buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 I am not sure you get the truth in the Mail, Buctootim. No I know, its a ****e paper. But it is a direct quote from Walsh and I know from my ex (Cabin crew at Gatwick) that the figures are about right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Oops - another one who hasn't read the other version http://www.unitetheunion.com/pdf/022-BA%20Cabin%20Crew%20disputev5.pdf Ooops another one who hasnt read my post. As the second paragraph states, the problem isnt the new contracts - its the thousands of heatrow staff on old grossly excessive contracts, earning three times a new recruit for the same job, and who dont leave. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 No I know, its a ****e paper. But it is a direct quote from Walsh and I know from my ex (Cabin crew at Gatwick) that the figures are about right. Are you saying that ALL staff earn £56K a year. I would be a very concerned shareholder if I thought that was the case. I would replace management as a first remedial step. I suspect the quote has been doctored and most likely the words "some staff" has been ommitted. It suits the Mail's purpose. Once again, I am against the strike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 (edited) Are you saying that ALL staff earn £56K a year. I would be a very concerned shareholder if I thought that was the case. I would replace management as a first remedial step. I suspect the quote has been doctored and most likely the words "some staff" has been ommitted. It suits the Mail's purpose. Once again, I am against the strike No - 'senior cabin crew' in this context means Cabin Service Directors (the supervisors on the planes). An average of £56,000 is about right as I know some earn around £80,000pa. Even my ex on the new contract at Gatwick (ie the lowest of the low) earns £26,500pa after four years service - which is much nearer where the wages need to be imo. Edited 23 May, 2010 by buctootim Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Ooops another one who hasnt read my post. As the second paragraph states, the problem isnt the new contracts - its the thousands of heatrow staff on old grossly excessive contracts, earning three times a new recruit for the same job, and who dont leave. I don't understand what we're arguing about . That link refers to salaries that were negotiated 13 years ago. And those salaries don't seem excessive to me. I don't know what the rates are for newer recruits but it does say that 70% of staff earn less than £20K. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Oops - another one who hasn't read the other version http://www.unitetheunion.com/pdf/022-BA%20Cabin%20Crew%20disputev5.pdf "Most crew would rather see their wages fall for two years, than for the service they provide to drop." Just to clarify. ANYONE in that job earning over £20kpa (including all the perks and allowances) is overpaid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 I don't understand what we're arguing about . That link refers to salaries that were negotiated 13 years ago. And those salaries don't seem excessive to me. I don't know what the rates are for newer recruits but it does say that 70% of staff earn less than £20K. Exactly. 70% earn less than £20,000pa basic (unite have conveniently left out flying pay and language skills bonus) but the average is £29,900. That tells you all you need to know about the 30%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Exactly. 70% earn less than £20,000pa basic (unite have conveniently left out flying pay and language skills bonus) but the average is £29,900. That tells you all you need to know about the 30%. Aah sorry - I see. It's getting late I suppose the CSDs' salaries are included when working out the average, then. Does it include any other members of staff do you suppose? I guess if Mr Walsh's salary was included, the average would be much much higher. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 No - 'senior cabin crew' in this context means Cabin Service Directors (the supervisors on the planes). An average of £56,000 is about right as I know some earn around £80,000pa. Even my ex on the new contract at Gatwick (ie the lowest of the low) earns £26,500pa after four years service - which is much nearer where the wages need to be imo. You have to ask yourself how anyone serving meals should be paid that. What have the management been doing? There must be a better way to reduce the costs other than an outright confrontation. natural wastage, early retirement, compulsory redundancy etc. Not sackings and strikes. Do you not see this? The workers should never have been allowed to earn as much as that (if it is a true figure) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arizona Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Aah sorry - I see. It's getting late I suppose the CSDs' salaries are included when working out the average, then. Does it include any other members of staff do you suppose? I guess if Mr Walsh's salary was included, the average would be much much higher. Are you on a wind up? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Are you on a wind up? No - just asking a serious question. I don't know how 'average' was arrived at. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 You have to ask yourself how anyone serving meals should be paid that. What have the management been doing? There must be a better way to reduce the costs other than an outright confrontation. natural wastage, early retirement, compulsory redundancy etc. Not sackings and strikes. Do you not see this? The workers should never have been allowed to earn as much as that (if it is a true figure) Of course. Those on very high salaries are on on the old contracts, and they continue to get increments year after year. Management did change the terms and conditions for new entrants. The problem is that the salaries of staff on the old contracts are so ridiculously high they dont leave through natural wastage, so the wage bill remains massive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 You have to ask yourself how anyone serving meals should be paid that. What have the management been doing? There must be a better