83.2% Vote for Industrial Action

“What is bringing BA to it’s knees (even though it clearly is not, after a round of bonus payouts and pay increases) is a management which has subjected the company to over £130million in lost income due to inevitable strike action by it’s disgruntled front line staff.

If they were bothered about the brands reputation and profit margins then they would accept their cost savings objectives have been met and move on.”

This is something of a non-sequitor.

The original strike was about the “imposition” of changes to crewing levels in order to achieve savings.

If these changes are now accepted by crew then has Unite dropped all litigation against the company (last public statement was that they were seeking leave to appeal to The Supreme Court in spite of having already lost twice at The High Court and Court of Appeal)?

Do crew now accept that the original strikes (which have caused so many of the subsequent grievances – sacking crew who poured milk over the bunks at BKK etc) were a complete waste of time and that BASSA’s approach to industrial relations has been deeply divisive (over 3,500 crew have now left the union) and completely misguided?

And as for all this self-pitying drivel about BA “beating down” its crew let’s remember that:

– All other work groups achieved agreed cost savings because they negotiated with BA. BASSA and CC89 didn’t – this is undisputed evidence before both the High Court and Court of Appeal.

– BASSA and CC89 were unable to present any evidence to the High Court and Court of Appeal that the crewing changes were detrimental to crew.

– BASSA had every opportunity to agree on the implementation of Mixed Fleet but blew it.

– Crew have also had a) no cuts in pay b) no changes to the absurdly complicated and expensive to administer system of allowances (one down payments, Back to Back payments, destination payments etc), c) no changes to the restrictive and inflexible rostering of EuroFleet and Worldwide fleets, d) no changes to the system of pay increments.

Other BA workgroups have undergone far more substantial and far reaching reforms to working practices without all hell breaking loose.

As for morale, the biggest improvement to morale has nothing to do with management. Rather crew and their union representatives should stop winding each other up with a daily diet of lies and half-truths designed only to spread fear and create mistrust.

@Alasdair

In all my working life I have only ever seen two other ‘management union’ crises’ .. the minors, and ‘Eddie Shah & Grundig’.

The situation is becoming intractable as so many other issues arise as time goes on eg losing non contractual perk flights for striking.

Senior BA cabin crew are the highest paid in the industry.

Staff should not be able to hold a business to ransom .. if they don’t like working for BA, seek employment elsewhere. This is not going to happen as these BA militants can’t earn more with another carrier.

Alasdair

what possible benefit is there for BA to have a non-unionised workforce of 13,500 employees ? The company needs to deal with items like pay, pensions, health & safety, etc. with this body of people. With no union in place, it places a larger administrative burden on the company. BA would want to operate collective bargaining on pay. Dealing with that number of staff on an individual basis would be a nightmare. Moreover, since cabin crew form the single largest block of workers in the company, if BA were truly on a union busting ticket, wouldn’t it make greater sense to pilot such an approach with a smaller unionised group of workers ? Don’t recall them doing that though.

This whole ‘BA is out to bust unions’ propaganda is being put forward to hide the inadequacies of a couple of union branches that are well beyond their sell-by date. BASSA were told several years ago that their financial controls were appalling. They’ve been in breach of Unite rules on more than one occassion. They’ve been run by a handful of people who have a financial interest in not settling this dispute. The branch secretary by his own admission was pocketing over £25,000 as a ‘honorarium’ from members subs whilst he was working for BA. Incidentally, he could have been taking around £55,000 and may well have since being sacked for failing to work. Now, given that once this dispute is over, his tenure on the role of branch secretary will come to an end (and with it that nice ‘honorarium’) , don’t you think he might just want to string this out as long as possible ?

As far as instilling fear into cabin crew goes, you don’t believe that a bunch of harpies screeching ‘shame on you scabbin’ crew’ from an open top bus at anyone in a BA uniform is intimidatory ? You think that the bile that has been heaped on any who don’t toe the party line on strikes is just ‘playful banter’. You condone the threats made on other staff members. The hate mail. If cabin crew have been fearful of management it is because they management have shown what can happen if they start applying the rules. The vast majority of cabin crew who work normally have nothing to worry about . The backsliders, the ones who attempt to wangle every possible additional payment for the minimum amount of effort (every organisation has one or two) are the ones who need to be concerned. With a new keen fleet in place, the poor performance of some long serving members is being highlighted. Time to shape up, or ship out.

