British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Desertia, I won't be dragged into a mathematical debate....I wouldn't stand a chance
I was only trying to make a point that if you ask your staff for permanent changes as our leader you should be the one leading the way.
Would you agree with that?
ever heard the phrase ' Every little helps?'
I was only trying to make a point that if you ask your staff for permanent changes as our leader you should be the one leading the way.
Would you agree with that?
ever heard the phrase ' Every little helps?'
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
finncapt. BASSA have very poor negotiating skills, BA management too sometimes, this is why they don't negotiate. If they'd sent out a questionaire to find out what the members wanted, if members had gone to the union office or emailed them that may have helped. BASSA keep setting up situations which they hope will make the management back down, this may have worked before but there's too much at stake now for the them to back down.
Personally, I think that the damage done is too bad and we'll be looking at more brutal cuts being necessary next year, any cuts being compulsory rather than asking a few staff.
When those redundancies come and they will ground staff,engineers, pilots and cabin crew will lay the blame squarely at this unions door.
Personally, I think that the damage done is too bad and we'll be looking at more brutal cuts being necessary next year, any cuts being compulsory rather than asking a few staff.
When those redundancies come and they will ground staff,engineers, pilots and cabin crew will lay the blame squarely at this unions door.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romans
Humour me (I won't ask again, I promise), point by point, either identify by post number or directly, where I am factually incorrect.
Failing that, I will have to agree with Finncapt. It is pointless debating this incessantly with people unable to see what is staring them in the face, that of BASSA denial.
.. we have covered all those points before.
I am afraid, we would have to agree to disagree.
I am afraid, we would have to agree to disagree.
Failing that, I will have to agree with Finncapt. It is pointless debating this incessantly with people unable to see what is staring them in the face, that of BASSA denial.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: France
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a question...
I know I could trawl this rather large subject and eventually fall exhausted on the answer, but I am sure that one of you chaps has the facts at his/her fingertips and will help me out;
How soon will the next ballot be - any date yet?
and then...
How long then before the first possible industrial action?
I’m looking for that magic window to safely use up some flights late Jan early Feb
Ta!
How soon will the next ballot be - any date yet?
and then...
How long then before the first possible industrial action?
I’m looking for that magic window to safely use up some flights late Jan early Feb
Ta!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that we all agree on one thing: Negotiation is necessary.
Can we also agree that we need to cut costs/save money urgently.
Now, we need to find a way to do this. My suggestion (fwiw):
The new crewing levels have been in force for over a month (on wwlhr), and apart from teething problems and some unwillingness from some individuals, there hasn't been any major dramas (please note the word major).
The company knows that unions/crew aren't happy with imposition, it was proven with the result of the ballot.
The union did not follow the law when balloting. This was proven in court.
The company say they're willing to negotiate any time, without pre-conditions. The union say they're willing to discuss anything as long as the imposition is removed.
We know that due to people taking VR/part time, it isn't possible to remove the imposition - also, BA cannot afford to. Part time crew who want to temporary increase their contract won't work either, as it costs too much money.
Where do we go from here? Firstly, can we stop the kindergarden stuff. Let's all be adult about this. Hey, we might even get famous if we can find the perfect solution
(I know, I know, not likely.)
Another thing to bear in mind. The strike was ruled illegal by the courts. I don't believe that Justice Cox would put her job and integrity on the line for any reason.
Personally, I think it would be union suicide to go straight into another ballot. We have seen the reaction from crew, colleagues, customers and media. We have been ridiculed in the press, and there is no faith or good feeling about BA from the public.
We need to change this perception (sp?). We need both sides, with a mediator (possibly Henkybaby...)/ACAS, to sit and talk. No pre-conditions. If both sides won't listen, then we don't know what each side want. Leave to imposition in place at the moment, at least, as we all know why it's here. We must get both sides together to talk. There is no other option.
I don't like to think that there are plenty of people out there who want to see BA fail and up to 70,000 people out of a job (directly or indirectly linked). I know feelings have been running high, lots shouting, plenty of tears and too much stress on individuals.
I do think that the union must listen carefully to their members, and what the members want. It is vitally important for the union to survive (and to be taken seriously, if I'm honest). I think BA must listen to the employees and the union, and vice versa.
