buctootim Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 You're wasting your time BTF. These right wingers have principles which is OK but the minute someone, or a Union, sticks to their principles and it affects them then they want to deny anyone else that right. Total waste of time. They can't understand that Duncan was so principled, and doing a stalwart job in defending and caring for his members that he lost his job through victimisation. Imagine Stu or Stan shouting the odds for their mates, until the boss threatens dismissal. 'That's it boys, you're on your own, I have no principles' The flow of obsequiousness would not abate! http://www.wordreference.com/definition/obsequiousness People forget about the Tolpuddle Martyrs and what they started. Ok, so some union activity (particularly the 70's) was OTT but Unions are not always about that! Sorry but that is ********. The action was all about preserving the ridiculous pay and benefits enjoyed by BAs long haul crews only. BA staff at Gatwick and other fleets had already settled for realistic deals. By rejecting a damn good deal from BA - much better than the short haul and Gatwick crews get - and striking FF has damaged BA and directly dumped on those non Heathrow union members - one of whom is my ex wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Every job should be measured against the firefighters and squaddies apparently! Why don't they teach you this at school the feckers? not really...but when there are very long list of applicants to be firemen, sort of tells you that the deal and conditions they were on were not too bad.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 not really...but when there are very long list of applicants to be firemen, sort of tells you that the deal and conditions they were on were not too bad.. There is a long list of Indians wanting to be doctors and nurses in the UK too. Shame the queue is not as big from our own back yard. Maybe more should be said about the benifits our armed forces get or dont get? Obviously the trained men and women cant speak up as they are under orders so maybe the general public should speak up. What was the basic wage in the forces again? And what comes with it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 This should interest the open-minded on this forum http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/17/ba-strike-plan-gregor-gall http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/15/ba-strike-unite-willie-walsh So that you can get to see both sides of the story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Sorry but that is ********. The action was all about preserving the ridiculous pay and benefits enjoyed by BAs long haul crews only. BA staff at Gatwick and other fleets had already settled for realistic deals. By rejecting a damn good deal from BA - much better than the short haul and Gatwick crews get - and striking FF has damaged BA and directly dumped on those non Heathrow union members - one of whom is my ex wife. Read it again. I mentioned Duncan doing a steward's job of looking after his members, not the strike. Duncan was victimised, in my opinion, for doing his union work. If he had been guilty of gross misconduct it might well have been deserved but he wasn't. FF has not damaged BA. The management of BA want to steamroller through with changes, rather than change by consultation. The union made many concessionary proposals to save money. But the management, being bullish, have decided to fight the unions rather than negotiate in an effort to totally eradicate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Sorry but that is ********. The action was all about preserving the ridiculous pay and benefits enjoyed by BAs long haul crews only. BA staff at Gatwick and other fleets had already settled for realistic deals. By rejecting a damn good deal from BA - much better than the short haul and Gatwick crews get - and striking FF has damaged BA and directly dumped on those non Heathrow union members - one of whom is my ex wife. Agreed. While I agree with the sentiments about FF having lost his job, there's no getting away from the fact that his miltant union beliefs and stubborn refusal to face facts have paid their part. On a similar dicussion on this board around Xmas, he mad the following direct quotes: "This dispute is nothing whatsoever to do with money." "it is a fallacy that we are overpaid." and, perhaps the worst... "in an anwer to us being paid twice as much as our counterparts it depends who you define as our counterparts. Yes we earn more than Easyjet crew but if you compare our salaries with other national airlines in Europe like KLM, IBERIA etc we are very much on a par." That's the same KLM/Air France partnership who have, according to Reuters, lost 500 million euros between January and March 2010. In addition to 235 million euros for the previous quarter. And the same Iberia who posted a 147 million euro first-quarter loss (again, according to Reuters) in May 2009, prior to their merger deal with BA. Real bastions of profitability and sustainability there. Too much militant tendency and not enough realisation of the real world. I appluad FF for standing by his principles, but its just my opinion that those principles are vastly flawed and extremely one-dimensional. And I also applaud BA for standing up to it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 This should interest the open-minded on this forum http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2010/mar/17/ba-strike-plan-gregor-gall http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/15/ba-strike-unite-willie-walsh So that you can get to see both sides of the story. This is a better summary of the situation imo. http://www.businessweek.com/news/2010-04-19/ba-has-strongest-hand-in-crew-dispute-1997-strike-leader-says.