about the forthcoming BA strike?

[iwastooearlytobeayummymummy]

DS (11)is supposed to be going on a much anticipated school trip next week, but both outward and return dates are strike days.
I can't begin to tell you how much he has been looking forward to this trip.

DD3 (13 )is also away, at the same time, on a choir trip, but flying with another operator.

Excited at the prospect of 2 children away,and happy to leave DD2 ( 18) home alone, DH and I have booked a much needed break ourselves, first time away without the children in 5 years.

Now everything is 'up in the air', no pun intended .

Can somebeody please explain why cabin crew are so aggreived? I've had a look at BBC's overview of the reasons behind the strike, but don't really get it.I also work for an organisation ( local authority actually) that has announced a 2 year pay freeze, recruitment freeze and forthcoming redundancies. Apart from free tea bags and instant coffee I get no other priveliges.

IABU to think they've got nothing to strike over?

WhiffleGarden made interesting points that seem to have been ignored in the flurry of gossip about pilots - absolutely right WG - WW and Ba have done their homework, done the sums and are fuly prepared. The strike will wither - the leaders of Unite will not suffer, just the poor bloody infantry cabin crew stupid enough to be duped into striking, and those paeengers who have lost holidays, weddings and those whose plan were uncertain for weeks, who will never risk booking BA again.. BA will slim down and modrnis, or die - I don't really care which, just feel very sorry for those silly enough to all themselves to be being used as pawns in a pointless posture by Unite.

Jellyheadjulia.... good posts...

Don't you get the feeling that your banging your head against a brick wall.........?

Good luck for the w/e, I'll be with you in mind.... I'm off to hospital now.. I'll catch up when I get back.

I think as WG and others have said WW has planned out a strategy. And whilst one customer went to the effort of expressing support in The Times, a lot of customers want this strike to break so that if they chose to use BA in the future they can do so with confidence that there will not be further strikes to disrupt their travel plans.

There has been a lot of negative views expressed about the striking crew in the media,. but also some quite positive ones that he is taking on UNITE and not giving in.

Can any cc any my question about rota'd breaks on shorthaul and longhaul flights please?

grr answer not any

JellyHeadJulia I admire you tremendously! At last we are hearing from someone who seems to be well informed about what exactly you are are striking for, what the unions are really all about and what the long term prospects are. You have extremely strong principles and you are prepared to see it through.

Can I ask you a few things?

• Does your DH support the strike? Or at least support your right to follow your principles
• Do you get a chance to read all sides on the forums, eg BALPA, Pprune, as well as the Bassa ones?
• What will be your ultimate goal, assuming the company is successful, will you take redundancy or accept NewFleet?
• having been through the experience of not realising that Bassa are not always right, how do you feel about the younger, more junior cc who are probably not as streetwise as you and may be following friends or reps blindly into this strike, not really realising what might happen to their jobs ultimately?

I am NOT trying to criticise your stance, I honestly think you're brave and smart and you know what you're doing. If the worst happens, it is possible to live just on a pilot's salary but I do hope you wont have to.

MaddyJensen thank you for your post. Good luck at the hospital.

I believe that the use of other groups of employees to break a strike is not only morally wrong but will have far reaching, damaging implications for other unionised staff groups. Should the merger of BA and Iberia be permitted to happen, groups such as our pilots (currently employed by BA) could be threatened with the imposition of new terms and conditions. Hypothetically, If the pilot union and its members were then to decide the new t & Cs were unacceptable, and decide to ballot for industrial action to protect their future career prospects, the new "merged" company would legally be able to bring in pilots, currently working for Iberia or its subsidiaries, to undermine any strike action.

Jellyheadjulia that is true, but that is why BALPA have been working and negotiating to protect the t&cs of pilots before the merger. In the example you give it is more likely to work the other way, Iberia pilots earn significantly more than BA, but it is a valid point.

Equally the same could still happen to cabin crew, WW could call the striking crews back in merge, impose new fleet and then use CC from Iberia to carry on the fleet whilst BA CC strike. The implications of that would be far worse for Cabin Crew.

It is not a decision that pilots took lightly- I hope you can appreciate that, the volunteers genuinely believe that BA would go bust if it does not shave down costs. To them that would be morally wrong, to leave their own families and the families of other BA employees exposed to a massive loss of jobs in an appalling economic climate.