What has to be remembered is that listening is an artform. Just by listening doesn't mean you have to agree. You only agree to hear what the other "side" has to say.
Unfortunately, we haven't been dealing with pure facts for the last year or so. Mistakes have been made on both sides, but I understand why we get frustrated with the union when it has been proven at least twice that they lied to their members.
Gg
I'm trying to learn from Henkybaby, but I'm a novice....
Can we also agree that we need to cut costs/save money urgently.
Now, we need to find a way to do this. My suggestion (fwiw):
The new crewing levels have been in force for over a month (on wwlhr), and apart from teething problems and some unwillingness from some individuals, there hasn't been any major dramas (please note the word major).
The company knows that unions/crew aren't happy with imposition, it was proven with the result of the ballot.
The union did not follow the law when balloting. This was proven in court.
The company say they're willing to negotiate any time, without pre-conditions. The union say they're willing to discuss anything as long as the imposition is removed.
We know that due to people taking VR/part time, it isn't possible to remove the imposition - also, BA cannot afford to. Part time crew who want to temporary increase their contract won't work either, as it costs too much money.
Where do we go from here? Firstly, can we stop the kindergarden stuff. Let's all be adult about this. Hey, we might even get famous if we can find the perfect solution
(I know, I know, not likely.)Another thing to bear in mind. The strike was ruled illegal by the courts. I don't believe that Justice Cox would put her job and integrity on the line for any reason.
Personally, I think it would be union suicide to go straight into another ballot. We have seen the reaction from crew, colleagues, customers and media. We have been ridiculed in the press, and there is no faith or good feeling about BA from the public.
We need to change this perception (sp?). We need both sides, with a mediator (possibly Henkybaby...)/ACAS, to sit and talk. No pre-conditions. If both sides won't listen, then we don't know what each side want. Leave to imposition in place at the moment, at least, as we all know why it's here. We must get both sides together to talk. There is no other option.
I don't like to think that there are plenty of people out there who want to see BA fail and up to 70,000 people out of a job (directly or indirectly linked). I know feelings have been running high, lots shouting, plenty of tears and too much stress on individuals.
I do think that the union must listen carefully to their members, and what the members want. It is vitally important for the union to survive (and to be taken seriously, if I'm honest). I think BA must listen to the employees and the union, and vice versa.
What has to be remembered is that listening is an artform. Just by listening doesn't mean you have to agree. You only agree to hear what the other "side" has to say.
Unfortunately, we haven't been dealing with pure facts for the last year or so. Mistakes have been made on both sides, but I understand why we get frustrated with the union when it has been proven at least twice that they lied to their members.
Gg
I'm trying to learn from Henkybaby, but I'm a novice....
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Topbunks, the points were covered in the thread which is now closed. To save you having to go through over 300 pages I will go over your points again.
However I don't want anybody telling me that I sound like a broken record. .
I am off to have dinner now but rest assure I will give you an answer to all your points later this evening.
However I don't want anybody telling me that I sound like a broken record. .
I am off to have dinner now but rest assure I will give you an answer to all your points later this evening.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'll ruin my reputation and probably get banned, but what the hell it will give something else to talk about.
Which speech are BASSA going to use next?
My money is on Churchill's "we'll fight them in the trenches".
Which speech are BASSA going to use next?
My money is on Churchill's "we'll fight them in the trenches".
I understand the point that you're trying to make, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Of course pilots cost a lot more, per individual, than CC, but there are very good reasons for this. You can't draw comparisons between the salaries of the two groups. You need to look at the market rate - BA pilots are benchmarked against this and paid a modest premium, but CC cost way, way over the odds. It may seem harsh, but you are the low hanging fruit.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DP,
Not quite - I believe a bit of BA media spin came into play there. I seem to recall that WW didn't qualify for his bonus on at least one of those years but it was deemed too difficult to correct the press release which suggested he'd turned it down.
MrB
PS Can we talk about the subject, not pick people up on their spelling/grammar etc? Romans44 has made it clear English is not their first language and I'm willing to bet that his/her English is a damned sight better than any attempt I could make to converse in their native tongue.
Not quite - I believe a bit of BA media spin came into play there. I seem to recall that WW didn't qualify for his bonus on at least one of those years but it was deemed too difficult to correct the press release which suggested he'd turned it down.
