Taking each of Duncan’s points in turn:
1. Financially, the monthly travel payment that was on the table before strikes were called was better as it was based on average allowances in the previous year when BA had more high paying routes (ie 2nd NRT, 3rd HKG). The new payment is contractual, which helps if you believe BA would renege on the deal.
2. Willie Walsh had previously offered full restoration of staff travel. This now comes with huge strings attached, including a wholesale restructuring of the branches and a radical overhaul of industrial relations.
3. Not true. The scheme is being extended and will continue, albeit under a different name.
4. Not true. Only uncompleted cases. Those who have appealed to the ET will not be subject to arbitration.
5. Not true. There will be a substantial rebalancing of influence in BA’s favour. For example, BA will no longer require authorisation to activate the Disruption Agreement.
6. Not true. The additional percentage to match the pilots deal is self funding through productivity improvements. This will hopefully also give BA more operational flexibility
7. Can’t comment.
8. BA has always been prepared to do this.
9. BA has always been prepared to do this.
10. BA has always been prepared to do this. Though, with Mixed Fleet and fewer Pursers promotion would be limited. Better performance management of under performers should enhance this however.
What has BA got?
The original cost savings it sought
Mixed Fleet at LHR
A substantial volunteer crew workforce
Some obvious troublemakers out of the door
A complete restructuring of the crew unions and day to day control of its operation
The confidence that never again will BASSA be able to hold a gun at BA’s head and threaten strikes every time BASSA doesn’t get its way.
And on top of all that BASSA think they’ve won. Everyone’s a winner! Everyone’s happy!
Trebles all round!