[Tete_de_cuvee]

Despite not being explicit, there is a high risk of a link being established between the recent ballot and previous one. This linkage could have been exploited.

Despite a large mandate of 78% voting in favour, unless both parties accept that it is best to address this impasse there will be another ballot… drawing the dispute out benefits neither party.

I hope BA realise that even though it is likely there will be a reduction in both the turnout as well as the majority in favour of IA, it is not because the CC are not becoming enamoured with BA, it will be they are becoming increasingly disenchanted with both BASSA and BA

http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/unite_statement_on_british_a-2.aspx

Legal intimidation is not the way to browbeat a crew into being a high performing, highly motivated team with good morale.

[Tete_de_cuvee]

It would appear if BA had tried to negotiate a settlement it would have strengthened their position further.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/feb/08/ba-cabin-crew-strike-ballot-unlawful?INTCMP=SRCH

[Tete_de_cuvee]

Despite the bloviating elsewhere it is not over

http://www.bassa.co.uk/BASSA/DOWNLOADS/ADVERT.PDF

as appearing in a range of newspapers tomorrow.

[Hippocampus]

Another good use of members’ subscription monies! Though, I suppose taking out press ads is the only way for Unite to get this long fizzled out dispute in the press.

There are more holes in the text of that ad then there are in BASSA’s membership records.

Funny Unite never mention exactly why crew were sacked isn’t it?

Damaging company property by pouring milk over crew rest bunks at BKK? The public would be rushing to support you.

Bluster all you like. You’ve lost. You picked the wrong fight at the wrong time. Deal with it and move on.

[Alasdair]

“You’ve lost!” And whom might that make you then?

In my opinion, and that of any balanced contributor – the loser would be a “blue chip” British company like BA who has had a show of nearly 6000 employees from one branch willing to take strike action against it.

And I dare say the majority of the rest making up the 13+ thousand cabin crew have grievances with the product and management also.

I suggest some housekeeping is in order, and what better than renewed negotiation?

[Tete_de_cuvee]

Guesses as to the potential lines/phrases BA may use in a spinning a counter ad…..

“our Crew do a fantastic job and are the best paid in the UK”

..we are willing to sit down and negotiate Unite however have refused to talk to us..

We have de-rostered Bassa reps but they refused

we will run a full longhaul schedule~ (of empty aircraft)

…what dispute ??? there is no dispute !!!

…this is NOT! I repeat NOT! about Union Busting !!

MINORITY maybe even SMALL MINORITY

[Tete_de_cuvee]

BA general manager for regulatory and political affairs Jim Forster
“A further strike is possible.”

http://www.travelweekly.co.uk/Articles/2011/02/11/36086/ba-we-were-ready-for-a-long-battle-with-cabin-crew.html

Note some of the comments with people in the US not booking due to the uncertainty.

With hundreds of cases going through the courts Cabin Crew view this as a fight for their survival, their careers – as such they will see it through.

Note also the mendacious” only 43% voted” for the strike comment …. this happens to be double the amount who voted for the conservatives at this latest election.

[Hippocampus]

Tête_de_Cuvée

Lie after lie after lie….

It was BASSA that sought a mandate for “NO NEGOTIATION” based on a show of hands at one of its tub thumping branch meetings.

It was BASSA and CC89 that would not sit in the same room as each other (awkward things court judgments aren’t they?).

It is BASSA and CC89 that can’t even agree on what they want from BA.

It was Unite that shook hands on a deal with BA, claimed it is the best that can be achieved and then reneged on a promise to put it to the membership.

It was BASSA that unlitaterally terminated the Facilities Agreement. As such, there is no agreement with BA for derostering the reps.

BA under-promised and over-delivered on its strike schedule last time round with many flights being reinstated.

First of all Unite claimed that the schedule was worthy of an entry for The Booker Prize. Then when flights were operating, Unite claimed that flights were taking off and landing again (do you really think ATC would agree to that!?). Now it is claimed they will be empty (only positioning flights/cargo only flights will be empty.

If BA claims it will operate a full long-haul schedule, it will do so.

BA’s traffic numbers are up strongly (particularly long-haul transatlantic and the all important premium traffic) so the impact on forward bookings is almost neglible.

The fact is a minority voted for a strike action. From BASSA’s perspective that is the number that matters. No voters/non-voters/non-union members who will all not support a strike are in the majority. History has shown that a vote to strike by cabin crew is not always followed up by withdrawal of labour.

[Tete_de_cuvee]

The fact is over 78% voted for a strike.
The fact is BA helped establish CC89 as an alternative to BASSA, so until recently BASSA has always been guarded in its interactions with CC89 who were initially backed by BA.
The fact is BA have not issued a definition of when a scheduled flight is deamed cancelled –
….Flies but with no passengers?
….Merged with other flights?
….Withdrawn but with advance notification?

BA assert X% of cabin crew reporting for duty. No basis is provided – does that include VCC, internationals… it is so easy to spin the numbers – witness the mendacious 43% number.

Legal-led BA is good at semantics – We don’t want to break BASSA – define break, neuter? what degree of ineffectiveness is acceptable to BA?

If the deal was acceptable surely the result would not have seen 78% voting for IA. Connotations of Robert the Bruce perhaps?

How often has BA refused to negotiate? Given the litigious nature of the lawyer led leadership am suprised they have not issued writs of slander and/or libel to counter the alleged erroneous assertions made by unite… especially with respect to bullying and intimidation in this document

http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/shock_findings_confirm_culture.aspx

The fact is less than 12% voted against a strike – which is half the number the conservatives had in the last election.