MrB
PS Can we talk about the subject, not pick people up on their spelling/grammar etc? Romans44 has made it clear English is not their first language and I'm willing to bet that his/her English is a damned sight better than any attempt I could make to converse in their native tongue.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DP,
Not quite - I believe a bit of BA media spin came into play there. I seem to recall that WW didn't qualify for his bonus on at least one of those years but it was deemed to difficult to correct the press release which suggested he'd turned it down.
Not quite - I believe a bit of BA media spin came into play there. I seem to recall that WW didn't qualify for his bonus on at least one of those years but it was deemed to difficult to correct the press release which suggested he'd turned it down.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand the point that you're trying to make, but you're comparing apples and oranges. Of course pilots cost a lot more, per individual, than CC, but there are very good reasons for this. You can't draw comparisons between the salaries of the two groups. You need to look at the market rate - BA pilots are benchmarked against this and paid a modest premium, but CC cost way, way over the odds. It may seem harsh, but you are the low hanging fruit.
don't change subject,
I am not arguing pilots wages, I have no problems with people earning what they deserve. I don't even have a problem with the large wages and bonuses our top men/women get. If they deserve it, good on them.
We are talking about asking people to make changes to save the airline money.
I find it totally unfair asking one group to make more sacrifices, when our operation (compared for example to that of the pilots)costs relatively less than others.
I don't mind being the low hanging fruit but that does not give anybody the right to walk all over me.
We fought long and hard to have what we have it is only natural that we fight to protect it.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the point Romans44 makes of WW leading by example, is it now three years in a row he's turned down his bonus (that he has been entitled to
DP, I can't comment on this as I don't know the facts.
What I do know is that the large bonus Mr WW turned down after T5 opened, it wasn't turned down out kindness towards the airline.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 79
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please forgive me, folks, I'm just one of those paying pax in J-Class as a private citizen.
So here's the scenario in Feb 2010. We are no longer confident that BA will actually fly - regardless of the quality of cabin service. What are we, the people who shovel money at BA for the 'pleasure' of flying with you likely to do?
Amidst all the arguments about BASSA and WW and agreements and LGW v. LHR - we, the paying pax don't actually care a lot. What we hope for is a reliable airline that provides a decent service in return for the several Łk we [the poor punters] pay for the ticket[s]. And at the moment, there seem to be little prospect of BA providing either.
Where does YOUR future lie? Honestly, folks, WE are going to look elsewhere. And, frankly, your disputes [whether right or wrong or stupid or justified] are simply going to result in nnn,nnn pax flying with ABBA. I believe the phrase is "smell the coffee" - I'd try smelling an empty cabin, or the queue at the benefits office.
It's Grown-Up time.
So here's the scenario in Feb 2010. We are no longer confident that BA will actually fly - regardless of the quality of cabin service. What are we, the people who shovel money at BA for the 'pleasure' of flying with you likely to do?
Amidst all the arguments about BASSA and WW and agreements and LGW v. LHR - we, the paying pax don't actually care a lot. What we hope for is a reliable airline that provides a decent service in return for the several Łk we [the poor punters] pay for the ticket[s]. And at the moment, there seem to be little prospect of BA providing either.
Where does YOUR future lie? Honestly, folks, WE are going to look elsewhere. And, frankly, your disputes [whether right or wrong or stupid or justified] are simply going to result in nnn,nnn pax flying with ABBA. I believe the phrase is "smell the coffee" - I'd try smelling an empty cabin, or the queue at the benefits office.
It's Grown-Up time.
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: MIDDLE EAST
Posts: 1,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
romans44
It's that very last sentence of yours that has me wanting to shout out loud......
' wake up and smell the bloody coffee!'
Having sat on the sidelines reading the numerous angles on this debacle, I feel it time to enter the fray.
Firstly, I believe UNITE to be an utter disgrace. Any Union that tries to impose strike action over the major holiday period of the year is nothing short of a disgrace. Not only did Derek Simpson state that it was 'probably over the top' but many BA cabin crew, if they are honest, were shocked at the timing and the length of the proposed action. Nice of your union to give you the full picture wasn't it? Designed to pile huge pressure on management of the airline, the only real losers would have been the hundreds of thousands of stranded customers. In view of the current climate, that may have been the catalyst in bringing down the Company. To state that it was pure bad luck that a strike was scheduled for the most inconvenient time of the year is a downright lie. And the courts have proved they are cheats.