BA cut pilots pay, because BALPA told BA pilots they had seen the figures and they could see (even as TU) how close BA was to financial ruin. The pilots took the cuts, provided that all departments met their cost cutting measures. CC are currently doing this, but only because the new service ratio is up and running.

pinkycheesy I will try and answer your questions as honestly as I can.

i do have the full support of my dh. He fundamentally believes in the right for an employee to belong to a union. He is as concerned as I am with regards to the potentially damaging consequences of the imposition of different T & C for all staff groups. Please see my post above for more clarification.
I am able to see all posts and opinions or other forums. Although I understand everyone has a different view point, I am astounded by the vitriol on some. A small percentage of the postings on both BALPA/BASSA forums concern me tremendously. We all know a safe and secure working environment with open, honest communication and respect is absolutely essential between flight and cabin crew. I believe a small minority in both communities have severely compromised this. Personally, because of the close working environment, the company should have considered the long term impact of including any members of the pilot community as volunteer cabin crew. Captains and First officers have a difficult enough job of leading their teams, without having to manage this division.
New fleet ? I do not believe I will be able to carry on if the new disruption agreement is allowed to be imposed. It is fairly difficult for dh to bid around my work to ensure we have cover for childcare as it currently stands with a fixed roster. Less time in the country after each trip due to the proposed reduction in days off and the possibility of my fixed roster being altered means this would be virtually untenable for m to continue. I am not naive enough to believe that I am indispensable as being a Cabin Crew Selector, we do still receive thousands of applications at BA. I do not believe, however, that despite the seeming direction of our leadership team, that our customers want a workforce in BA that stays for only a short period of time, what I believe is happening sadly at LGW. The advertisement in The Times and a letter to the editor of "Business Traveller" from two of our high yield customers supports this opinion. Both state that on occasions, our hard product is severely lacking compared to say Singapore Airlines but the vastly differing ages, industry experience & life experiences amongst our cabin crew is why they chose to travel with us again and again.
I love my job which is why, wrongly or rightly, I am choosing to fight for it.

At point I must add. I am not disparaging our cabin crew at Gatwick. They are selected with exactly the same, stringent criteria as the crew at LHR although on different terms and conditions. I do not believe that many recruits are able to remain in the company for the long term with their reduced pay and conditions.

I am always puzzled as to why age and pay have anything to do with customer service. Surely when you select CC you select people who will be nice to customers?

Jellyheadjulia you say my husband is morally wrong to strike- but don't you think it is morally wrong to jepordise the jobs and well being of Gatwick CC by exposing them to a pay cut that would further erode the T&Cs you already say they can't work to?

jellyhead you are doing the right thing Just because I and some others dont agree with this particular strike doesnt make it wrong to do what your conscience tells you. I cant imagine how hard it must be to synchronise 2 crew rosters in your house; We have enough trouble with only one, plus my p/t work and our kids' social lives!

WRT the pilots, it seems like there was some good stuff happening over the weekend, with captains being much more proactive about ensuring the whole team was working as one, rather than as 'us & them'. My DH is seeing it as a bit of a wakeup call to the flightcrew that they do need to do their bit for harmony as well...I think that crew briefings will be a bit different in the weeks to come...I hope so, anyway.

silver1 Your point about selection is absolutely correct. Customer service staff are indeed selected to be nice to customers. I was merely trying to point out that many of our current customers state that they enjoy being on board with an experienced crew of different ages and backgrounds, and in many cases, this is the only reason they still chose to fly with us in our premium cabins. I do not believe this will continue to representative of a future cabin crew if t & c's are eroded. Most of our applicants into Gatwick are just starting out on their career path. This does not mean that they are not extremely good at their jobs, they are excellent. I do believe, that when applying to BA at LGW, they accept those t&c's, knowing that they will have to move on in a few years in order to have better career prospects and salary prospects.

I could not volunteer to break a strike. I am sure your dh did what he thought was morally right for him and his family. I would never criticize another individual for standing up for their principles and for what they think is right.

With regards to the pay cut for LGW crew. I presume you are referring to the proposal that we as crew did not have the opportunity to vote on. I did not want the two sides to stop communicating. I still hope that both will come back to the table and resolve grievances by compromise and negotiation. I do not think anyone of us will ever have a completely objective account of why both sides have not been able to find a resolution to date.I will say again that the majority of the cabin crew community do not feel that we should be exempt from the savings that all departments have been asked to make but that it should be done without imposition. I have tried to explain in previous posts my reasons for taking the very serious decision to strike.

pinkycheesy Thank you for posting such dignified and positive replies. Even though we are not in agreement, I appreciate your honesty.

Anyone?

goldenticket as no one else has replied, I will tell you what DH's volunteer pack says

Refreshment breaks for a crew working with volunteers (thus fewer crew than normal)

If the flight is 3-6 hours they have 20 minutes
6:01-10 hours 40 mins (can be two 20 minute breaks)
10-12 hours (60 minutes)
12:31-13 hours day flight 80 minutes if the flight diverts an extra 3 hours bunk rest to continue may be needed
12-13 hours night flight as above
13:01-14 hours minimum 2hours and 15 minutes bunk rest
14:01 and above minimum 3 hours bunk rest

When on bunk rest half the crew on rest half on duty
When bunk rest- customer service levels must be maintained.