Let’s be plain. BA management have been pretty successful in drawing BASSA’s claws specifically because they have acted in a professional and business-like manner throughout. They haven’t stooped to the childish tantrums that have personified BASSA’s responses to date.

I find it very revealing that the clinical psychologist who is facilitating at present is described as ‘acting as a “long-term relationship builder”‘ That would suggest to me that Unite recognise that they will not be getting much if anything new from the talks to date and that they will have to settle for what is currently on the table. Thus there would be a need to rebuild relationships not only between striking and non-striking cabin crew as well as establishing positive working relationships between the cabin crew representatives and their local management.

As BA is preparing for a relaunch it would necessitate resolution of the dispute with Cabin Crew else just papering over the cracks…

http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/news/1064973/British-Airways-prepares-relaunch-put-brand-back-map/

… note the final line

“A BA spokeswoman said: ‘We are working on the relaunch of the BA brand, first internally with our staff, then later in the year as an ad campaign.’

Came across this article. http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2011/04/13/36833/easter-royal+wedding+double+whammy+boosts+bookings.html

The stats are interesting, but more telling is a little comment towards the end, I quote

‘A minority of potential travellers over Easter 2010 may have postponed departures because of strikes by British Airways cabin crew.’

Note the words minority, potential and may. Sounds like the bulk of the travelling public are undeterred by Unite’s talk of strikes. Of course it remains to be seen how many of them will be travelling on BA flights, but the auguries sound promising.

Unlikely to be down to any third party. More likely to be down to a realisation that Unite have backed themselves into a corner and now have no real options. The key items under discussion and the noises about what would be required to settle look awfully like the offer that was hammered out by Willie Walsh and Tony Woodley last October. The deal that never got voted on by the Unite membership because the branch executives turned it down.

Sounds like a ‘good cop/bad cop’ routine has been done by Walsh and Williams and Unite have succumbed. In reality, this is the only outcome that makes sense from a union perspective. The branches have made such a pig’s ear of the ballots, including every possible grievance but linking it to the previous ballot, that the union cannot take strike action without fear of legal action that might divest them of a substantial amount of cash. Len doesn’t want to be seen to back a failure, so will be looking for a way out that keeps his reputation intact.

There is an interesting note in the joint statement ‘a new working relationship with the local representatives;’ Could this be code for the disbandment of BASSA and CC89 and the creation of a single branch to represent all cabin crew ?

Pilots bless their hearts are the most likely to come off worst from their behaviour in this dispute.

They have just shot themselves in the foot. Pilots found time and energy to work as cabin crew but now the little darlings are claiming they are too tired to work …

http://www.skyport-heathrow.co.uk/2011/04/the-big-interview-balpa-genera.html

They are not known for their altruistic tendancies and had hoped to get to the front of the queue for staff travel – now not happening.

They had hoped to get financial reward by an uplift in their pay-off BA shares – The value, it went down.

They are no mates Nigel on long trips now as cabin crew exclude them from down-route socialising.

The TUC are apparently waiting on BALPA’s boss to respond to charges of misrepresentation and BALPA breaking core union tenets – maybe an expulsion of BALPA from the TUC?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jan/28/ba-unite-tuc-brendan-barber-attacks-balpa-leader

Pilots had threatened Industrial Action several times over recent years. The threat yielded a resolution. As there is now a surfeit of pilots, the ability of them to threaten effective industrial action has deteriorated significantly. They will no longer get one iota of, the previously guaranteed, support from the cabin crew who would not have crossed Pilot picket lines. Next time CC will be surging across Pilot’s picket lines – a fact am sure WW will appreciate.

The pilot’s obloquy and backstabbing has yielded little gain, compromised their future negotiation power, impacted passenger safety and created a toxic legacy which will continue long after the CC dispute is settled.

Looks like a case of appalling union leadership to me.