British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: England
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In response to Henkybaby, as a shareholder and as a pilot who would like to one day work for BA, and therefore would like to see it thrive and expand I find it absolutely gobsmacking that paying Pax are downgraded to make way for crew. For the love of god what planet are some people living on in these difficult times. If I was one of those pax I would be apoplectic. Does the captain not have the final say in these situations? I mean a flight from Ams-Lhr is only 45 mins sitting in economy is not that much of a hardship surely? I hope this event has been brought to the attention of management.
Romans you said earlier today that you would rather have a pay cut than a reduction in T & Cs. If 13000 cc were to give a pay cut that would produce the 140 million pounds saving that BA are looking for it would require a cut of 140,000,000/13000 = 10769 pounds per crew. Pretty unacceptable I think you will agree. Even if you met half way between BAs 140m and UNITEs offer of 57 M, say 100 M, it would still require a cut of 7692 pounds per crew. Therefore some sort of productivity gains must be offered. These must be permanent. When and if the good times return you will be free to ask for some of that money for union members. If it is not offered you will be free to ballot for IA for a greater pay rise at that time.
As Henkybaby and GG have said we (or rather BA and the cc) need to look forward rather than back. As I see it there are three outcomes:
1. BA management capitulate, reinstate the lost positions by hiring new crew on present T & Cs and promptly go bust. Everyone loses.
2. BASSA are beaten but only after more threats of strikes and actual strikes. Bookings plunge, routes dropped, forced job losses, BA shadow of former self. Everyone loses
3. Negotiation takes place. Please let this be the option. It will require BASSA to accept the position we are now in as Management will never recruit more CC on present T & Cs to replace the VRs. However the main concern seems to be new fleet. If suitable productivity gains could be offered I'm sure NF could be negotiated away so future recruitment to replace retirements and for any expansion would be on present T & Cs.
What sort of productivity gains could be achieved?
I have flown long haul as a pilot many times. BA fly to PHX dep at 1500 and arr at 1840 then returning, dep at 2105 arr at 1350. If this was done with only 1 night stop you would still be at the hotel by 2000L ish (time for a few beers and a meal at the Outback or P F Changs) and bed. You could have a decent lie in and still hit the Malls before leaving the hotel at 1830-1900. It would still be the best part of 23 hours off and you would get extra time at home with the family. Yes you lose allowances but BA save money on these and HOTAC costs. This is just an example.
On short haul I find it amazing that a crew (both FD and CC) do not stay together for the day. You fly your 2, 3 or 4 sectors and finish at base or stay overnight at destination for another day together the next day. This must be more efficient than the present set up?
As far as allowances go you are so lucky. In the last few years the government have gone from a system where you were given a set amount of cash $60-70 for a night in the US and you could spend it how you want. Many spent it on food and phone calls as it was meant to be but many ate pot noodles and bought mountain bikes and Ipods. It has changed now to a system where you get the same amount but you must provide receipts for any amount over $5. It must all be spent on food or drink (but only 1 alcoholic drink!). If you dont provide receipts for the amount given the difference comes out of your pay. This is tax payers money so with MPs expenses etc things change. Your allowances come from your customers fares.
Only my thoughts
Regards
Romans you said earlier today that you would rather have a pay cut than a reduction in T & Cs. If 13000 cc were to give a pay cut that would produce the 140 million pounds saving that BA are looking for it would require a cut of 140,000,000/13000 = 10769 pounds per crew. Pretty unacceptable I think you will agree. Even if you met half way between BAs 140m and UNITEs offer of 57 M, say 100 M, it would still require a cut of 7692 pounds per crew. Therefore some sort of productivity gains must be offered. These must be permanent. When and if the good times return you will be free to ask for some of that money for union members. If it is not offered you will be free to ballot for IA for a greater pay rise at that time.
As Henkybaby and GG have said we (or rather BA and the cc) need to look forward rather than back. As I see it there are three outcomes:
1. BA management capitulate, reinstate the lost positions by hiring new crew on present T & Cs and promptly go bust. Everyone loses.