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 There is a long list of Indians wanting to be doctors and nurses in the UK too. Shame the queue is not as big from our own back yard. Maybe more should be said about the benifits our armed forces get or dont get? Obviously the trained men and women cant speak up as they are under orders so maybe the general public should speak up. What was the basic wage in the forces again? And what comes with it? what are you on about with indians and NHS...? there were (at the time just before the strikes) about 100 applicants for every job going in the fire service where do you draw the line..more money for the armed forces, then the police, the the doctors then teachers, the nurses, the ben men then then who is going to pay for this..? as for basic wage in the forces..depends what you mean....new recruit..? an admiral..? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 FF has not damaged BA. The management of BA want to steamroller through with changes, rather than change by consultation. The union made many concessionary proposals to save money. But the management, being bullish, have decided to fight the unions rather than negotiate in an effort to totally eradicate them. Not only has FF damaged BA, he has damaged the union. He will find a lot of Heathrow short haul, Gatwick and regional crews drifting away because of this dispute. To reiterate, the pilots, engineers and non Heathrow long haul staff had all settled - but it is their job security which will be directly impacted by this uneccessary dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 I wonder what airline will employ cabin crews who were right behind the strike when BA have no choice but to slash its staff or even fold completely Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Kraken Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 I wonder what airline will employ cabin crews who were right behind the strike when BA have no choice but to slash its staff or even fold completely More to the point, what BA cabin crew staff will actually want to leave and take lesser terms and salary for effectively doing the same job? May as well stay until you're pushed (whilst on better, cushier conditions) and drive the company into the ground with unsustainable costs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Not only has FF damaged BA, he has damaged the union. He will find a lot of Heathrow short haul, Gatwick and regional crews drifting away because of this dispute. To reiterate, the pilots, engineers and non Heathrow long haul staff had all settled - but it is their job security which will be directly impacted by this uneccessary dispute. FF did not make the decision to strike. The members voted on it, as required to by law, and followed all the legal procedures in giving notice of that ballot result. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 FF did not make the decision to strike. The members voted on it, as required to by law, and followed all the legal procedures in giving notice of that ballot result. well, at this rate, it wont be long before more are with FF in trying to find jobs.... dont know if they have read the news lately...europe is on the verge of economic meltdown Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buctootim Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Anyone who doubts what this strike is about should read the comments from BAs own staff. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/8294056.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 (edited) Anyone who doubts what this strike is about should read the comments from BAs own staff. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/8294056.stm variable pay.... in the forces we get this sort of thing depending on what you are doing..one thing they hammer home is that it is just that..VARIABLE PAY..when you get it, it is "extra"... I work as cabin crew at Gatwick and I think that it is about time that cabin crew based at Heathrow were brought into line with their fellow colleagues at Gatwick, who do the same job for significantly less money. As a cabin crew member who has worked in Manchester and was then transferred to London when the Manchester base was closed down, I was shocked to see how 'easy' life was at Heathrow. To survive this crisis it is important that these measures are taken and the rest of my colleagues 'wake up and smell the coffee' and start to work for a living. Sorry my friends I am recently retired staff having served for almost 40 years. Every department in BA bar one has been making saving for many years now. All of these departments are still proud to be able to deliver excellent service, whether to internal or external customers. For too long the LHR cabin crew have been under the illusion that they alone are the epitomy of good service. At last the Leadership Team has done what it is there to do, lead. Edited 7 May, 2010 by Thedelldays Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 How many squaddies do you see going on strike? None... because they are commited to serving queen and country, and if they did decide to strike they would be charged with either AWOL or Refusing to Soldier. How many Squaddies do you see on the news moaning about their pay an conditions in the papers etc? None... because if they did they would be charged with Bringing the Army into Disrepute. Brilliant! We can reduce their pay and conditions even more than I thought and they won't complain or go on strike! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 7 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Brilliant! We can reduce their pay and conditions even more than I thought and they won't complain or go on strike! they just leave and find different jobs.