covering all areas as current recognition agreements do ? Surely a pilots current employment terms, through printed or custom and practice can't just disappear because the employee association changes ?
I have no axe to grind,have no agenda and am purely interested in the facts regarding the situation please. Whilst I'm sure it's not the most comfortable place for Balpa as an association I can't deny that I think competition in any sector is a bad thing for ensuring customers (in this case pilots) get value for money.
In every other aspect of daily life we seek the best deals we can and if we feel a provider is not providing we switch, but we check we are comparing like for like and the downside of any move vs the upside (risk v reward).
Thanks for reading and I look forward to factual information if anyone would be so kind.
Please don't let this become a BALPA OR PPU mud slinging thread.
Ps I apologise if there is already a public thread on this, I couldn't find it.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Eu
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some rostering agreements are contractual but many are not. If your agreement is union negotiated and that union is removed then the company may voluntarily honour it...but why would they want to?
This all depends on the company approach and what they are really up to. I have been lead to believe that VS are plotting a major assault on terms and conditions across the board. That may be just rumour - only those inside can answer for sure but it's no secret the place has been run like a high school project for years. Now that the Americans are heavily involved I would expect major (unwelcome) changes to employment practices.
If you were running the place and somebody gifted you the opportunity to get rid of costly working agreements what would you do? If the company removed an existing Union and replaced it with another voluntarily they would set up a new collective labour agreement. Lots would depend on the scope of this. An agreement can be forced legally if a union pursues statutory recognition however the scope of this only revolves around pay, hours and holidays. Anything this limited is generally poor and seldom worth the paper its printed on but represents a start in the long process of improvement. This would normally be first step in establishing a union presence rather than a process for an already established unionised workforce.
Of course a company might promise plenty to a fledgling union then fail to deliver on it. This may take the form of keeping the framework of agreements in place while striping out the detail that makes them worth anything. The quandary then becomes what can they do? Strike? The idea of any form of industrial action is fantasy unless the union has established a significant strike fund. This requires £several million as they will be injuncted, subject to lawsuits etc etc.
Ironically the best course of action for crew in such circumstances would be for both unions to reach joint agreement. This would enable pre-existing agreements to be kept under a power sharing council. This would not be ideal for either union but their respective negotiating teams should know it is realistically the only way to ensure continuity. How the company respond to such ideas is key. If the company do not entertain that as an option then you can rest assured they are seeking the removal of existing agreements. That is the point where it is time to start being afraid.
competition is generally a good thing..even in unions until the point where both sides take their eye off the ball because they are too busy squabbling. The only winner is the company in these circumstances.
This all depends on the company approach and what they are really up to. I have been lead to believe that VS are plotting a major assault on terms and conditions across the board. That may be just rumour - only those inside can answer for sure but it's no secret the place has been run like a high school project for years. Now that the Americans are heavily involved I would expect major (unwelcome) changes to employment practices.
If you were running the place and somebody gifted you the opportunity to get rid of costly working agreements what would you do? If the company removed an existing Union and replaced it with another voluntarily they would set up a new collective labour agreement. Lots would depend on the scope of this. An agreement can be forced legally if a union pursues statutory recognition however the scope of this only revolves around pay, hours and holidays. Anything this limited is generally poor and seldom worth the paper its printed on but represents a start in the long process of improvement. This would normally be first step in establishing a union presence rather than a process for an already established unionised workforce.
Of course a company might promise plenty to a fledgling union then fail to deliver on it. This may take the form of keeping the framework of agreements in place while striping out the detail that makes them worth anything. The quandary then becomes what can they do? Strike? The idea of any form of industrial action is fantasy unless the union has established a significant strike fund. This requires £several million as they will be injuncted, subject to lawsuits etc etc.
Ironically the best course of action for crew in such circumstances would be for both unions to reach joint agreement. This would enable pre-existing agreements to be kept under a power sharing council. This would not be ideal for either union but their respective negotiating teams should know it is realistically the only way to ensure continuity. How the company respond to such ideas is key. If the company do not entertain that as an option then you can rest assured they are seeking the removal of existing agreements. That is the point where it is time to start being afraid.
competition is generally a good thing..even in unions until the point where both sides take their eye off the ball because they are too busy squabbling. The only winner is the company in these circumstances.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: earth
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thad,
Thanks for the thoughts, I presume all the above is based on the recognition agreements not being contractual, without knowledge of what the VS terms of employment and their specific agreements say I don't know.
Is there the possibility that VS management retain all agreements but in effect search & replace the word Balpa with the word PPU, thus in effect nothing changes ?
I am hearing lots of mixed views, those saying that it could all turn to rat s**t is just Balpa scare mongering because they don't want to lose VS as it could be their undoing as other airlines do similar and the other side of the coin that it is partially or wholly accurate that it ends up a token recognition agreement not worth the paper it is written on.
I can't personally, with a view from the sidelines see there being an alliance because as I understand it the current feeling in VS is that the majority of pilots do not hold faith in BALPA, it would probably have jaws hitting the floor if that happened and the new large members of PPU members wondering what exactly is going on - just like the whole trigger (Balpa and Ewing ) that lead to this current situation in the first place.
I continue to watch from the sidelines with interest.
Thanks for the thoughts, I presume all the above is based on the recognition agreements not being contractual, without knowledge of what the VS terms of employment and their specific agreements say I don't know.
Is there the possibility that VS management retain all agreements but in effect search & replace the word Balpa with the word PPU, thus in effect nothing changes ?
I am hearing lots of mixed views, those saying that it could all turn to rat s**t is just Balpa scare mongering because they don't want to lose VS as it could be their undoing as other airlines do similar and the other side of the coin that it is partially or wholly accurate that it ends up a token recognition agreement not worth the paper it is written on.
I can't personally, with a view from the sidelines see there being an alliance because as I understand it the current feeling in VS is that the majority of pilots do not hold faith in BALPA, it would probably have jaws hitting the floor if that happened and the new large members of PPU members wondering what exactly is going on - just like the whole trigger (Balpa and Ewing ) that lead to this current situation in the first place.
I continue to watch from the sidelines with interest.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Eu
Posts: 950
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd say the chance of retaining the agreements in their current form is pretty close to zero. That assumption is based on what seems to be an open goal being presented to management. Of course it will be dressed up possibly as a new agreement but the reality will be serious dilution of existing agreements.
I wouldn't say Balpa are scaremongering. They would be duty bound to inform their members of what lies ahead. The job of representation would continue no matter who holds a recognition agreement. If anything the pressure will now be on the opposition because they must you now realise what the company are really up to. They will be held to account by their own members if they achieve recognition at the expense of their members terms and conditions. You should be able to predict what's going on based on management comms. If they have stopped short of saying that your agreements will be subject to full transfer then you've got problems. Good luck.
I wouldn't say Balpa are scaremongering. They would be duty bound to inform their members of what lies ahead. The job of representation would continue no matter who holds a recognition agreement. If anything the pressure will now be on the opposition because they must you now realise what the company are really up to. They will be held to account by their own members if they achieve recognition at the expense of their members terms and conditions. You should be able to predict what's going on based on management comms. If they have stopped short of saying that your agreements will be subject to full transfer then you've got problems. Good luck.
