British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only)
cldrvr
I don't think it works that way round. I imagine that an employee would have to raise a grievance first, then if that failed, take the matter to tribunal.
I agree that all sorts of non contractual benefits get removed, but it would be applied to all, not as a punishment for a sub group. From what I have read, you should suffer no detriment for taking part in union activities. What I am not sure on is whether union activities includes strike action.
I agree that all sorts of non contractual benefits get removed, but it would be applied to all, not as a punishment for a sub group. From what I have read, you should suffer no detriment for taking part in union activities. What I am not sure on is whether union activities includes strike action.
cldrvr
Action short of dismissal TULR(C)A, s 146.
Every worker has the right not to be subject to any detriment........
....for the purpose of deterring him from taking part in activities of an independent trade union.
Every worker has the right not to be subject to any detriment........
....for the purpose of deterring him from taking part in activities of an independent trade union.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: MAN
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Activities for union duties are duties that a rep would have to fulfill, not the strike action of the general workforce.
Quote:
An employee has the right not to have action short of dismissal taken against him as an individual by his employer for the purpose of— (a) preventing or deterring him from being or seeking to become a member of an independent trade union, or penalising him for doing so,
(b) preventing or deterring him from taking part in the activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time, or penalising him for doing so, or
(c) compelling him to be or become a member of any trade union or of a particular trade union or of one of a number of particular trade unions.
Quote:
An employee has the right not to have action short of dismissal taken against him as an individual by his employer for the purpose of— (a) preventing or deterring him from being or seeking to become a member of an independent trade union, or penalising him for doing so,
(b) preventing or deterring him from taking part in the activities of an independent trade union at an appropriate time, or penalising him for doing so, or
(c) compelling him to be or become a member of any trade union or of a particular trade union or of one of a number of particular trade unions.
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fabio 747, you wrote:
BASSA members must realise that BA have the right to manage BA and that includes the disciplinary process which was agreed by Unite. You are entitled to your view but it is my view that using ACAS to settle internal disciplinaries would be totally inappropriate. It is wrong to imply that threatening people and damaging cars is acceptable because the atmosphere is poisoned. I won't go into who poisoned it.
I'm not sure which instance you are talking about. I know of one 2 weeks week when a stewardess swiped in but never appeared in her briefing room. She was found and admitted she was a striker. Her ID card was confiscated and she was escorted off the premises having had a good look at all the non-strikers in CRC. If that was the incident you were referring to I think that was a sensible approach by BA.
Just remember this whole strike business kicked off because you were asked to work one down. Unlike other departments there was no pay cut. Can you not see what an overreaction the strike was?
These are my views and not those of my employer
Regarding the suspensions etc. I think there was an over reaction by BA (due to the current dispute and the poisoned atmosphere). I think a sensible approach was to have a third party (ACAS) involved in some the disciplinary hearings
I do not think that escorting out a cabin crew member from the CRC before a briefing and in front of the whole crew community was a very sensible and respectful approach by BA, especially if the outcome was nothing!
Just remember this whole strike business kicked off because you were asked to work one down. Unlike other departments there was no pay cut. Can you not see what an overreaction the strike was?
These are my views and not those of my employer
cldrvr
But s 168 and s 170 specifically apply to union duties.
I am in no way saying that I am right, it would be for the courts to decide. I have been looking, but have not found any case law that mirrors this action by BA. I imagine that Unite are nervous of pursuing this, because if it is found to be an acceptable action against taking industrial action, the precedent would have been set.
I am in no way saying that I am right, it would be for the courts to decide. I have been looking, but have not found any case law that mirrors this action by BA. I imagine that Unite are nervous of pursuing this, because if it is found to be an acceptable action against taking industrial action, the precedent would have been set.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: in a house
Posts: 131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what reason?
I suppose that if is was bringing the company's name into disrepute, you could argue it, but it would then be a matter of discipline again.
Maybe it would be the right to manage, although whether that is an actual right, or just terminology, I don't know.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the policy contained a statement (I do not know if it does or does not) that it can be removed at any time from anybody for whatever reason, then I would agree again.
Staff travel is a non-contractual and discretionary benefit granted at the sole discretion of BA and as such can be withdrawn or varied at the sole discretion of the Company at any time.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: MAN
Posts: 769
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no discrimination case, there are several different T&C's among the CC's different fleet, different bases. There is precedent within BA for different conditions and pay. There is no UK law preventing removal of non contractual perks from employee groups, as there is no UK law stating that all employees have to have the same T&C's.
The only case BASSA could have is to fight for implied contractual obligation, but that has been overturned several times by the Appeals Court since 2007. BA has some great sollicitors that I am sure have researched this thoroughly before WW made the announcement.
The only case BASSA could have is to fight for implied contractual obligation, but that has been overturned several times by the Appeals Court since 2007. BA has some great sollicitors that I am sure have researched this thoroughly before WW made the announcement.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Posted by Fabio747
TIRAMISU: If I may I think it is a bit naive believing that commuting cabin crew did come to work to keep the flag flying and not to lose Staff Travel...?? I am sure that being a EF CSD you perfectly know the numbers of commuters in BA.
TIRAMISU: If I may I think it is a bit naive believing that commuting cabin crew did come to work to keep the flag flying and not to lose Staff Travel...?? I am sure that being a EF CSD you perfectly know the numbers of commuters in BA.
Where and when please did I ever say that commuters came to work to keep the flag flying?
You said:
The main reason why most of my colleagues went to work was not to keep the flag flying but to KEEP the STAFF TRAVEL
The main reason why most of my colleagues went to work was not to keep the flag flying but to KEEP the STAFF TRAVEL
My reply:
Not true. That is not the reason why I went to work.
Not true. That is not the reason why I went to work.
PS: I also should have said came to work instead of went.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is no discrimination case.
Under UK Employment Law, discrimination only exists on the basis of disability, age, religion or belief, race, gender or sexual orientation.
As it would be impossible to argue that ST was taken away on the basis of one of the above, there is no discrimination case.
If BASSA/Unite started using the law (ideally UK Employment law
) as the basis of the arguments instead of stuff they dream up in their heads, then they may begin to understand where they have gone wrong.
Under UK Employment Law, discrimination only exists on the basis of disability, age, religion or belief, race, gender or sexual orientation.
As it would be impossible to argue that ST was taken away on the basis of one of the above, there is no discrimination case.
If BASSA/Unite started using the law (ideally UK Employment law
) as the basis of the arguments instead of stuff they dream up in their heads, then they may begin to understand where they have gone wrong.
UK employment law is a constantly evolving process, based on statute and common law. If the removal of a benefit as a punitive action for taking industrial action, then I imagine it would need to be tested at tribunal. As I said in a previous post, I cannot find any case law to show whether action has been taken or not.
There are statutory acts that outline discrimination, but you also have common law, that is just as valid.
There are statutory acts that outline discrimination, but you also have common law, that is just as valid.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because they were wrong.
Join Date: May 2010
Location: uk
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Enough!!
Enough!!
All this belly aching about ST is getting really boring
Commuter or not, you made your decisions - live with them!
Seems as though everybody has forgotten what the dispute is about.
If indeed, it is really about anything.
I am not so sure.
All this belly aching about ST is getting really boring
Commuter or not, you made your decisions - live with them!
Seems as though everybody has forgotten what the dispute is about.
If indeed, it is really about anything.
I am not so sure.
If what you say is correct, then I imagine they would have a case.