Quote from WW. "Haven't stopped laughing!!!! At least we agree on something JT!!
Unfortunately it was your unions members who helped set up a low paid CC unit at LHR." But wasn't it BASSA that helped set up a low paid CC unit at LGW? :hmm: |
Of course those pilots and cabin crew who may be shut out of the Holiday Pay settlement, are now trying to play the discrimination card. They want their cake and eat it. Sorry that doesn't wash.
There must be a benefit and even an advantage for those paying fees to a professional body, who negotiates with an employer on their behalf. This is where there is conflict in the psyche of pilots. Most are right wing Tories who do not believe in unions, and even denigrate achievement by calling organised labour, or institutions like BALPA a " self serving cartel". |
8029848s
You may well be right when you suggest it would be wrong for the company to pay union members and non-union members differently going forwards. I'd be surprised if that applies to the back pay though. Union members had to have their names updated every three months throughout the legal process, in order to be legally entitled to back pay of more than three months. The unions' point with this letter, is that if they pay any more than the legal minimum, they'll be taking the Michael when they then come along cap in hand for further cost savings in the near future. I think it is all a bit hypocritical when you consider that they negotiated a non-legal minimum payout for the ex-BMI pilots within BA though, so I'm expecting the full back pay for all. I'm sure the company likes to consider itself a fair and law abiding company. It has been legally determined that the company should have been paying this money. Whether they are legally forced to provide back pay or not, a fair employer would, and that's why I think BA will. Despite what a lot of people seem to think, BA is a very fair employer. |
BALPA save BA money!
The company has agreed a holiday payment for the former BMI pilots (as non-claimants). Are all of these pilots BALPA members? If not then queue 'unequal treatment' claim by non union BA pilots :)
|
Jockster:
The company has agreed a holiday payment for the former BMI pilots (as non-claimants). Are all of these pilots BALPA members? If not then queue 'unequal treatment' claim by non union BA pilots "Back Holiday Pay": As GS-Alpha has said there is is no requirement in law to pay "back holiday pay" to non members covering the period from the start of the legal proceedings until the settlement, since those pilots were not involved in those proceedings - they were not named as claimants. GS-Alpha Whether they are legally forced to provide back pay or not, a fair employer would, and that's why I think BA will. Despite what a lot of people seem to think, BA is a very fair employer. |
Jockster, the ex-BMI guys were claimants so you'll have to think of another cunning plan.
My post above, was simply about the amount of settlement for ex-BMI guys. The BALPA members among them were all claimants. The actual value of the backpay has been settled out of court so is not necessarily what would have been achieved through the courts. My point was that I suspect the BMI claimants would have got slightly less had it gone to court, but then so might the rest of the BA pilots. Such is the nature of an out of court settlement though. I do not believe BA are 'legally required' to backpay non-claimants, and a claim started right now, can only demand up to three months of back pay. Wiggy tactically it might suit them to pay everybody and then plead broke when it comes to the annual pay round |
Count:
Of course those pilots and cabin crew who may be shut out of the Holiday Pay settlement, are now trying to play the discrimination card. They want their cake and eat it. Sorry that doesn't wash. Happy days! |
Well done to this company for deciding to apply the holiday pay ruling to ALL.
I think this is a good thing. Yes, I pay my 1% to a union, but in the spirit of tolerance and understanding, I have no problem whatsoever in wanting ALL of the workforce to benefit from an allowances system which has been proved to be unfair in a court. BALPA, and other unions do a great deal of good for their members... Legal Advice & Representation Industrial Support Employment issues advice Free initial personal legal advice Access to BALPA Financial Solutions Access to BALPA website and forums Bi-monthly Log Magazine!! Lots of advice and support on offer. But some individuals have different circumstances and attitudes and don't feel that they need this support. Or maybe they have their own support networks and don't feel that they can justify the cost of this added 'insurance'. That's fine! There's no right or wrong answer. As for negotiating Ts&Cs with an employer, if you go it alone it may be difficult or impossible to effect a change. The company may not negotiate with an individual. You'll just have to accept what's been given. Whereas I know that I have a team of capable chaps who will fight the battles for me. Yes, they sometimes get it wrong, or misread the sentiments of their members, or are boxed into a 'poor' settlement by the company, but by and large I have the security of knowing that they are on my side, and personally speaking they remove a level of anxiety from my life. So whilst I understand that the union's job is to look after its members, I certainly do not begrudge ANY of those who benefit from its collective bargaining power. |
wessexdriver72 - (ps.. is that your age!!!)
