[JohnPhelanAustralia]

“Once BA finally accept that they are not going to succeed in destroying us ….”

uhhh, hello ……… Duncan, YOU have succeeded in destroying yourself. The really sad bit is that you can’t even see that whatever power you might once have had is already gone …….

[VintageKrug]

Chairman Holley’s latest rant.

Is it just me who thinks he should seek medical help urgently? I can imagine this diatribe delivered on youtube, in the style of one of those subtitled”Hilter rants”:

———————

It is clear that Willie Walsh and the Board members of BA who appointed him, are out of control. They represent the worst excesses of Capitalism not seen since the banking disaster. Where the banks got involved in a crooked exploitation of the financial system, BA has sought to profit through rigging fuel surcharges and cargo pricing. In both cases, British Airways has been heavily fined on either sides of the Atlantic, and as far away as Australia. Yet apart from one fall-guy, a hapless BA senior manager by the name of Keith Packer, who was jailed in the USA for 8 months over cargo price fixing, no other senior members of British Airways have taken responsibility for their illegal actions and activity. There is absolutely no doubt that the Board of British Airways and the Leadership Team, have made some disastrous decisions and the company has suffered through fines and huge losses, plus over £1bn lost in inappropriate fuel hedging positions. The negative publicity for British Airways and the damage sustained to the brand and the companies image, is unimaginable

A “dictatorship in a democracy”, why? Because Willie Walsh has been recruited by the Board of British Airways, not because of his business acumen or previous success as a CEO, he was hired because he is willing and able to say and do absurd things.

He started in this vein as a union rep for IALPA, where he was quoted as saying: “in negotiations, you get nowhere by being reasonable”. He has tried to orchestrate a’coup d’etat’ on the unions in BA and BASSA in particular, using the recent recession as an excuse to drive down wages and conditions of ordinary employees in the airline, whilst his own pay and that of his co-directors soars.

Willie Walsh represents as the CEO of British Airways, greed, exploitation and failure. He failed at Aer Lingus in his attempt to organise a Management Buy Out, he failed the airline by putting it in the low cost model and he failed to leave Aer Lingus in a viable state. He has also failed at British Airways. Industrial relations are the worst in the companies history, the share price is depressed because of his actions, and rather than riding high out of the recession, there is a sense of doom amongst employees at the airline. You hear it from the engineers who haven’t got the spares or manpower to fix the planes, you hear it from the ground staff who struggle to deal with the volumes of customers as their own numbers are reduced and you hear it from the cabin crew.

It appears that the Board and LT of British Airways have great instincts for personal profit, but have no values or concern for the majority of staff that generate those profits, and who now work harder for the same money, or less in some cases. Where are the profit sharing schemes for ordinary employees in BA? When was the last Share Save scheme?

BA’s cabin crew are being victimised solely for the profit motive. And we tacitly accept this “dictatorship” every time we turn up for work. What is worse, is that we have seen in our own dispute Capitalism trumping democracy. Democratic ballots for industrial action, have been overturned by the friends of Capitalism in the High Court. Judges who are supposed to use common sense and intellect in their deliberations, have cast aside legitimate and lawful democratic ballots because of flimsy technicalities. That is where we are as a democracy in the United Kingdom and it stinks. Unscrupulous employers use this avenue to fight a dispute that they have deliberately created though imposition, using High Court judges to bust unions.

And in this warped void of a capititalistic society that people like Willie Walsh congregate, it is perfectly acceptable to make people poor. Witness the Mid Fleet. No agreement there to work to, only a “framework”. No decent wages or conditions, just exploitation of unemployed people or others, who thought that BA is an honourable employer and things ‘will get better’. But the fact is that MF should be a glaring example of what life would be like in BA, without union representation. For all those crew who went to work during the dispute, this ultimately will be your reward.

Our dispute with Willie Walsh has now evolved. This is not about imposition and the false premise for that reduction in crew complements that BA was in a “fight for survival”, this dispute is now a revolt against management greed, incompetence, bullying and harassment. It is a defining moment.

Are you prepared as decent people to allow this dictatorship in a democracy to continue? Is it right that you are coerced and bullied into accepting inferior pay and conditions, AFTER the company has turned the corner and is once again, as predicted, making substantial profits? Is it right that your democratically elected union representatives and your union, are trampled over by the mantra, ego and dogmatism of one person? Is it right that colleagues have been suspended and sacked just for supporting the dispute?

Then it is your duty to vote NO at the next ballot.

——————–

Um, that would be the bonus and sharesave scheme that BASSA itself vetoed, then, would it Duncan?

[VintageKrug]

It amazes me anyone would look to thois sort of person for leadership in a time of crisis.

[Hippocampus]

I’m not sure who exactly drafted the latest outbreak of verbal diarrhoea on the BASSA forum, which isn’t really worth deigning with a reply.

It would be interesting to know how BASSA plans to extricate itself (and its members) from the mess it is entirely responsible for finding itself in.

[Hippocampus]

It seems that after no less than three defeats (twice at the High Court, once at the Court of Appeal), they still won’t let go over the crewing changes!

http://www.uniteba.com/LATESTNEWSUPDATES.html

A select group of senior reps from the joint negotiating committee will be meeting with Tony Woodley and Co tomorrow to discuss the way forwards.

It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.

Definition: Negotiation – mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.

In view of the recent impositions which fly in the face of agreed and required negotiation principles, the company would need to now clearly demonstrate their genuine willingness to be “committed to beginning the process of restoring and improving relationships at all levels” as contained in their latest offer, under Working Together.

In order to restore the relationship and for us all to recognise the merit of that intent, as we understand it, the issues that BA now need to resolve are very simple:

(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);

(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;

(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);

(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);

(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).