I hope this helps. Obviously with the full compliment of crew on board there would be more opportunity for rest.

Silver

Jellyheadjulia~ my question refers to the proposal UNITE have spoken of that says Cabin Crew across the board would take a pay cut (that they would want refunded after three years as a bonus)
If as you say Gatwicks T&Cs are unsustainable how can you expect them to live with this pay cut?

Howdy peoples! Sorry, been manic today at home, I am still readin the thread though and will post when I have something to add (like tomorrow, when it all starts again on the strike front). Will be watching with interest to see how many turn up to work (I wonder if the bookies have odds on it?)

Willie Walsh is responding to the academics letter tomorrow in the Guardian.
OSTG favourite read, so she should be able to fill us in as we are a Times household.

Silver1 The union must have considered the package they offered in its entirety to be the best that they could table and feasibly get agreed. Unions, as with any collective, can not represent each and every member's wishes entirely and I presume should and could aspires to reflect the wishes of the majority. Do I personally think it is fair to expect LGW to take a pay cut? No I do not. The point is mute though as the entire offer was rejected by BA. I do not think anything in this entire dispute is fair.
With reference to the guardian reader, that would be me- guilty as charged. Not however, in isolation, I read both The Times and The Telegraph as well. I believe if you read all sides and spectrums, you have a better chance of finding out the truth.

The Guardian reader comment was a joke aimed at ostg as she says she always offered them to pilots when she knew they preferred the Torygraph.

The Union didn't seem to have too much trouble dismissing the wishes of Gatwick (hardly an individual) when it made it clear it wouldn't do anything to support Gatwick if they rejected their current t&cs (quoting from Gatwick CC that I spoke to)
BA says it rejected the offer because it's own internal work said most staff did not want a pay cut and it would be prejudicial against Gatwick. I can see why they would do this.

I do understand your reasons for striking, but what I don't understand is this;
If you want to negotiate on those points, why strike over something else, something that WW is determined to implement. He is not then obliged to negotiate on your concerns-and this could end badly for all of you.
Had you waited to see IF your fears were founded, you probably would have had a lot more public sympathy.

Also if you don't mind my asking-how do you feel about statements today that a pre-condition to a deal is staff travel returned and (this is the bit that galls me) the reinstatement of BASSA reps accused of harassment?

Silver1 You misinterpreted my post. When I said a union cannot represent each individual, I was referring only to me and not LGW crew. I do not believe LGW crew should have to take a further pay cut if at all possible, so therefore the union if you were to consider this point in isolation do not represent my views

As our husbands could contest, with the benefit of the accurate science of hindsight, one cannot take industrial action legally over what we may fear in the future. (The "openskies" dispute and call for industrial action was trying to prevent the potential trojan horse that could erode future terms and conditions.)

The crew complements were imposed after lengthy talks had broken down. I believe that if the crew community had not contested this element, the rest of the new fleet would have arrived very rapidly in any case. "Project Columbus" a project focusing on a new fleet with completely altered pay structures has been the subject of a focus group in HQ for the last three years. I do not think that whatever our concerns or negotiating prowess as a community the spectre of a new fleet would have disappeared.

Staff travel a benefit or through custom and practice a contractual right ? The finest legal experts are still disputing this in all of our media channels, why, therefore would I a lowly stewardess know the answer to this conundrum?

Whether the BASSA reps should be reinstated? I do not believe they will receive fair and just treatment within the disciplinary process at the current time. Their alleged crimes seem nominal to me when operating within the parameters of a normal, unsuspicious business climate.
What tangible evidence of harassment by any of the reps has been claimed by a truely independant party?

The union though, do seem willing to sacrifice Gatwick to a paycut, and that is why Gatwick seem undisturbed by the strikes (full service projected for tomorrow) I am pleased you don't think this is right- but it is a reason that I find the union to be repulsive. They take Gatwick subs as easily as they take Heathrow.

The precedent on staff travel has already been set for strikers though (baggage handlers-admittedly wild cat)-and I am sure BA would have taken rigorous legal advice on this issue. However who knows how it will go.

As for the BASSA reps, I disagree that it is minor. What was threatened to the BALPA rep (who resigned) wasn't minor. That was pretty grotesque.

My understanding is that the BALPA rep has stepped aside, temporarily, for not only the reason you mention but because a portion of the BALPA membership were themselves uncomfortable with his very public stance in this dispute. I believe the rep is currently considering whether to stand for re-election but is not prepared to comment at present.

Silver1 We clearly have extremely different understandings of the current dispute both in terms of the reasoning or justification for either party's position. Although It has been enlightening and informative to hear reasoned discussion with regards to the dispute from a different perspective, I am no longer going to post. My ironing is now a mountain, and I should have wrapped 3 birthday presents and made 3 long-overdue phone calls to my friends. Kind regards