I am a BA BALPA member too and initially was a bit disappointed that those who were not willing to contribute to the fight will still gain. However, I understand that the legal advice probably meant that BA had no choice and have therefore tried to 'dress it up' as a gift from a caring employer!!! They are an excellent employer, but not a favourite uncle!!! However, I am very pleased that the back-pay will go to those people who had the courage of their convictions to leave bassa. It would have been VERY harsh if they had missed out. |
those people who had the courage of their convictions to leave bassa A little birdie tells me 380 rejoined BASSA in the past few weeks. Wonder if they'll leave now :rolleyes: |
A little birdie tells me 380 rejoined BASSA in the past few weeks. Wonder if they'll leave now Nice to see BASSA, once again, tugging on the coat tails of BALPA's proactive stance. Bit like the pensions deal and the HMRC deal, oops, forgot, BASSA said you couldn't negotiate with the tax man and went it alone. Losing their members money. :ugh: |
Nice to see BASSA, once again, tugging on the coat tails of BALPA's proactive stance |
Presumably if BALPA is trying to find a spine, BASSA must be trying to find a brain?
|
There will be an exodus of BA pilots out of BALPA as soon as the Holiday Pay is coughed up. That is all many are waiting for.
Hardly much "spine" there for when Willie comes knocking on your door. Perhaps Wirblesturm can inform us how the alleged superior intellect of BA's pilots, through elegant and intelligent negotiations with BA, have ended up on an hourly rate paid in Sterling? Against a range of currencies throughout the world, the UK Pound has collapsed, but BASSA has retained allowances locally and uplifted whenever the Pound drops. :D |
There will be an exodus of BA pilots out of BALPA as soon as the Holiday Pay is coughed up. That is all many are waiting for. |
Perhaps Wirblesturm can inform us how the alleged superior intellect of BA's pilots, through elegant and intelligent negotiations with BA, have ended up on an hourly rate paid in Sterling? Against a range of currencies throughout the world, the UK Pound has collapsed, but BASSA has retained allowances locally and uplifted whenever the Pound drops. :D Obviously the long term financial benefits of an increased, more stable, accountable basic pay and a reduced variable pay removing the 'cherry trips' and basing your roster on lifestyle choices was such a stupid move against the vagaries of the financial money markets, how could we have entertained it. Sterling only ever drops doesn't it Count, it never climbs does it, imagine a bizarre world where the £ buys $2.20, unimaginable. The increase in basic makes paying the bills easier and more reliable, it benefits the BARP members and allows free choice of destination not just the 'big payers' for the senior crew. You know like the ones that the BASSA council members were buying off the allocator who was dismissed? Surely you remember, you used him to deliver your strike mandate? Oh the 'fairness' of it all, BA Senior Stewards Association at it's best. |
I am afraid Wibblestime that the B of E will be rolling those QE printing presses for a long time to come, and the chances of U$2.20 to the Pound may not occur for a decade or more. Parity with the Dollar is more likely. How does that fit in with your budget?
