Anyone else fancy punching BA in the face?

[ClarkyBoy]

The globespan announcement must surely be playing on the BA staff's minds at the moment, and BA must be delighted there will be a surplus or air crew waiting if required!!!

.....some are already in prime location internationally too.........

[DDtB]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8418805.stm


hahahaha.... get it right up ya Unite. Tossers!!!

[RDH]

Nice bit of editing there Rob

Mac

Thanks

[DDtB]

Apparently BA staff are planning a 3 day long, mass sick day protest now instead...

Selfish cnut. I'd be firing anyone who is found to be doing this and simply refusing to recognise the union at all in future. The current unions in this country have no place in a modern society. And why do all union bosses have a Yorkshire accent??

That's my BA card cut up now and I'll be flying Virgin/KLM etc in future instead. That'll learn 'em!!

[Tom]

Apparently BA staff are planning a 3 day long, mass sick day protest now instead...

Selfish cnut. I'd be firing anyone who is found to be doing this and simply refusing to recognise the union at all in future. The current unions in this country have no place in a modern society. And why do all union bosses have a Yorkshire accent??

That's my BA card cut up now and I'll be flying Virgin/KLM etc in future instead. That'll learn 'em!!

Reasons for striking aside, now that they've been told they can't strike by a judge, in this instance

[mac]

Am I the only one who's slightly disturbed that they have been told they have no right to appeal?

[Titanium S1 111S (gla)]

Am I the only one who's slightly disturbed that they have been told they have no right to appeal?

Not quite the case Mac "Mrs Justice Cox also refused the union permission to appeal, but the union could apply directly to the Court of Appeal."

I am not familiar with English procedure but it seems that there is an appeal route if the union wants to do that.

G

[DDtB]

Doesn't disturb me. They carried out a ballot which broke the rules so fcuk 'em.

Rather than appeal... they could actually read the rule book do the ballot properly next time, rather than breaking the rules like they've done, proving themselves to be selfish cnut simply trying to cause maximum disruption any way they can !

Or they could just fcuk off full stop.

[Rich H]

Surely they will have to re-ballot their members - the dispute was that the ballot was not legal as I see it. There is no appeal as it either was or it wasn't legal in accordance with the rules.

I'm a unite member... They are our union here...

[Brian J]

That's a pain in the ar*e. Had hoped this would all be over by January - now seems strike will be pushed back to February when we want to fly to somewhere warm in the Caribbean.

Bl**dy lawyers

Brian J (selfish faction)

[mac]

Am I the only one who's slightly disturbed that they have been told they have no right to appeal?

Not quite the case Mac "Mrs Justice Cox also refused the union permission to appeal, but the union could apply directly to the Court of Appeal."

I am not familiar with English procedure but it seems that there is an appeal route if the union wants to do that.

G

Didn't look into it full and only passed on to what I heard on the TV.

Dave, there's a reason why we need unions - it's called bosses like you

[Lazydonkey]

From what i can see the deal amounts to a pay freeze over 2 years and a slight reduction in head count. They are also talking about realigning salaries of new starts so that it more fits the market they are now operating in (they are no longer a premium carrier who can afford premium staff) But crucially existing staff take a pay freeze at a time when inflation is the square root of fcuk all, and interests rates are at an all time low.

In exchange they get to keep their jobs and the company tries to fight off stiff competition from elsewhwre.

Unless i'm missing some big consipiracy then i think that's not a bad deal under the circumstances? Feel free to shoot me down if I'm wrong but i can't see the unions or the cabin crew have a leg to stand on here - just seems selfish and stubborn to me.

2p

[Kev]

The cabin crew are just upset that their easy ride (compared to other airlines) is coming to an end. To be honest, I don’t think the change in terms and conditions are that bad considering the state of the aviation industry at the moment. The pilots, through the union BALPA, have agreed to take a pay cut, up to 25% of their flying allowance I think and a change of terms and conditions and the engineers have accepted a change of term and conditions, not sure if they accepted a pay cut or not. So to me, the pilots and engineers see they have to help company reduce the number of redundancies, but the Heathrow cabin crew are a bit beyond this. Remember it’s only the Heathrow cabin crew wanting to strike.

As I understand it, NOBODY is getting their pay reduced by 50%, they are reducing the pay for the NEW starts only, existing staff have been asked to take a 2 year pay freeze. The biggest change I can make out is for the senior cabin crew member or flight director or whatever they are called today, they NOW have to help with the service, at the moment they don’t. Because of this they can reduce the number of crew per flight. For example at the moment I think they fly with 15 cabin crew on a 747, 1 senior member and 14 crew members, so that’s 14 member carrying out the service. With the changes that BA want, they can fly with 14, 1 senior member and 13 crew members, so that’s still 14 members carrying out the service. Flights out of Gatwick already fly with reduced crew, they have been for a number of years now, agreed between BA and unite. It’s just now that BA management want to bring this to Heathrow.

From what i can see the deal amounts to a pay freeze over 2 years and a slight reduction in head count. They are also talking about realigning salaries of new starts so that it more fits the market they are now operating in (they are no longer a premium carrier who can afford premium staff) But crucially existing staff take a pay freeze at a time when inflation is the square root of fcuk all, and interests rates are at an all time low.

In exchange they get to keep their jobs and the company tries to fight off stiff competition from elsewhwre.

Unless i'm missing some big consipiracy then i think that's not a bad deal under the circumstances? Feel free to shoot me down if I'm wrong but i can't see the unions or the cabin crew have a leg to stand on here - just seems selfish and stubborn to me.

2p

[Brian J]

(they are no longer a premium carrier who can afford premium staff)

Tragic - I liked BA because they were a premium carrier and I was prepared to pay for it. Is there no room now for a premium carrier? Must we all be dragged down to the lowest level?

It seems to be my lot now continually to regret the passing of a civilised way of life - must be getting old - or have I just had too long a lunch??

[Lazydonkey]

From unites website

Unite has denounced BA's attempt to impose significant contractural changes on its 14,000 cabin crew employees, and introduce a second tier workforce on poorer pay and conditions.

Unite believes the new contractural changes are an attempt to force staff to pay the price for management failings with the company wringing more and more out of fewer and fewer staff who will be paid less.

Working hours will be extended, crew levels will be slashed, career opportunities will disappear and new starters will be brought in on bargain basement wages. Unite says this will inevitably damage customer service and hit the brand, possibly leaving it beyond repair.

Irony of the last statment aside i think it's telling when the union can't even make their mind up what the main issue is.

Full story here
http://www.unitetheunion.com/campaigns/ ... stand.aspx