28th May 2014 at 22:11 #529522
Anonymous28th May 2014 at 22:11 #529523
A little birdy whispers in my ear that all is not well with the poor darlings of mixed fleet and that they are contemplating industrial action.
Ah bless, just a few years ago these blue eyed guys and gals were going to be the future of BA, but now it seems that the toxic combo of insane rosters and Tesco level pay is catching up.29th May 2014 at 05:47 #529524
And which credible birds tells you this, Jacques Hylkema? Frank van der Post? Willie? Enquiring minds want to know.29th May 2014 at 09:40 #529525
Good question Stephen, as if it is true it could cause a lot of us issues with upcoming travel, so RumorMerchant please advise further!29th May 2014 at 09:46 #529526
Appears that the OP created the handle specifically for this thread.
Obviously a rebirth of a previous poster… without a reference, these alarmist posts should be deleted…29th May 2014 at 10:20 #529527
I totally agree with Martyn.
Instead of saying that a little birdy told him, the poster should say where the information has come from so that we can have some idea as to whether or not the information is in any way credible.
Regular posters on here know that I am no great defender of all things BA but nor am I one of the ‘I hate BA brigade’ either but i really dislike any sort of rumours being spread about any organization without there being some way of checking the voraciy of the statement that is being made.
Matyn, i hope you and yours are all well?29th May 2014 at 10:33 #529528
I’ve not heard rumours of industrial action (in fact I believe only a minority of MF crew have union membership) but it is true that MF crew are not happy about a number of issues – although this isn’t particularly anything new.
I think a lot of this has stemmed from BA underestimating the desires of most MF crew – it transpires that most DO want a long term career with BA although of course this is not the model BA wants MF to follow. I think the time is approaching where those that have been on MF since the beginning have been around a few years now and they are realising that their loyalty isn’t being rewarded – not in terms of increased pay or better terms anyway.
Add to that the realisation setting in that despite working from the same base on the same aircraft in the same uniform as their ‘legacy’ colleagues their take home pay is around 40% less for 20% more work.
BA also backtracked on an agreement with Mixed Fleet that was important to them – trip durations. While BA was not prepared to budge on pay or days off at home per month for MF it did allow once concession – that any route that transfers from legacy fleet to MF would retain the same time off downroute. Although they have now gone back on this as the latest route transfer (CPT) showed. BA only roster MF one night in CPT vs 2 for legacy fleet. This did not go down well at all.29th May 2014 at 10:33 #529529
The language used is suspiciously familiar to well a loved poster, and agreed, not a very responsible comment to make unless of course it can be substantiated by at the very least showing us some smoke.
So since the comment hasn’t even generated smoke ,we can all no doubt conclude there is no fire.
And fire is the appropriate word here, most mixed fleet probably don’t have the legal right to strike !29th May 2014 at 10:44 #529530
Good morning everyone. I too had rather taken the same line with the OP until I stumbled upon the following on the “Independent” website. It’s the third paragraph from the end of the story:
As RFerguson has shown, MF T&Cs are such that they earn, to all intents and purposes, one-half of legacy crew. The same approach is now being employed with ground staff who are earning less, in real terms, than when I had my Summer job with British Airtours at LGW several decades ago.
In common with most members of the Directocracy, WW appears perfectly happy with “don’t do as I do, just do as I say…!” when taking substantial extra sums by way of bonuses and pension top-ups. There really is nothing like a dose of “we’re all in this together…” to motivate the proletariat on the shop floor.29th May 2014 at 11:36 #529531
Not an expert at employment law, but as I suggested above, unfortunately MF have predictably made themselves victims of their own making. And as such have fallen straight into BA managements “Lump it or Leave it” philosophy of managing employee relations.
Ultimately if rferguson is right about BA back tracking on agreements (and there is no reason to assume otherwise) then it just goes to prove that old adage about spots and leopards.
And if you’re correct in your assertion about earning less than you did in your summer job decades ago, then I find BA and other companies that are rushing to make us 3rd world employees quite repugnant. Especially when they trot out the tried and tested “ We must be competitive in this global world” making it OK to treat employees like a Chai Wallah in a Mumbai Call Centre rather than a valued colleague that is the face of their organization…… all very sad if the article is correct.29th May 2014 at 13:53 #529532
The story is also mentioned here
Although it is a sign post to the Independent.
I like BA as an airline, but if the allegations about pay are true, it leaves a bad taste in the mouth.29th May 2014 at 14:19 #529533
rferguson – 29/05/2014 10:33 GMT
Not heard any rumours at all regarding a planned strike. Would be very surprised.
1. There are not enough of them in the Union
2. There is a Non BA Forum for BA Crew that has many thousands of posters. If there was even a slight mention , it would usually be on there in an instant and it isn’t.29th May 2014 at 14:59 #529534
An excerpt from above link
The narration states: “The hiring of a younger, cheaper cabin crew has been a strategic success for the company. With thousands of eager applicants, the airline can afford to be strict.”
Sounds like BA recruitment want to have their cake and eat it. I’m presuming that by proclaiming that they can be strict they mean that they can hire candidates of a high quality. This is a perfectly reasonable policy as it should result in a highly motivated, educated and aspirational group of people. .
And there is the inherent failing in BA’s recruitment; those same people who have successfully passed BA’s strict criteria will have realized the true value of their qualities to BA, shortly after their probation. People will any degree of self worth and common sense will take the time it takes to pass their probation to become aware of the mixed messages coming from management.
“You’re really important to us as a business hence the reason why we recruited somebody of your calibre, now here’s some dung to shovel “
If this is a deliberate policy, then it’s incredibly short sighted as well as incredibly difficult hiring policy to maintain successfully. As a business what you save in wages and other on going costs you spend on continuous recruitment and training.
It also reeks of a business that see’s its workforce as a cost centre rather than an investment.
As an outsider I’ll also suggest that handbag and rferguson are totally correct. The nature of people who make up MF are more likely to quit or just put up with their crappy T & C’s doing as little as they can as they have no real passionor loyalty for the company. People who strike are normally passionate about the relationship they have for the company and want their dispute/issues acknowledged & resolved by management !29th May 2014 at 16:07 #529535
I believe where BA’s Mixed Fleet recruitment is wrong is that BA has gone from paying the most in the industry to the least – pretty much overnight.
It is no surprise that very few leave other airlines to come to BA – as they will earn less take home pay and work more. I know for a fact that a full time crew member at Easyjet will take home more than one at BA employed on a Mixed Fleet contract.
I totally understand the rationale to recruit on new T&C’s and pay (as many many other airlines have also done). But it’s such a drastic race to the bottom which I think is a bad move – by that I am not taking a shot at the great hardworking people that BA are employing but more so the BA ‘deal’ they are offering.29th May 2014 at 16:08 #529536
I forget who it was from amongst the excellent coterie of in-house BA posters that stated Vueling’s view on recruitment and retention: they did not want cabin-crew to stay much beyond 18-24 months (if my recollection is correct). Is that now BA’s HR management’s view of its MF as well?
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.