The main arguments behind this strike action for the union members is a pay freeze and the reduction of one crew member on long haul flights. This is clearly not a safety issue. It's an issue that means crew are going to have to work harder. Well guys, suck it up and get on with it. You are already the best paid in the UK so little sympathy there. As for work, you want to see the service offered by the ME carriers. What BA offer is pitiful in comparison and, like it or not, that is what you're up against. Yes, It may mean a little less time in those bunks that you covet so much but that's life nowdays in this tough world..
Just remember, no employee is indespensable and BA is particularly vulnerable right now. Losing over 1 million a day and another estimated 300 million had the 12 day strike gone ahead. That could have caused irreparable damage to the airline and anyone who cannot see that is either blind or has the ego of a large union head!
So, if you want to go ahead and fight for your precious pay and working conditions, please be my guest. Let the 92% of union members make a point of principle of voting against the airline. Then, put your feet up, pour yourself a cuppa ( you'll be good at that bit!) and watch as your Company sinks into history. Life will go on after the few weeks of headline news and people will fly with other airlines, as they are starting to do already. BA will vanish along with the likes of Sabena, Swissair, Pan Am, TWA and many others I could mention. Then see how your new unemployment pay compares with a back to back payment or a Narita meal allowance. With the current 3.7 billion deficit in the BA pension fund, you may also find yourselves stacking 'chicken or beef ' in the local tesco to fund your retirement.
Be very, very careful what you wish for. Or vote for!
Harry
It's that very last sentence of yours that has me wanting to shout out loud......
' wake up and smell the bloody coffee!'
Having sat on the sidelines reading the numerous angles on this debacle, I feel it time to enter the fray.
Firstly, I believe UNITE to be an utter disgrace. Any Union that tries to impose strike action over the major holiday period of the year is nothing short of a disgrace. Not only did Derek Simpson state that it was 'probably over the top' but many BA cabin crew, if they are honest, were shocked at the timing and the length of the proposed action. Nice of your union to give you the full picture wasn't it? Designed to pile huge pressure on management of the airline, the only real losers would have been the hundreds of thousands of stranded customers. In view of the current climate, that may have been the catalyst in bringing down the Company. To state that it was pure bad luck that a strike was scheduled for the most inconvenient time of the year is a downright lie. And the courts have proved they are cheats.
The main arguments behind this strike action for the union members is a pay freeze and the reduction of one crew member on long haul flights. This is clearly not a safety issue. It's an issue that means crew are going to have to work harder. Well guys, suck it up and get on with it. You are already the best paid in the UK so little sympathy there. As for work, you want to see the service offered by the ME carriers. What BA offer is pitiful in comparison and, like it or not, that is what you're up against. Yes, It may mean a little less time in those bunks that you covet so much but that's life nowdays in this tough world..
Just remember, no employee is indespensable and BA is particularly vulnerable right now. Losing over 1 million a day and another estimated 300 million had the 12 day strike gone ahead. That could have caused irreparable damage to the airline and anyone who cannot see that is either blind or has the ego of a large union head!
So, if you want to go ahead and fight for your precious pay and working conditions, please be my guest. Let the 92% of union members make a point of principle of voting against the airline. Then, put your feet up, pour yourself a cuppa ( you'll be good at that bit!) and watch as your Company sinks into history. Life will go on after the few weeks of headline news and people will fly with other airlines, as they are starting to do already. BA will vanish along with the likes of Sabena, Swissair, Pan Am, TWA and many others I could mention. Then see how your new unemployment pay compares with a back to back payment or a Narita meal allowance. With the current 3.7 billion deficit in the BA pension fund, you may also find yourselves stacking 'chicken or beef ' in the local tesco to fund your retirement.
Be very, very careful what you wish for. Or vote for!
Harry
Last edited by harry the cod; 21st Dec 2009 at 19:17.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romans44
Eh? Our operation costs more overall. Total IFCE costs are more than Flight Ops from the figures you posted.
Pilots get paid more than CC due to a different skillset and responsibility level.
Wiilie costs less than all the pilots together. Willie costs more than any individual pilot.
So what??????????????
The argument is obsolete. Market forces dictate the going rate for job "X".