2. BASSA are beaten but only after more threats of strikes and actual strikes. Bookings plunge, routes dropped, forced job losses, BA shadow of former self. Everyone loses
3. Negotiation takes place. Please let this be the option. It will require BASSA to accept the position we are now in as Management will never recruit more CC on present T & Cs to replace the VRs. However the main concern seems to be new fleet. If suitable productivity gains could be offered I'm sure NF could be negotiated away so future recruitment to replace retirements and for any expansion would be on present T & Cs.
What sort of productivity gains could be achieved?
I have flown long haul as a pilot many times. BA fly to PHX dep at 1500 and arr at 1840 then returning, dep at 2105 arr at 1350. If this was done with only 1 night stop you would still be at the hotel by 2000L ish (time for a few beers and a meal at the Outback or P F Changs) and bed. You could have a decent lie in and still hit the Malls before leaving the hotel at 1830-1900. It would still be the best part of 23 hours off and you would get extra time at home with the family. Yes you lose allowances but BA save money on these and HOTAC costs. This is just an example.
On short haul I find it amazing that a crew (both FD and CC) do not stay together for the day. You fly your 2, 3 or 4 sectors and finish at base or stay overnight at destination for another day together the next day. This must be more efficient than the present set up?
As far as allowances go you are so lucky. In the last few years the government have gone from a system where you were given a set amount of cash $60-70 for a night in the US and you could spend it how you want. Many spent it on food and phone calls as it was meant to be but many ate pot noodles and bought mountain bikes and Ipods. It has changed now to a system where you get the same amount but you must provide receipts for any amount over $5. It must all be spent on food or drink (but only 1 alcoholic drink!). If you dont provide receipts for the amount given the difference comes out of your pay. This is tax payers money so with MPs expenses etc things change. Your allowances come from your customers fares.
Only my thoughts
Regards
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When will BASSA realize the "basic salary" argument doesn't cut any ice when everyone in the aviation industry, and now the media and even the public, knows there's a big difference between basic salary and actual gross earnings because of all the extras built into the BA CC payment package.
Incidentally, meal allowances are designed to let you eat down-route; granted it would be a greedy soul who managed to eat all of it but if you're stuck in Scandinavia in the winter, room service is a pretty appealing option so you need to budget for food. Other companies do this on expenses claims but airlines allocate a set amount. The rest is overtime, paid when we work more than a 10 hour day and other odds and sods depending on fleet. Sadly and contrary to popular myth, we are really not talking about a massive amount.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For Gg
Thinking about your last post made me think about how both sides could get what they want without losing face (for lets be honest here, thats what's needed).
How about this? The crew levels stay as they are for a working trial (6 months) with appropriate feedback from both crew and customers to ascertain if there are any routes which need the numbers tweaking. Mostly the trials will succeed, because if LGW already work that crew ratio, then why wouldn't they? If there are any real problems on routes peculiar to LHR then BA will need to look closely at the crewing levels or service offered. That way the Union could say that the imposition is lifted and BA get the number of crew on a flight they want.
Anyone any thoughts on whether that could work?
For Weather map - that depends on whether people handling skills count? As it is about 50% of our new crew are educated to degree level or have medical or language skills so bring more onboard than just coffee pot wielding skills. And now BA even give them an NVQ in Customer Service!
How about this? The crew levels stay as they are for a working trial (6 months) with appropriate feedback from both crew and customers to ascertain if there are any routes which need the numbers tweaking. Mostly the trials will succeed, because if LGW already work that crew ratio, then why wouldn't they? If there are any real problems on routes peculiar to LHR then BA will need to look closely at the crewing levels or service offered. That way the Union could say that the imposition is lifted and BA get the number of crew on a flight they want.
Anyone any thoughts on whether that could work?