way to reduce the costs other than an outright confrontation. natural wastage, early retirement, compulsory redundancy etc. Not sackings and strikes. Do you not see this? The workers should never have been allowed to earn as much as that (if it is a true figure) From what I've read from those who have been in the industry, the "excessive" earners have been at BA since before 1997 when the new contract structure was put in place, at a time when flying was still seen as a "premium" mode of transport. As a result, those salaries probably were seen as reasonable at the time. Times have changed, but the salaries of those people haven't been adjusted to fit. Whether that's down to management since then (possibly) or whether there is legislation which would prevent what would be a massive drop in salary, I've no idea. I do suspect BA won't see much "natural wastage" while the seemingly (and knowingly) overpaid can still earn far more than they could reasonably expect in a similar job elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Of course. Those on very high salaries are on on the old contracts, and they continue to get increments year after year. Management did change the terms and conditions for new entrants. The problem is that the salaries of staff on the old contracts are so ridiculously high they dont leave through natural wastage, so the wage bill remains massive. Another honest question. Once upon a time, crew were made to retire once they reached a certain age - or at least were put on ground duty. Does that still happen? In the really old days, I think female crew had to retire if they got married! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lets B Avenue Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Has the Daily Heil ever published Willie Walsh's salary or what "perks" he also claims? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seaford Saint Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 From what I've read from those who have been in the industry, the "excessive" earners have been at BA since before 1997 when the new contract structure was put in place, at a time when flying was still seen as a "premium" mode of transport. As a result, those salaries probably were seen as reasonable at the time. Times have changed, but the salaries of those people haven't been adjusted to fit. Whether that's down to management since then (possibly) or whether there is legislation which would prevent what would be a massive drop in salary, I've no idea. I do suspect BA won't see much "natural wastage" while the seemingly (and knowingly) overpaid can still earn far more than they could reasonably expect in a similar job elsewhere. I have seen Vodafone in the UK lose 5% of staff a year for the last 3 years. Same at HP upon occasion..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 Another honest question. Once upon a time, crew were made to retire once they reached a certain age - or at least were put on ground duty. Does that still happen? In the really old days, I think female crew had to retire if they got married! http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ba-to-increase-retirement-age-471101.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 I have seen Vodafone in the UK lose 5% of staff a year for the last 3 years. Same at HP upon occasion..... I would assume neither Vodafone or HP have many - if any - "rank and file" staff on salaries they couldn't dream of earning for the same job in the same industry for a different company, to be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
once_bitterne Posted 23 May, 2010 Share Posted 23 May, 2010 According to today's Mail on Sunday, FF trousered a cool £120k as he's allowed to keep a share of Union subs so made more than the Unite leaders lol! http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1280613/BA-cabin-crew-strike-ahead-catastrophic-breakdown-talks.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John B Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 It would appear to the casual observer that the Heathrow cabin crew have been particularly willing to go out of their way to send the company nearer to bankruptcy. The one question that stands out for me is why have BA's cabin crew based at other airports appeared to be quite happy to accept the revised conditions BA have asked them to adopt because of the company's financial situation, yet the Heathrow staff are the only ones kicking up a fuss? Wel they have had their perks taken away so they are probably not very happy. That Walsh just seems to want to crush the Union Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Oops - another one who hasn't read the other version http://www.unitetheunion.com/pdf/022-BA%20Cabin%20Crew%20disputev5.pdf I have to laugh. You accuse people of being brainwashed by right wing newspapers but your counter arguements you take from the paragon of independance "Unite". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Has the Daily Heil ever published Willie Walsh's salary or what "perks" he also claims? Pull BA's accounts - his full package is a matter of public record Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Has the Daily Heil ever published Willie Walsh's salary or what "perks" he also claims? Yes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gingeletiss Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Stu, I work for Vodafone, believe me I know about job cuts and outsourcing and offshoring. I don't agree with the strike however, why dont BA just settle and try to build better relations with its workforce? Why don't the union settle?, why is this all about the management caving in? They (the 2 sides) had agreed so much already. The flying perks is really incidental financially, you only get them if a deat is empty Are they incidental?, it seems to me that this is really a big part of what it's all about. As well as the 20 hrs a week they have to work (poor dears), they also insist on having mini breaks at the final destination (long Haul), and being put up in the very best hotels, for 3/4 days at a time. Must be very taxing on them. if a paying passenger wants the seat then tough. Once again I don't agree with the strike but if the law