1. Willie seems to be paid relatively LITTLE for a FTSE100 Chief Exec
2. BA pilots seem to get a MARKET-LEADING rate (just, when you consider the extra hours they work compared to Virgin pilots)
3. BA CC "on average" (important, 'cos we're not ALL on old contracts) get paid far MORE than the market-rate.
Finally, the savings we were asked for were probably higher than some groups because of point 3 above and the fact that "we" (and especially our old-contract brethren) haven't taken too many of those little steps towards cost-cutting over the past decade. Hence we were asked for a LOT now. There are good reasons for all these things and I'm afraid your argument versus other staff groups doesn't hold water.
For example, if aircraft become so automated and reliable in 5 years time that the market-rate for pilots is halved, then would you really wish to take a 50% pay-cut because you "want what the pilots got"?
It's school-yard stuff and I'm afraid it shows a real lack of understanding of how the world works and what "fair" is.
I find it totally unfair asking one group to make more sacrifices, when our operation (compared for example to that of the pilots)costs relatively less than others.
Pilots get paid more than CC due to a different skillset and responsibility level.
Wiilie costs less than all the pilots together. Willie costs more than any individual pilot.
So what??????????????
The argument is obsolete. Market forces dictate the going rate for job "X".
1. Willie seems to be paid relatively LITTLE for a FTSE100 Chief Exec
2. BA pilots seem to get a MARKET-LEADING rate (just, when you consider the extra hours they work compared to Virgin pilots)
3. BA CC "on average" (important, 'cos we're not ALL on old contracts) get paid far MORE than the market-rate.
Finally, the savings we were asked for were probably higher than some groups because of point 3 above and the fact that "we" (and especially our old-contract brethren) haven't taken too many of those little steps towards cost-cutting over the past decade. Hence we were asked for a LOT now. There are good reasons for all these things and I'm afraid your argument versus other staff groups doesn't hold water.
For example, if aircraft become so automated and reliable in 5 years time that the market-rate for pilots is halved, then would you really wish to take a 50% pay-cut because you "want what the pilots got"?
It's school-yard stuff and I'm afraid it shows a real lack of understanding of how the world works and what "fair" is.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: London
Age: 50
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Everybody - Question for Romans44
just joined this forum.
I have a question for Romans44. I have not read all the old posts but it appears to me that there's quite a lot of different information going around: some crew say that they only voted yes because they though it was going to be a 2-3 days strike, but in this forum I read that BASSA advised the crew that it was not going to be a short strike- so who is telling the truth? On comments from papers (such as the Guardian) crew members have been disputing the average salary quoted by the papers saying that it was too high and that most of them received a much smaller salary as most of the trips are paid much less than Japan... however crew I spoke to said they refused the average salary option (that would ensure it didn't matter what trips they are sent to) as they would be loosing money... it is all not making any sense!
Also Romans you quoted the pay cut that BASSA offered few times but you never comment on the fact that it was only a temporary measure. The crew are not the only ones been asked to make sacrifices.
I have not read anywhere that the reduction in crew numbers were happening in conjunction with crew taking VR and going part time. Crew always point out how good BA is with their PR but nobody has told the story the way it is isn'it?
BA is not only made of CC, but it appears that nobody else is worth anything or nobody else deserves a job.
I have a question for Romans44. I have not read all the old posts but it appears to me that there's quite a lot of different information going around: some crew say that they only voted yes because they though it was going to be a 2-3 days strike, but in this forum I read that BASSA advised the crew that it was not going to be a short strike- so who is telling the truth? On comments from papers (such as the Guardian) crew members have been disputing the average salary quoted by the papers saying that it was too high and that most of them received a much smaller salary as most of the trips are paid much less than Japan... however crew I spoke to said they refused the average salary option (that would ensure it didn't matter what trips they are sent to) as they would be loosing money... it is all not making any sense!
Also Romans you quoted the pay cut that BASSA offered few times but you never comment on the fact that it was only a temporary measure. The crew are not the only ones been asked to make sacrifices.
I have not read anywhere that the reduction in crew numbers were happening in conjunction with crew taking VR and going part time. Crew always point out how good BA is with their PR but nobody has told the story the way it is isn'it?
BA is not only made of CC, but it appears that nobody else is worth anything or nobody else deserves a job.