For Weather map - that depends on whether people handling skills count? As it is about 50% of our new crew are educated to degree level or have medical or language skills so bring more onboard than just coffee pot wielding skills. And now BA even give them an NVQ in Customer Service!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: England
Posts: 343
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ottergirl, I believe you are long haul what are your views on:
Regards
I have flown long haul as a pilot many times. BA fly to PHX dep at 1500 and arr at 1840 then returning, dep at 2105 arr at 1350. If this was done with only 1 night stop you would still be at the hotel by 2000L ish (time for a few beers and a meal at the Outback or P F Changs) and bed. You could have a decent lie in and still hit the Malls before leaving the hotel at 1830-1900. It would still be the best part of 23 hours off and you would get extra time at home with the family. Yes you lose allowances but BA save money on these and HOTAC costs. This is just an example.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London, England
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ottergirl,
I think that you are in denial about how much some of your old contract WW colleagues can earn. I remember one purser netting £3,800 one month!
It's time that junior crew pushed for a redistribution of wealth and a fair bidding system - but the BASSA fat cats wouldn't want that would they? Of course they will argue that more experience deserves more pay but I don't see too many people at Tescos on £50k after 30 years and look at their job - long, unsociable hours, rude and violent customers, fires, medical emergencies, etc...
Merry Christmas to you all!
I think that you are in denial about how much some of your old contract WW colleagues can earn. I remember one purser netting £3,800 one month!
It's time that junior crew pushed for a redistribution of wealth and a fair bidding system - but the BASSA fat cats wouldn't want that would they? Of course they will argue that more experience deserves more pay but I don't see too many people at Tescos on £50k after 30 years and look at their job - long, unsociable hours, rude and violent customers, fires, medical emergencies, etc...
Merry Christmas to you all!
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
binsleepin
Sorry but I am shorthaul through and through and its been many years since I set foot outside Europe. The only time I've been to PHX was on holiday with a fractious baby so I wouldn't like to say how I'd feel if I'd worked there. When Romans44 or Hiflyer come back on, you can ask them.
Hotwings - thats a scary Tesco you hang out in! Where is it so i give it a miss? I am not in denial about how much WW crew earn but I am realistic to know that I wouldn't want to do their job for even more. The years I did affected my life so badly that I know when I am well off. Truth be told, I am not sure I'd relish managing the WW crew either! Those were long nights slogging back from the West Coast.
If you compare our rank structure with John Lewis then certainly on Eurofleet, there isn't such a huge discrepancy. To be managing a staff of 15, you'd have to be a Department head and after 20+ years service they'd be earning about the same as me (and without having to do 0500 reports). I know I am an old contract CSD but on Eurofleet, that don't amount to much!
Hotwings - thats a scary Tesco you hang out in! Where is it so i give it a miss? I am not in denial about how much WW crew earn but I am realistic to know that I wouldn't want to do their job for even more. The years I did affected my life so badly that I know when I am well off. Truth be told, I am not sure I'd relish managing the WW crew either! Those were long nights slogging back from the West Coast.
If you compare our rank structure with John Lewis then certainly on Eurofleet, there isn't such a huge discrepancy. To be managing a staff of 15, you'd have to be a Department head and after 20+ years service they'd be earning about the same as me (and without having to do 0500 reports). I know I am an old contract CSD but on Eurofleet, that don't amount to much!
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Until you fall over and break a leg that is! Then its 12K and like it! Similarly, if BA choose not to work you and leave you at home 'available' then its back to basic. On Annual Leave, basic again. Standby but not used, you guessed it! The point is, the 12K is the only part you can rely on. Mortgage companies will look at the rest of your payslip but will rarely lend on anywhere near your take home pay because they know it can't be relied on.
nice to see that someone has the facts and not simply rely on what they read on papers.
I believe it was the Daily Mail who reported the grand meal allowances we get on a Narita trip, which by the way I have only flown once since I have been LH, and that is almost 2 years.
Funny how they left out the 80 pounds we get for a 3 day Delhi trip, or the 70 pounds I will get for my east coast stop over tomorrow...Weather permitted, of course or even the 8 pounds you SH people get for an afternoon trip. Funny thing the Dail Mail.