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 There is a long list of Indians wanting to be doctors and nurses in the UK too. Shame the queue is not as big from our own back yard. Maybe more should be said about the benifits our armed forces get or dont get? Obviously the trained men and women cant speak up as they are under orders so maybe the general public should speak up. What was the basic wage in the forces again? And what comes with it? Entry level? About 13-15k Benefits? 140 times more likely to be killed than a firefighter who thinks he is worth 30k a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 Brilliant! We can reduce their pay and conditions even more than I thought and they won't complain or go on strike! No... they will sign off, work their YEARS notice and go into Civvy Street and find another job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 we should enlist the bankers and traders and send them to Afghanistan theyve got enough cash stuffed away that they can work for free too and pay off their debt to soceity properly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonnyboy Posted 7 May, 2010 Share Posted 7 May, 2010 well, at this rate, it wont be long before more are with FF in trying to find jobs.... dont know if they have read the news lately...europe is on the verge of economic meltdown smash the unions! keep the peasants in chains! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gemmel Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 FF did not make the decision to strike. The members voted on it, as required to by law, and followed all the legal procedures in giving notice of that ballot result. Remind me what happened with the first strike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 FF did not make the decision to strike. The members voted on it, as required to by law, and followed all the legal procedures in giving notice of that ballot result. You are of course right, however, the union leadership play a big part in advising and influencing the members which way to vote. Take for example the latest ballot. The Unite leadership strongly recommended that the members reject the offer on the table. Other times, the union leadership will say to the members, this is the best deal we will ever get and we recommend that you take it, and 9 time out of 10 they do. I am not saying the the union members are sheep and blindly follow the leadership, but FF did have a significant influence on the direction and nature of this dispute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 Remind me what happened with the first strike Was it not discovered that there were anomalies with the count? Ex employees being issued with ballot papers etc? Definitely a disgrace that no control of membership was exercised. Who ran the ballot? Certainly when we balloted (1990 Electricians @ Ford) it was run by the Electoral Reform Society. What I was saying was that FF did not make the members strike. Irrespective of how rightly, or wrongly, the ballot was conducted. The members, and sadly some interlopers, voted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 Was it not discovered that there were anomalies with the count? Ex employees being issued with ballot papers etc? Definitely a disgrace that no control of membership was exercised. Who ran the ballot? Certainly when we balloted (1990 Electricians @ Ford) it was run by the Electoral Reform Society. What I was saying was that FF did not make the members strike. Irrespective of how rightly, or wrongly, the ballot was conducted. The members, and sadly some interlopers, voted. Didn't FF say that, as a result of that, the judge directed the union to update its database? Isn't that what he took time off to do? And is now dismissed as a result? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 Didn't FF say that, as a result of that, the judge directed the union to update its database? Isn't that what he took time off to do? And is now dismissed as a result? I have always been given to understand that a decent employer will give a duly elected shop steward reasonable time, within working hours, to perform union work. In practice I have even found that most decent employers will give the union officials access to a PC with e-mail etc. When the company works with the union most issues, from either side, get sorted amicably and effectively. It's generally the hot heads, from either side, who cause the problems and it's normally the steward who keeps his ones in check! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 8 May, 2010 Author Share Posted 8 May, 2010 smash the unions! keep the peasants in chains! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weston Super Saint Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 I have always been given to understand that a decent employer will give a duly elected shop steward reasonable time, within working hours, to perform union work. In practice I have even found that most decent employers will give the union officials access to a PC with e-mail etc. It was quoted in the papers [i believe], before, so all the information is in the public domain.... So, just how many hours has FF spent doing his duties for BA - you know, the people who were paying his 50odd grand a year salary - over the past 12 months, and how does that compare to the hours he was contracted to work? I suspect the answer to that question might point to the reason why he was sacked.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EastleighSoulBoy Posted 8 May, 2010 Share Posted 8 May, 2010 (edited) It was quoted in the papers [i believe], before, so all the information is in the public domain.... So, just how many hours has FF spent doing his duties for BA - you know, the people who were paying his 50odd grand a year salary - over the past 12 months, and how does that compare to the hours he was contracted to work? I suspect the answer to that question might point to the reason why he was sacked.... Maybe so, it might also be interesting to see if the company voiced their concerns about the amount of time he spent on Union business. Then again it might, just might, be the fact that they didn't want him doing union business within working time especially if it concerned their current dispute. Hence my previous use of the phrase 'decent employer'. Given that all the union offerings at the table were basically ignored. Who really knows? Probably only the Union and the management and each will have their spin on it. * EDIT* I presume that the employer followed the correct disciplinary procedures which led up to Duncan's dismissal? Some have been known to 'forget' exactly where they were in that procedure and 'inadvertently' jump a few steps! Edited 8 May, 2010 by EastleighSoulBoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Duncan on Radio 5 now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Duncan on Radio 5 now. Any chance of a summary? cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