The fact is BA has a history of dirty tricks

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Dirty-Tricks-British-Airways-Atlantic/dp/0753504588/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1297625261&sr=1-3

…Virgin Atlantic became one of the world’s top airlines only after surviving an incredible dirty tricks campaign by British Airways. Award Winning investigative jounalist Martyn Gregory exposed BA’s secret war, and he reveals the full story in Dirty Tricks….

spin.. semantics… dirty tricks

[Hippocampus]

Same tired old lies.

BASSA has spun the line that CC89 was a creation/an arm of BA management for years. Now it is doing the same with the PCCC.

Flight schedules were published days before the strikes. Those published flights all operated with additional flights reinstated to position for inbound flights.

Only 4,900 crew went on strike, with a further 600 returniing to work. Many VCC were stood down and sent home.

There have been plenty of things said by Duncan Holley about the company and its management that BA could sue for defamation. It may well sue or decide that it simply isn’t worth it – not least because hardly anyone is interested in the dispute anymore. I hope for DH’s sake that BA do not decide to sue.

BA has been more than patient with BASSA and Unite. Both BASSA and Unite have shown no willingness to negotiate in good faith.

[Tete_de_cuvee]

Hippo – your turn on the naughty stool. Research is good, try to avoid bellicose rhetoric…

“BA had been intent on destroying the TGWU’s presence in favour of the ‘promanagement’ Cabin Crew ’89, a union clearly modelled on the breakaway Union of Democratic Mineworkers of the mid-1980s and formed at Ayling’s behest when he was Director of Human Resources. Senior management had even formed a clandestine grouping known as the Miners’ Group with express battle plans to break the TGWU in the same way that the National Union of Mineworkers had been effectively broken during the 1984–85 pit strike.61 Yet BA’s actions had the reverse effect, increasing cabin crew unionisation across the sector. In this sense, BA scored an own goal: it had built
its reputation on the quality of its service – indeed, it had just launched its Customer First programme – and this had been temporarily destroyed. As one analyst put it, with few flights in operation, ‘BA just announced a new, friendlier-than-ever, better-than-ever service. In the wake of that, to not have staff who are providing this service is where the damaging point lies.’62 The dispute cost Ayling his job, the airline £125 million and probably played a major part in the collapse of BA’s share price from over 750p in 1996 to below 300p in early 2000.”

‘Labor battle clouds BA’s effort at friendlier skies’, World Airline News 7 (27), 4 July 1997,
at http://www.tc.gc.ca/aviation/news, visited June 2000.
Manchester University Press.
S. Milne, ‘The battle of British Airways’, Guardian, 14 July 1997.
B. Clement, ‘BA on war footing as staff vote to strike’, Independent, 26 June 1997. http://www.economist.com/node/370513 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1467-8330.00322/abstract

[Hippocampus]

CC89 was formed by crew who were dissatisfied with the militancy of BASSA at the time. Remember the “champagne strike” of 1989?

Just as the PCCC was formed by crew who had the foresight to see what BASSA is doing to its membership.

The notion that this dispute is all about union busting is purely to instil fear (just as the entirely false claims that BA wants to force all crew on to Mixed Fleet) and give an appallingly handled dispute an ongoing narrative.

[Tete_de_cuvee]

It is also a Burke group tactic to divide and rule.

Another great diversionary tactic endorsed by BA to give PCCC credibility…

I wonder if BA will give the same publicity to Shareholders wishing to sack WW?

[Tete_de_cuvee]

From BA accounts – in the year prior to WW joining BA flew 36,103,000 pax. In the last fincancial year 31,817,000 pax a 12% drop.

Walsh has halved the share price.

Walsh has paid one dividend of 5p per share.

Walsh has had his salary increased by 37%

As long as the dispute goes on BA will lose revenues from Pax not booking due to uncertainty, BA will retain excess capacity, retain an expensive team of legal advisors and PR – all wasting money when they could resolve this dispute at minimal monetary cost… just cost to their macho, bullying egos

BA will not target other groups within the company as it cannot fight on two fronts … though it should take advantage of the surplus of pilots in the market to implement cuts in pay, t&c for mixed fleet pilots as it has done with Cabin Crew.

Morale and motivation will remain at an all time low throughout the company.

For the legacy crew they will fight on for their careers, for most of WW team it is a job or a project. The passion of the CC will ensure this dispute will continue for a long while – they have nothing to lose.

[Hippocampus]

More spurious use of numbers.

The numbers have fallen over that period because BA sold its regional operation BA Connect to FlyBe and chose not to buy out franchise partners, BMED and GB Airways. Any fool can fill a plane. Running an airline is not about chasing passenger numbers.

The sole reason why this dispute is continuing is because of the inability of BASSA to negotiate in good faith. Your comments about the pilots are straight from the BASSA textbook of obsfucation and scare mongering. And do you know where there is a massive surplus of 777 pilots with sufficient hours.

And on Willie, let’s look at his achievements:

– First cross border merger with IB after many aborted attempts (KLM etc)
– Transatlantic anti trust immunity with AA (with minimal concessions demanded)
– Resolution of the pensions deficit (where Unite would not let BASSA get involved)
– Successful negotiation of new ground staff working practices
– Huge improvements in punctuality and baggage handling post T5
– Successful restructuring of LGW operation where it is now poised to
expand
– First CEO to stand up to BASSA with the full support of the rest of the company, the City, the media (Socialist Worker excepted) and the vast majority of the public
– Stabilisation of the company through the near collapse of the banking system and global recession
– Significant expansion of Oneworld (S7, Kingfisher etc)

That’s pretty good I’d say. And now with traffic on the up and financial results improving we’re seeing renewed investment in the fleet and the products (both soft and hard).

BA is in pretty good shape. If some BASSAmentalists do not want to part of that, then that’s fine. They should know where the exits are.

[Author]

Posts