Goodnight everybody, keep the conversation going..
Back in a few days...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The one thing that we ALL have in common on this thread is that we are interested, concerned and indeed passionate about saving BA. If we really do want to save BA, we must draw a line under what's gone on and move forward.
____________________________________________________________ ___ = Line drawn
I fully agree with what Midman said on the first page - the administration and the operation need sorting out. And the administration of the operation definitely needs sorting out.
I also fully agree with Interpreter and the phrase - LET THEM TALK. I try and do that at every opportunity. It isn't always easy because you get the bog standard answers: Price Fixing fines, T5, Openskies etc. It's all managements' fault. You do have to be quite patient and grit your teeth through it all, but I have found that by asking what they hope to achieve etc, they eventually come up with their own observation and say "actually I have lost faith in the Union". It's a basic coaching principle - let them come up with the answer by asking questions.
And of course Henkybaby is right - we need a solution. We can regurgitate about the injunction, legal terminology etc. but it is actually irrelevant now. Another ballot is somewhat pointless and will only serve to distance the public even more (if that's possible) - by the time it is run the court case will be due, and that will be the deciding factor.
So, to move this on, the cabin crew community is now divided into three groups:
A. Those who voted No and resigned from the Union (Welcome to our latest member - GODD!)
B. Those who voted Yes and were horrified (yes horrified at the 12 days of Xmas) and have now LOST FAITH IN THE UNION.
c. The hard core lost cause.
It is difficult to gauge what the percentages of the groups is.
Group C is the cancer - (I make no apologies Lurker - it is a word in the dictionary defined as "something evil or destructive that is hard to contain or eradicate") that will need drastic action.
B. are slowly coming round
A. of course are perfect
The important group are B - as they are not sure what to do now. They need converting into A's - we need to get to work if we want to save this company.
When A group has achieved it's 1000th member,
then we can start our new council, and put Midman's suggestion into practice of being more hands on and involved in day to day operations, without comprising the customers or the business.
We need to work hard and get there quick before this Union causes us to self-destruct.
I am BA cabin crew and the above represents my own view and not that of BA.
____________________________________________________________ ___ = Line drawn
I fully agree with what Midman said on the first page - the administration and the operation need sorting out. And the administration of the operation definitely needs sorting out.
I also fully agree with Interpreter and the phrase - LET THEM TALK. I try and do that at every opportunity. It isn't always easy because you get the bog standard answers: Price Fixing fines, T5, Openskies etc. It's all managements' fault. You do have to be quite patient and grit your teeth through it all, but I have found that by asking what they hope to achieve etc, they eventually come up with their own observation and say "actually I have lost faith in the Union". It's a basic coaching principle - let them come up with the answer by asking questions.
And of course Henkybaby is right - we need a solution. We can regurgitate about the injunction, legal terminology etc. but it is actually irrelevant now. Another ballot is somewhat pointless and will only serve to distance the public even more (if that's possible) - by the time it is run the court case will be due, and that will be the deciding factor.
So, to move this on, the cabin crew community is now divided into three groups:
A. Those who voted No and resigned from the Union (Welcome to our latest member - GODD!)
B. Those who voted Yes and were horrified (yes horrified at the 12 days of Xmas) and have now LOST FAITH IN THE UNION.
c. The hard core lost cause.
It is difficult to gauge what the percentages of the groups is.
Group C is the cancer - (I make no apologies Lurker - it is a word in the dictionary defined as "something evil or destructive that is hard to contain or eradicate") that will need drastic action.
B. are slowly coming round
A. of course are perfect
The important group are B - as they are not sure what to do now. They need converting into A's - we need to get to work if we want to save this company.
When A group has achieved it's 1000th member,
then we can start our new council, and put Midman's suggestion into practice of being more hands on and involved in day to day operations, without comprising the customers or the business.We need to work hard and get there quick before this Union causes us to self-destruct.
I am BA cabin crew and the above represents my own view and not that of BA.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And we're back to money again....