You conveniently forget your own departments problems with regard to favoured trips when the hourly rate was introduced. I remember a BALPA rep having to promise the company the problem of sickness on the NRT route was being addressed. All of a sudden that became a very junior trip. So no lectures please about cabin crew attendance. As for Mixed Fleet reducing IFCE costs, the fleet has just had a pay rise and they can potentially earn more than Gatwick based cabin crew. I suppose the turnover was just too high to sustain? Over 1,000 MF crew now belong to UNITE and with the Legacy Purser name change, it cannot be long before there is a full merger. You know it makes sense. |
As for Mixed Fleet reducing IFCS costs, the fleet has just had a pay rise and they can potentially earn more than Gatwick based cabin crew Irrespective of how many CC join BASSA/Unite the BASSA of old is no more, they have no teeth anymore and most of the members would be vary wary of following the drivel from the head seat/ Branch Secretary again before leaping into ludicrous, destructive IA. The CC need representation, I have always believed that, they just didn't need the old BASSA. In fact no one did. How does that fit in with your budget? As for QE, I think we will see that change when the prime aim of the B of E becomes growth not inflation capping. The gains of having allowances paid in local currency pale into insignificance as soon as a trip is dropped or lost. What you gain on the swings you lose on the roundabouts. I would rather have the increase in pensionable basic thank you. Bank of England governor outvoted in bid to launch fresh QE boost Those opposing further QE said the Bank had already given a "substantial" stimulus to the economy and expressed concern that QE was becoming less effective. With inflation already above target, there was a risk further asset purchases would send the wrong signal to the public. |
For every small decrease in the pound versus overseas currency the cost to BA of WW and EF operating it becomes greater eroding that route's profitability. Put another way it makes MF more desirable in that route. There are an additional 1000 MF coming on line this year - why and where will they fly to?
BASSA has never thought beyond the immediate, their "thinkers" are purely tactical not strategic. Enjoy the currency changes while they work in your favour. On a separate point. What will happen to box payments and other variable pay for cabin crew when the legal ramifications of HP are worked through. A fixed payment each month perhaps? |
Count
I remember a BALPA rep having to promise the company the problem of sickness on the NRT route was being addressed. All of a sudden that became a very junior trip. So no lectures please about cabin crew attendance. FWIW I did plenty of NRTs after the allowances change and I certainly don't recall any tweaks being offered, e.g. a Destination Payment :ok:, in order to make NRT more attractive. Whilst the trip did indeed "go junior" the names that turned up at briefing at LHR were normally those that had been "in the frame" at roster publication several weeks before report. I certainly didn't see any evidence of an attendance problem. |
There was an 'understanding' with the Company that if attendance became a problem on certain identified routes which had previously paid high allowances, BALPA would have to deal with it. NRT became a weak link when the hourly rate was introduced. Previously allowances were so lucrative for BA flight crew flying to NRT and other Japanese destinations, some senior F/O's had even turned down promotion in order to cherry pick the route. One eventually became a Samurai! He only managed 300 trips to Japan.
The hourly rate did seem a good wheeze at the time, but with their usual lack of pragmatism, BA flight crew failed to see the possibility what a debased Pound would have on their downroute purchasing power. Now of course jealous pilots accuse the cabin crew of eroding profitability, but are not aware that far more damage is caused to a routes viability by a weak Pound on fuel and leasing costs, plus the associated inflationary pressures on UK imports that feed through to wage demands. Yes a meal at Fatties with a few beers, is a costly experience these days for BA pilots. |
MF costs etc.
Thats why Syd going to MF in Sept.
Huge decrease in crew costs, and one local night less in Sin, which with the imminent introduction of the 777 will hopefully help make the route viable again. |
So what savings have BA flight crew offered on the LHR - SYD route?
Do you really need two Captains on the LHR - SIN - LHR sectors? What about the two Club seats 60A/B that have to remain unsold just in case one of you wants to watch a film? Two 747 flights to SIN every night, four Club seats that can't be sold each way. 1460 Club pax denied a seat with a fare of £2500 (BA.com fares for June) average each both sectors = £7,300,000 potential loss of revenue annually. And the flight Crew have bunks as well. This loss of revenue is just so that they can choose to watch a film or not! Not only does it look bad having staff sitting in passenger seats, many customers would prefer to sit in those seats. This is where the breathtaking arrogance of BA pilots on this forum, who criticise other employees for not cutting their pay or getting to market rate, is exposed. Pilots act as strikebreakers, yet their own union agreements as illustrated here over Club rest seats, is costing BA millions in lost revenue. |
What about the two Club seats 60A/B that have to remain unsold just in case one of you wants to watch a film? Two flights to SIN every night, four Club seats that can't be sold. 730 Club pax denied a seat with a fare of £3500 average each way = £2,555,000 each year lost by BA. Careful what you wish for. |
Wibblestim, you are being untruthful. The cabin crew rest seats are not saleable seats, but in an overhead rest area not accessed by passengers on both aircraft types.