[Hippocampus]

An update from the Amicus/CC89 branch of Unite from today:

16th November 2010 – AMICUS UPDATE – Report Back (Unite Meeting)

In a surprise turn of events today AMICUS have been branded terrorists by Unite and Tony Woodley in particular. The BASSA Branch Committee have now twice verbally ejected us from the negotiating committee because, apparently, our views are “too radical”, “too direct” and “not subtle enough”. They have “lost patience” with us

The day started with a message from BASSA saying that our update of last evening (15th November 2010) was not helpful in its content. Despite a request for reconsideration, the day has ended in much the same way.

We have yet to establish why, though we accept that we have sought to address the matter of imposition, and that is where we differ from the various communications the BASSA Branch Secretary has posted.

It now appears that our friend’s personal blog has somehow become the joint committee’s final position – arrived at without discussion or debate. That in itself is not an issue, however, everybody and both branches are entitled to input and opinion – and in the face of that, without further debate or discussion, we, the AMICUS “branch of Unite” have, by personal communication from the BASSA Branch Secretary, been excommunicated from the BASSA negotiating team. In no uncertain terms, we have been told there will be no “joint” business from today.

So why?

We have no idea – but have the feeling this is about more than just words.

We offered to do a joint communication, but this too was declined. We hope that decision will be reconsidered by the committee as a whole, but we cannot condone a less than honest and truthful position.

We are deeply saddened and disappointed that this has happened. We have offered a line of further communication on the subject, but this has also been rejected.

The outgoing joint general secretary of Unite also today branded us as “terrorists”.

Why you ask? Because firstly we would not support the farcical ‘recommendation’. Having previously shared our intentions with our BASSA colleagues (who at that time disagreed with our position), we bit the bullet and were honest with you and Unite about this. In our humble opinion, a recommendation of the current BA offer and its Litigation appendix is morally indefensible. Unite chose to ignore our protestations about the offer, so we were left with no choice but to formally reject it.

It has subsequently and reluctantly been agreed by all parties that the consultative ballot is now dead in the water. It is our understanding, as ALL parties had previously AGREED (and is indeed promised in Unites intended letter of recommendation) we would now go straight to an industrial action ballot. This is therefore what AMICUS proposed today. We did suggest one proviso – that being, we should use the ballot period to determine if British Airways were minded to engage your reps from both branches on our issues, including the primary reason we took industrial action in the first place: IMPOSITION AND A UNILATERAL DISREGARD FOR OUR AGREEMENTS.

It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.

Needless to say our point of view was again ignored. It then became once again apparent that it is not about the logic of our argument, but the weight of the numbers we represent. On basis that only 40 AMICUS members claimed strike pay, versus 7000 BASSA members, our democratic right to an opinion and our ability to represent you is extinguished. We can’t help but feel that this sounds a little like life in British Airways. Long live democracy…?

It was stated that we, the AMICUS section committee do not represent the membership, even though in an unprecedented move we took a valid and necessary stand to protect your rights which ultimately reflected the mood of the joint membership. It was not comfortable for us to do this alone, especially as we have stood shoulder to shoulder with our BASSA colleagues thus far. But we wholeheartedly believe it was the right thing to do. We have supported industrial action for the first time in our history. With clear consciences, we took the brave step of rejecting the ridiculous offer that was being pushed on you.

So where do we stand?

Our BASSA colleagues would like Tony Woodley to go back to British Airways and propose that if the points in the BASSA Branch Secretary’s latest blog are met then the deal can be salvaged as it stands. 3 of the points relate to the full reinstatement of staff travel, binding ACAS arbitration for all disciplinaries arising out of the dispute (see our earlier update on this) , and the removal of threats if a new facilities (reps) is not agreed within 8 weeks. It is also means that all the toxic elements of the deal which ultimately benefit the company will remain in place, no doubt including the litigation section, bar the stipulations in the blog regarding those off sick during the dispute and those who had pay deducted. In short, all other aspects of litigation are surrendered, including our appeal to the Supreme Court on the contractual issues of our collective agreement – the original basis of our dispute, imposition. Unite declined to comment upon the progress or intention to support any such appeal.

We then suggested, at the very least, we should put a time scale on Unites “return to talks”, and the reason for that limitation as an undertaking is because British Airways have a notorious track record for delaying. We also pointed out that we believed it is unacceptable to be constantly running to British Airways trying to resolve the dispute that British Airways initiated in its unreasonable approach and behaviour. This is even more difficult to stomach as British Airways are now in profit in spite of our industrial action, the ash cloud and numerous hefty fines being imposed for malpractice and unlawful conduct. Needless to say were any of the required “permanent structural cost savings” actually necessary?

So where do we go now?

We believe it is appropriate to offer you, the membership, the opportunity to tell us if we are not representing your best interests. Call it a vote of confidence if you will. If you don’t want us to maintain the position we have taken, or indeed if you wish us to adopt another approach please communicate with us via our website. The alternative is that we withdraw from the debate altogether to allow our BASSA colleagues to determine our collective futures should you wish it.

Our previous communications did not reveal this unfortunate, untimely and quite suprising dischord as we hope that it would resolve itself quickly. However, it seems we are not being heard, and the true reasons for this are still as yet unknown.

We will in the meantime continue to represent you with humility, integrity and above all naked honesty. We will continue give you our collective opinion; we feel you deserve the direction a lot of you have been asking for and require – in fact you pay for it, and we will strive to do this subject to being involved in the proceedings.

The Amicus cabin crew section/branch
Of Unite the Union.

[Author]

Posts