Ottergirl, I'd like to ask you your opinion on getting an hourly pay instead of your current type of allowances. I'm not talking numbers here, it's a hypothetical question. Also, I'd like to ask how you (or anyone else on EF) feels about fixed links. Not necessarily a fixed link between every flight at base, but shorter turn-arounds than currently.
I'd also like for someone from WWLHR to let me know how they feel about hourly pay. For WWLHR it would mean they could get a bidding system, trip pay varies due to length, and possibly sickness would reduce on current "low pay" trips? The system may end up being more fair.
I'd like to re-iterate that I'm not talking numbers at this point, I'm just trying to find out how you would feel about it. I'll be thankful for any answers.
Having read a lot in the last few months, it seems to me that most crew are happy to give up their telephone allowance. Is this true? Is this something you could live without?
I'm just trying to come up with ideas here, where it's more productivity than financial impact. I know for sure that personally, I can't afford a pay cut. As long as the interest rate stay more or less where it is, I can afford a pay freeze. I don't want sympathy, I'm not pulling on the violin strings, I'm just saying it like it is.
More ideas most welcome.
Gg
PS. WeatherMap, with all due respect, can we please behave like adults? I don't agree with everyone here, but we've got to move forward. Thanks.
Ottergirl, I'd like to ask you your opinion on getting an hourly pay instead of your current type of allowances. I'm not talking numbers here, it's a hypothetical question. Also, I'd like to ask how you (or anyone else on EF) feels about fixed links. Not necessarily a fixed link between every flight at base, but shorter turn-arounds than currently.
I'd also like for someone from WWLHR to let me know how they feel about hourly pay. For WWLHR it would mean they could get a bidding system, trip pay varies due to length, and possibly sickness would reduce on current "low pay" trips? The system may end up being more fair.
I'd like to re-iterate that I'm not talking numbers at this point, I'm just trying to find out how you would feel about it. I'll be thankful for any answers.
Having read a lot in the last few months, it seems to me that most crew are happy to give up their telephone allowance. Is this true? Is this something you could live without?
I'm just trying to come up with ideas here, where it's more productivity than financial impact. I know for sure that personally, I can't afford a pay cut. As long as the interest rate stay more or less where it is, I can afford a pay freeze. I don't want sympathy, I'm not pulling on the violin strings, I'm just saying it like it is.
More ideas most welcome.
Gg
PS. WeatherMap, with all due respect, can we please behave like adults? I don't agree with everyone here, but we've got to move forward. Thanks.
Last edited by Glamgirl; 22nd Dec 2009 at 00:28. Reason: adding a ps
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Age: 49
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glamgirl
Hello Glamgirl I am on EF and as far I can gauge:
Most crew would be happy to do fixed links and to be honest I was surprised this was not mooted as a cost saving idea.
I would agree with an hourly rate as the more you work, the more you get paid. And thats why I am kind of against the monthly travel payment as I feel that people who were just doing the early morning domestic there and back would potentially get the same of us who do the 2 day six sector trips etc. If something could be worked out to counteract that I am all ears!
Let me know if you think of anything else
AD
Most crew would be happy to do fixed links and to be honest I was surprised this was not mooted as a cost saving idea.
I would agree with an hourly rate as the more you work, the more you get paid. And thats why I am kind of against the monthly travel payment as I feel that people who were just doing the early morning domestic there and back would potentially get the same of us who do the 2 day six sector trips etc. If something could be worked out to counteract that I am all ears!
Let me know if you think of anything else
AD
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glamgirl
I'd also like for someone from WWLHR to let me know how they feel about hourly pay. For WWLHR it would mean they could get a bidding system, trip pay varies due to length, and possibly sickness would reduce on current "low pay" trips? The system may end up being more fair.
it seems to me that most crew are happy to give up their telephone allowance. Is this true? Is this something you could live without?
The only way this is going to be resolved WITHOUT a major amount of blood on the carpet is for a little humble pie to be eaten. BASSA need to accept the new status quo, and begin a meaningful dialogue about shaping the future careers of cc in BA.