The Club seats allocated for Flight Crew rest on the 747-400 and four class 777-200ER's could be sold. In fact more often than not you do not even use them.They are just empty. |
The cabin crew rest seats are not saleable seats, but in an overhead rest area not accessed by passengers on both aircraft types. If there are overhead rest areas available on the 777 then there are no seats in the cabin for flight crew either. The only time cabin rest seats are available (normally 11k) for flight crew are if there is a 'dog box' at the back of first class. Cabin seats are only allocated for specific sectors as labelled in the FCN. Do try and keep up Count. |
There was an 'understanding' with the Company that if attendance became a problem on certain identified routes which had previously paid high allowances, BALPA would have to deal with it. NRT became a weak link when the hourly rate was introduced. The cabin crew rest seats are not saleable seats, but in an overhead rest area not accessed by passengers on both aircraft types. |
Wubblestrim,you are still trying to muddy the water. The
GE 777-200's to be specific, are not long range aircraft, so do not fly to SIN. There is no dedicated overhead rest area on those aircraft so a curtained off area with one row of three seats is allocated. Flight crew frequently upgrade themselves from the 11K Club seat on three man pilot sectors, to a First class seat. Currently on non stop flights to SIN and back, on both 747's the flight crew compliment is four, two Captains and two F/O's. These sectors could easily be accomplished with just one Captain and two F/O's. This alone would save BA at least £3m a year on the SIN/LHR sectors. Giving up the two Club seats as well would give a total saving of around £5.5m a year. More than four times the amount BA may save by replacing Legacy cabin crew on the route. BA has been held to ransom for too long over these costly flight crew perks, profitability on routes should not be subject to archaic union diktats. |
It can't be done with one Captain and two FO's any more than it can be done with 12 cabin crew. Or are you volunteering that?
Now, where did you get the precise breakdown of actual passenger loads and ticket prices to determine BA could have sold those rest seats for £2.5M? Or did you just pluck that number out of thin air? I'll tell you what would save money though: giving the cabin crew 7 sets of eyeshades from the washbags rather than hundreds of pounds when the lights in the bunks won't go out. |
Comrade Count,
I hope the foot is getting better? Flight crew frequently upgrade themselves from the 11K Club seat on three man pilot sectors, to a First class seat. profitability on routes should not be subject to archaic union diktats. |
For goodness sake guys, I've just read through this drivel and after getting over the laughter I'm asking myself: 'why on earth are you bothering?'. It looks like a silly internal spat between BA emplyees, even though some of them no longer are BA employees!
Please let them whine their way into the obscurity they deserve and stop feeding them the oxygen they need to believe they actually matter. |
Count
Without wanting to get into the cabin/flight crew politics, I was interested in your statement that the LHR-SIN-LHR trip could be flown with three pilots. Having looked at CAP371 http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP371.PDF I cannot see how this could be achieved. Would you be so kind as to explain your calculations? PS...of course the new EASA regulations could change that when they come into force? |
And the results are in! Following some not so subtle pressure by some individuals the skivers charter has been accepted! Feel a little sniffle coming on? Don't bother coming into work, just phone in sick and somebody else will do the work you get paid for. Oh, they've been force drafted because there's so much sickness? Never mind sucker, you should have had some dependents or union days you could swing to avoid the draft. And when EASA up the annual flying hours you'll be giving your employer 100 more hours of your time for nothing (did you really think they would be able to 'afford' to renegotiate the fixed payment?).
Congratulations to the British Airways Captains Council, possibly the fastest ever turnaround between winning something for the members and handing it straight back to BA with nobs on! |
So, just for clarity, which way did you vote Charlie?
Suggest you try the balpa forum and avoid trolling here. Laundry, public etc... |
That's the trouble with democracy, it's a bitch when your rhetoric does not win the argument and the vote goes against you. At least there is Pprune to come to, where you can whine about the unfairness of it all.
|
Turnout was disappointing. Again. The most frustrating aspect is flying with people who say they didn't like either option, and didn't like the way the BACC handled it, so they didn't vote.
I do think that BALPA have shot us all by claiming a victory in the holiday pay, only to then find the legal implication of actually winning the case has meant many regular line pilots will lose over the long term. |
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:23. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.