of the land says that strikes are legal, why should anyone be punished with a loss of any conditions or perks etc for striking? Are you for real?, are you really saying that they should retain these 'perks' while at the same time, striking and causing millions in lost revenue:smt103. They were told, strike and you lose your perks, they carried on and went on strike. What part of that do you think they didn't understand? If unions acted above the law then fair enough impoe penalties. BA's management will also be out of work too if the firm goes under and then who would employ Willie Walsh again? £56K came from the Telegraph.... do all staff get this, do any? I have my doubts. I would have to ask what the hell management had been doing for the last few years to allow this to be the case. Wouldn't you? How much are the management paid? I guess you are one of those militant, 'I don't care...lets strike anyway' type of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hutch Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Just for a bit of perspective on the "how much do they get paid for making tea" debate, I thought I'd post some information from what I consider to be a fairly reliable source. Both sides spin doctors, with the help of both sides of the media, are publishing conflicting basic and average wage numbers. The real issue IMO is about allowances, how much they are and who gets the chance to earn them. Over the years top up allowances have become as important as, or more important than, basic salary. AFAIK, BA operates a length-of-service driven route bidding system i.e. those who have been with the Company since the days of the Wright brothers get first pick of the routes they want to operate on. For example, Heathrow CC on the old contracts are paid top up allowances of £935 on a 4-day Tokyo trip or £835 on a 5-day Hong Kong trip. These routes are obviously very popular. Add that lot up over a year. The "New Fleet" contracts for recent and new starters are based on a per hour allowance for Time Away From Base pay, much less than the old allowances. The power struggle as I see it, driving the strike, is who will operate on these expensive legacy routes. BA will (rightly) want to use lower cost but equally well trained and efficient staff on these routes, and the old timers who have been trousering (or skirting) the allowances for years don't want to give them up. I don't think that BA are trying to impose revised contracts on any individual, but are reserving their right to decide who will operate on what routes. If the old timers find that they are restricted to working on the less lucrative routes with short or no stopovers, their take home pay will be reduced substantially. That is why the strike has little support in the Company in general, as evidenced by the sheer number of employees willing to stand in on Heathrow CC duties during the strike. And if, as I have seen reported, BA made it clear to the staff that if they went on strike then certain discretionary perks would be reduced or removed, then I don't think they can, or should, back down from that position. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 For example, Heathrow CC on the old contracts are paid top up allowances of £935 on a 4-day Tokyo trip or £835 on a 5-day Hong Kong trip. These routes are obviously very popular. Add that lot up over a year. .... and Virgin crew get less than £300 for the same trip / length of stay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scummer Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 According to today's Mail on Sunday, FF trousered a cool £120k as he's allowed to keep a share of Union subs Yes it said in The Sunday Times that he gets 10% commission on the union subscriptions he collects!? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 No, you know what... she is right. Soldiers can work through the night, sometimes up to 48 hours with no proper sleep and still be expected to drive a tank in a battle zone, fire live weapons and defeat the enemy. But the poor old trolley dolleys need a good 24 hours kip before they can serve their next microwave meal. Ive met a few trolly dolly's when they were on leave and all were great fun to spend time with. Ive also met a few squadies on leave and ive not met one that wasnt a dik in thier civillian leave time. People in the forces are often highly trained to do really tough jobs in extreme conditions. Social and civillian skills are often not high on the list of prioritys. trying to compare the different jobs people do is not a very good argument. I wouldnt want a trolly dolly defending our country but then I wouldnt want a soldier serving me tea at 30'000 feet either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saint_mears Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 just seen this guy on bbc news live being interviewed. I thought he spoke quite well and there is clearly an 'anti union' stance from BA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Ive met a few trolly dolly's when they were on leave and all were great fun to spend time with. Ive also met a few squadies on leave and ive not met one that wasnt a dik in thier civillian leave time. People in the forces are often highly trained to do really tough jobs in extreme conditions. Social and civillian skills are often not high on the list of prioritys. trying to compare the different jobs people do is not a very good argument. I wouldnt want a trolly dolly defending our country but then I wouldnt want a soldier serving me tea at 30'000 feet either. No it's not good to compare... however put their wages into perspective... they get paid a hell of alot of money for what they actually do... which is serve tea and coffee. They get paid not far off £1000 for having a mini-break in Hong Kong whilst they 'recover' lol Their job even at 20k a year would be more than enough... some of the perks and wages they get are stupid. The bottom line is that BA are allowed to stop perks and bonuses by law... what they are doing is legal and fair play to them not backing down. Here's looking forward to when they start making redundancies... hopefully it will be just before Xmas to cause maximum effect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 just seen this guy on bbc news live being interviewed. I thought he spoke quite well and there is clearly an 'anti union' stance from BA. And why not?! The union are sending the staff out on strike when BA have not broken any employment laws etc! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 No it's not good to compare... however put their wages into perspective... they get paid a hell of alot of money for what they actually do... which is serve tea and coffee. They get paid not far off £1000 for having a mini-break in Hong Kong whilst they 'recover' lol Their job even at 20k a year would be more than enough... some of the perks and wages they get are stupid. The bottom line is that BA are allowed to stop perks and bonuses by law... what they are doing is legal and fair play to them not backing down. Here's looking forward to when they start making redundancies... hopefully it will be just before Xmas to cause maximum effect. And be trained and able to: Deliver babies Administer CPR Deliver injections for anaphylactic shock To operate a defibrilator in the event of a cardiac arrest Take command of a lifeboat in a ditching event To deliver in fire fighting and survival techniques To learn and operate search techniques in the event of a bomb threat To deal with a situation wherein a pilot becomes unconscious A tad more than your average waiting staff. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 And why not?! The union are sending the staff out on strike when BA have not broken any employment laws etc! Stu, you need to understand that the people are the union. The Union cannot call the members out on strike as that is illegal. All they can do is ballot the members. When they do so the ballot has to be, IIRC, at least two choices. 1. For industrial action up to, but not including, strike action. 2. For industrial action up to, and including, strike action. The ballot is scrutinised by, IIRC, the Electoral Reform Society. If a call for a strike is issued, when clearly the ballot papers indicate otherwise, then the Union are open to litigation and a large fine. By that same token after a ballot in favour of strike action then the Union have to give the company a legally determined period of notice. This gives both sides in a dispute the time to gather their thoughts and seek a compromise. When Duncan announced the ballot result that was all he was doing, conveying the members wishes. Not stirring them into strike action. The Union have not broken any laws either. The members (Union) have made their decision clear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
View From The Top Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 And why not?! The union are sending the staff out on strike when BA have not broken any employment laws etc! It's no surprise that you're wrong. Despite my views of the strike and the cabin staff the union has only acted on the orders of its membership. It's quite obvious that the UNITE leaders can see and want and end (WW has stated how he has no axe to grind with them) but the membership don't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 [/quote Even if the links ESB have posted are true... THEY MAKE A CUP OF TEA AND GIVE OUT MICROWAVE MEALS!!! Their pay is relative to the very basic job they do... a glorified waitress! If they have perks and bonuses and they are removed... TOUGH SH!T!!!!!! Read the link AGAIN - read page 2 - see what is required of cabin crew. Remember this next time you fly - and be thankful that there are trained crew members available to deal with all sorts of life threatening emergencies. No argument but I think 'making the tea' is a quaint description of the roles and responsibilities that each member of cabin crew has. Including, if need be, getting you and I off that jet should a disaster occur. The reason I posted anyway was because £56k gross has somehow been spun into £56k take home! Can someone enlighten me about this war chest that BA supposedly have? Off to bed now. Can someone tell me how often these "highly trained" staff have put their emergency evacuation skills into action resulting in the saving of any lives.....? We're meant to be so thankful for their "emergency disaster" skills, I'd love to know what these actually are and how often they have ever been used to make a difference? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Read the link AGAIN - read page 2 - see what is required of cabin crew. Remember this next time you fly - and be thankful that there are trained crew members available to deal with all sorts of life threatening emergencies. Can someone tell me how often these "highly trained" staff have put their emergency evacuation skills into action resulting in the saving of any lives.....? We're meant to be so thankful for their "emergency disaster" skills, I'd love to know what these actually are and how often they have ever been used to make a difference? Something wrong with the quote facility - my reply below There have been 9 serious incidents in April and May this year alone. Still if you're happy to have a recent McDonalds employee on your next flight - well, good luck to you. http://www.planecrashinfo.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 And be trained and able to: Deliver babies - Trained to a very basic level. 