BA need to address the fears of cc about job security (though in the current climate that will be difficult) and try and put the past behaviour of BASSA to one side.
Needless to say this is all IMHO and hasn't a chance of happening.
Time to buy a carpet cleaner.......
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AtlasDrawer,
Thank you for your thoughts. Very interesting, and shines a light in the right direction.
Runway Vacated,
I understand what you're saying, but I'm just trying to move things forward here. We've discussed (and can discuss continuously) until we're blue in the face about who did what and why and where. I haven't forgotten, and I don't expect anyone else to have forgotten either.
I've just reached a stage now where I think there's no point in blaming each other (we've done that in the last 4 threads on this topic). We urgently need to move forward. That's why I'm holding a little survey. Surely that can't be a bad thing?
Gg
(See, Henkybaby, I was listening to you...)
Thank you for your thoughts. Very interesting, and shines a light in the right direction.
Runway Vacated,
I understand what you're saying, but I'm just trying to move things forward here. We've discussed (and can discuss continuously) until we're blue in the face about who did what and why and where. I haven't forgotten, and I don't expect anyone else to have forgotten either.
I've just reached a stage now where I think there's no point in blaming each other (we've done that in the last 4 threads on this topic). We urgently need to move forward. That's why I'm holding a little survey. Surely that can't be a bad thing?
Gg
(See, Henkybaby, I was listening to you...)
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romans44
I'm afraid I need to post my missive again. Have to say though, you're doing yourself few favours by simply picking on slight wording issues in my post. I'll try clarify for you so you can focus on the real point I'm making.
To which you replied...
I also said...
To which you replied....
So what does your first quote mean? You accept that the skillsets are different, never said that pilots and Cabin Crew (and Engineers and Chief Execs?) should all be paid the same, yet, although our IFCE budget is in larger than that of flight Ops "in total", you claim that it is "in comparison" larger in Flight Ops. Yes, pilots get more than CC (you accept), yes pilots are permitted to be remunerated differently to CC (you accept) and also Willie gets more than any pilot and hence (your words and flawed argument) "in comparison", Chief Exec budget is greater than Flight Ops.
Once again, I say that argument is flawed. you accept the differences we've mentioned then immediately bemoan them.
to which you replied....
Virgin ARE a good comparison. As a group we are paid more. See above for when YOU used the GROUP argument and then switch to the INDIVIDUAL argument below.
to which you replied
So I have clarified for you above in bold.
I've also highlighted above the main points in the bit you failed to respond to. These detail exactly why we were asked for more than some other departments. You simply cannot start the "clean slate for everyone, lets all make the same savings" argument again and again. Engineers saved less than pilots, CC are being asked to save more than pilots. MARKET FORCES. CAA stats show us ON AVERAGE well above the market rate. YOU might not be getting that much, I might not be getting that much but ON AVERAGE we are.
The "in comparison" argument (I say again) is obsolete and doesn't hold water - unless you really do want to take a pay cut if/when the pilots/Chief Exec/Engineers/groundstaff do. Are we really all to be making the same savings all the time? Tell me you don't really believe that? If you don't, then "comparison" with other departments has been laid to rest.
Please try and respond to the basic argument this time instead of picking up on wording errors and avoiding the crux of the problem with your stance.
I'm afraid I need to post my missive again. Have to say though, you're doing yourself few favours by simply picking on slight wording issues in my post. I'll try clarify for you so you can focus on the real point I'm making.
Romans44
Quote:
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.
Eh? Our operation costs more overall. Total IFCE costs are more than Flight Ops from the figures you posted.
Quote:
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.
Eh? Our operation costs more overall. Total IFCE costs are more than Flight Ops from the figures you posted.
there are 13000 CC and less than 3000 pilots, it doesn't take much to see that in comparison IFCE costs are less than Flight ops.
Pilots get paid more than CC due to a different skillset and responsibility level.
Totally agree with this, I never once said pilots should be paid less.