1 day course I imagine, same course I done. Administer CPR - That is basic first aid Deliver injections for anaphylactic shock - Again, basic first aid. To operate a defibrilator in the event of a cardiac arrest - 1/2 day course. Take command of a lifeboat in a ditching event - Again, hardly rocket science. To deliver in fire fighting and survival techniques - Very basic again. To learn and operate search techniques in the event of a bomb threat - Basic To deal with a situation wherein a pilot becomes unconscious This is the one where you might be on to something? Are you saying all staff are trained to fly the plane if the pilot has an accident? If so fair play, they are amazing. A tad more than your average waiting staff. Oh my god... you got that straight off the Unite pdf as well didn't you? You have some strange obsession with the role of a trolley dolly and seem desperate to make it sound more glamorous and challenging than it really is. They are people who serve tea and coffee and also know how to use a fire extinguisher and administer basic first aid ( if there is not a doctor on nurse on board ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Oh my god... you got that straight off the Unite pdf as well didn't you? You have some strange obsession with the role of a trolley dolly and seem desperate to make it sound more glamorous and challenging than it really is. They are people who serve tea and coffee and also know how to use a fire extinguisher and administer basic first aid ( if there is not a doctor on nurse on board ) You're right - I forgot to add the bit about dealing with overweight, sweaty, drink-fuelled 'tourists'. That's really glamorous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 24 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Still if you're happy to have a recent McDonalds employee on your next flight - well, good luck to you. http://www.planecrashinfo.com/ disgraceful slant on maccy d's employee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 24 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2010 You're right - I forgot to add the bit about dealing with overweight, sweaty, drink-fuelled 'tourists'. That's really glamorous. considering they are strict in even letting on the plane if you are drunk..I would say you are wrong Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 4 people are killed on flights for every 1 million hours of flying so times that by how many people are on the flights on average, say 300... there is a chance you may get killed is 1 in 75 million. Wow, yeah I think I will take my chances with the McDonalds worker please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Since you feel the Unite pdf is wrong / misleading, how about looking at the Wiki entry (and reading the whole bit including the details of heroic acts by crew towards the bottom of the page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_attendant Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 24 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Since you feel the Unite pdf is wrong / misleading, how about looking at the Wiki entry (and reading the whole bit including the details of heroic acts by crew towards the bottom of the page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_attendant ah..wiki the fountain of knowledge Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Since you feel the Unite pdf is wrong / misleading, how about looking at the Wiki entry (and reading the whole bit including the details of heroic acts by crew towards the bottom of the page) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flight_attendant Let's look at FACTS Top 10 civilian jobs in order of the most dangerous, take from FACT, the numbers are in deaths per 100,000 people. Can't see trolley dollys there. Timber cutters 117.8 Fishers 71.1 Pilots and navigators 69.8 Structural metal workers 58.2 Drivers-sales workers 37.9 Roofers 37 Electrical power installers 32.5 Farm occupations 28 Construction laborers 27.7 Truck drivers 25 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jillyanne Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 My cousin is a trolley dolly for Delta and she is the first to admit what an easy job it is and what a great life she has visiting all the places she does and getting paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 My cousin is a trolley dolly for Delta and she is the first to admit what an easy job it is and what a great life she has visiting all the places she does and getting paid for it. One of my friends is one for Flybe, she absolutely loves it and does next to no work. She also earns a very healthy wage by keeping heself 'on call' during her time off, which is very rare that she is called in. They also had their quarterly review meeting over 3 days.... in Athens.... it's a hard life eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 24 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2010 I have met various trolley dolleys around the world..they have a fantastic job and perks..... I bet if all these people on strike were sacked or walked, their jobs would be filled in no time at all..I bet BA would have to litterally turn people away Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sour Mash Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 :smt041Oh my god... you got that straight off the Unite pdf as well didn't you? You have some strange obsession with the role of a trolley dolly and seem desperate to make it sound more glamorous and challenging than it really is. They are people who serve tea and coffee and also know how to use a fire extinguisher and administer basic first aid ( if there is not a doctor on nurse on board ) Exactly. I'm sure it can be a tiring and stressful job at times and they're stuck dealing with some absolute morons on occassions, but please don't paint it out to be some sort of safety critical, emergency support job, as SRS says above, they serve food and drink and can maybe help a bit with some basic first aid. I couldn't care less if a stewardess could "Take command of a lifeboat in a ditching event" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 24 May, 2010 Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Hey! Why don't we all become attendants? It's such a good life! I have three friends who were flight attendants. Like many other people in many other walks of life, they either changed career or opted for ground duties because of the toll it took on their personal lives and families. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 24 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 24 May, 2010 Hey! Why don't we all become attendants? It's such a good life! I have three friends who were flight attendants. Like many other people in many other walks of life, they either changed career or opted for ground duties because of the toll it took on their personal lives and families. do you reckon..if the jobs of those on strike became available tomorrow, would BA have any problem what so ever filling the positions with capable people..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now