So what does your first quote mean? You accept that the skillsets are different, never said that pilots and Cabin Crew (and Engineers and Chief Execs?) should all be paid the same, yet, although our IFCE budget is in larger than that of flight Ops "in total", you claim that it is "in comparison" larger in Flight Ops. Yes, pilots get more than CC (you accept), yes pilots are permitted to be remunerated differently to CC (you accept) and also Willie gets more than any pilot and hence (your words and flawed argument) "in comparison", Chief Exec budget is greater than Flight Ops.
Once again, I say that argument is flawed. you accept the differences we've mentioned then immediately bemoan them.
Market forces dictate the going rate for job "X".
Why compare us with the likes of Easyjet or Virgin and not with the likes of Iberia, Lufthansa, AirFrance?
1. Willie IS to be paid relatively LITTLE for a FTSE100 Chief Exec
2. BA pilots DO get a UK 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.
2. BA pilots DO get a UK 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.
Why is it that , when it comes to pilot, things 'Seem to be' but when it comes to CC things are certain?
For your information my basic pay is just over 12.000. I believe Easyjet basic is higher.
You are comparing old contracts with easyjet.
For your information my basic pay is just over 12.000. I believe Easyjet basic is higher.
You are comparing old contracts with easyjet.
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.
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've also highlighted above the main points in the bit you failed to respond to. These detail exactly why we were asked for more than some other departments. You simply cannot start the "clean slate for everyone, lets all make the same savings" argument again and again. Engineers saved less than pilots, CC are being asked to save more than pilots. MARKET FORCES. CAA stats show us ON AVERAGE well above the market rate. YOU might not be getting that much, I might not be getting that much but ON AVERAGE we are.
The "in comparison" argument (I say again) is obsolete and doesn't hold water - unless you really do want to take a pay cut if/when the pilots/Chief Exec/Engineers/groundstaff do. Are we really all to be making the same savings all the time? Tell me you don't really believe that? If you don't, then "comparison" with other departments has been laid to rest.
Please try and respond to the basic argument this time instead of picking up on wording errors and avoiding the crux of the problem with your stance.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Romans,
I merely presented some simple statistics to show that if Walsh gave up his salary it would have little effect on BA's losses. These are simply numbers. What is there to debate?
Besides which, didn't he work for nothing earlier this year? In which case he has already taken a pay cut.
What has he asked you to sacrifice exactly?
Added: He worked for nothing in July. That means he took an 8.3% cut in salary this year. As you say, every little helps.
Desertia, I won't be dragged into a mathematical debate....
Besides which, didn't he work for nothing earlier this year? In which case he has already taken a pay cut.
What has he asked you to sacrifice exactly?
Added: He worked for nothing in July. That means he took an 8.3% cut in salary this year. As you say, every little helps.
Last edited by Desertia; 22nd Dec 2009 at 05:47.
travelandtrouble
it would just mean that suddenly TLV and BOS become the best trips and SIN/SYD the least popular.
Last edited by wiggy; 22nd Dec 2009 at 06:51. Reason: Added the word "legitimate"!
Join Date: May 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I fnd completely astonishing from A Lurker, Ottergirl, Romans44 etc, is the way they completely ignore all posts from their customers - who are making it very plain that they are walking away from the company AND WON'T BE COMING BACK.
Without your customers you can bleat on about terms and conditions all you like. BA isn't a charity. Without your customers you will have no job. The damage YOU and your Union are doing to BA is getting close to terminal. Lemmings rushing over cliffs is a good analogy.
As was said earlier WAKE UP AND DRINK THE COFFEE. Snide remarks about threats and not drinking coffee are pointless and demonstrate the paucity of your argument. When BA goes down the pan YOU, yes YOU, WILL be unemployed - and unemployable. What company with any modicum of common sense will employ an ex-BA CC?? The first indication of "BA" on the CV, and it will go straight in the bin.
I feel very sorry for the intelligent and sensible among you such as Tiramisu, for they will be tarred with the same brush. For you, I have no sympathy at all. Enjoy the dole, you are likely to be on it a long time (and it is a lot less than £12k pa., and has no added benefits).
Without your customers you can bleat on about terms and conditions all you like. BA isn't a charity. Without your customers you will have no job. The damage YOU and your Union are doing to BA is getting close to terminal. Lemmings rushing over cliffs is a good analogy.
As was said earlier WAKE UP AND DRINK THE COFFEE. Snide remarks about threats and not drinking coffee are pointless and demonstrate the paucity of your argument. When BA goes down the pan YOU, yes YOU, WILL be unemployed - and unemployable. What company with any modicum of common sense will employ an ex-BA CC?? The first indication of "BA" on the CV, and it will go straight in the bin.
I feel very sorry for the intelligent and sensible among you such as Tiramisu, for they will be tarred with the same brush. For you, I have no sympathy at all. Enjoy the dole, you are likely to be on it a long time (and it is a lot less than £12k pa., and has no added benefits).
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Rugby
Posts: 883
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA Logo
There has been much comment on this forum about BASSA's use of an image simulating the raising of the flag at Iwo Jima. Those who think it an appropriate image to use can see the real story of the battle at Iwo Jima on Yesterday TV (in the UK) on Christmas Eve at 7.00am - set the recorder.
Edited to say there is a fuller account on the Military History Channel on Christmas day.
Edited to say there is a fuller account on the Military History Channel on Christmas day.
Last edited by Dawdler; 22nd Dec 2009 at 07:08.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a cabin crew member who voted No and has now resigned from the Union, I would firstly like to thank TrueBlue, TwoToneBlue, PMVW, Henky, Fincastle, Desertia (particularly the threadworm humour) and all the other SLF that take the time to post on here and put their point of view.
We are now trying to find solutions rather than just hash over the same problems,
, and I think the customers should be a part in finding that solution as, after all, they know best. So to that end I have a question for you our (much needed) customers.
What would it take to reassure you that customer service is our priority and what could we the cabin crew do to demonstrate that and make sure that you travel on BA in the future?
Also any advice that you have from the outside world of overpowering this enormous out-of-control monster that is BASSA would be much appreciated.
I would also like to assure you that the attitude of Romans, FlyingChicken, Fume, Lurker, etc is NOT representative of the attitude of cabin crew generally and many of us are truly concerned about the current appalling situation and the damage it has done and would genuinely like to be given the opportunity to show you some of the best customer service in the world.
I am a BA cabin crew member and the above represents my own view and not that of BA.
We are now trying to find solutions rather than just hash over the same problems,
, and I think the customers should be a part in finding that solution as, after all, they know best. So to that end I have a question for you our (much needed) customers.What would it take to reassure you that customer service is our priority and what could we the cabin crew do to demonstrate that and make sure that you travel on BA in the future?
Also any advice that you have from the outside world of overpowering this enormous out-of-control monster that is BASSA would be much appreciated.
I would also like to assure you that the attitude of Romans, FlyingChicken, Fume, Lurker, etc is NOT representative of the attitude of cabin crew generally and many of us are truly concerned about the current appalling situation and the damage it has done and would genuinely like to be given the opportunity to show you some of the best customer service in the world.
I am a BA cabin crew member and the above represents my own view and not that of BA.
ottergirl
I realise this is only one example of cc pay. Yesterday I was visiting a friend,
his wife is a Purser at Lhr on Longhaul 777/747. She is on 50% roster. She retreived her payslips for the last 12 months. We totalled her pay and allowances, approx £24000. If she changed to full time her pay therefore around £48000 pa.
The £50000+ often quoted for a WW CSD seems quite reasonable.
By the way she voted no.
his wife is a Purser at Lhr on Longhaul 777/747. She is on 50% roster. She retreived her payslips for the last 12 months. We totalled her pay and allowances, approx £24000. If she changed to full time her pay therefore around £48000 pa.
The £50000+ often quoted for a WW CSD seems quite reasonable.
By the way she voted no.