miserableoldgit Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Any chance of a summary? cheers He has been on for nearly an hour, and is still on, putting his case against his dismissal, and for the BA proposed strike action. It is also a phone-in so he is facing opposing views from callers. Am trying to get some work done so can`t pick up all of the details!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ottery st mary Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 He has been on for nearly an hour, and is still on, putting his case against his dismissal, and for the BA proposed strike action. It is also a phone-in so he is facing opposing views from callers. Am trying to get some work done so can`t pick up all of the details!! Come on get your priorities right FFS:D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red and White Army Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 The unions and their members are right ******s for these new proposed strikes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
saintjay77 Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 So did anyone hear enough of what FF on radio 5 to give an update? The argument seems pretty one sided at the mo so just wondering if the other side of the argument is good enough to change anyones opinions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 (edited) I know quite a few BA members, 2 ex union despatchers (for the strike) and one very senior BA worker, who is working to ensure minimum disruption to plans (very much against the strike), and I have to say I think the strike is inherently wrong. HOWEVER I do support Duncan's RIGHT to argue for the strike, and to be struck off for political reasons is wrong. The other issue is that BA have realised that there are efficiency savings they can make, and I wouldn't be surprised to see some redundancies this year, all made possible for BA by the strike, and the seniors realising further savings can be made on cabin crew. Of course, I don't know this for sure, I am purely speculating, but it really wouldn't surprise me. Edited 11 May, 2010 by Dibden Purlieu Saint Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Haven't most of the other BA staff been trained as cabin crew for when the strikes take effect? Having staff that are able to multi-task and are reliable could render "specialist" cabin crew rather redundant, with the strike only serving to show BA that they'll actually be better off without them... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StuRomseySaint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Haven't most of the other BA staff been trained as cabin crew for when the strikes take effect? Having staff that are able to multi-task and are reliable could render "specialist" cabin crew rather redundant, with the strike only serving to show BA that they'll actually be better off without them... Exactly, and then they get to have staff doing a full weeks work as opposed to 70 hours a month... as they can find other duties to fill in the other 100 or so hours a month that everyone else works. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dibden Purlieu Saint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Haven't most of the other BA staff been trained as cabin crew for when the strikes take effect? Having staff that are able to multi-task and are reliable could render "specialist" cabin crew rather redundant, with the strike only serving to show BA that they'll actually be better off without them... Yes they are, which is hurting the crew more and more. And the public have responded well to it, especially when you get Pilots in full regalia serving you tea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Anyone who doubts what this strike is about should read the comments from BAs own staff. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/talking_point/8294056.stm "I'm a BA crew member and these changes mean that all of us will have to work harder for less money" LOL - welcome to the real world and joining the rest of us!! "I am a BA cabin crew member on longhaul. This change is being imposed - our union has not agreed to this. Around 50% of my salary is made up of variable pay, i.e. money I receive depending on which trips I am rostered." Again, welcome to the real world. 'Extra' money you earn should be considered a bonus and saved, you shouldn't be living above your base salary. Ask any salesman that. Ask anyone who does overtime. Idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 "I'm a BA crew member and these changes mean that all of us will have to work harder for less money" LOL - welcome to the real world and joining the rest of us!! "I am a BA cabin crew member on longhaul. This change is being imposed - our union has not agreed to this. Around 50% of my salary is made up of variable pay, i.e. money I receive depending on which trips I am rostered." Again, welcome to the real world. 'Extra' money you earn should be considered a bonus and saved, you shouldn't be living above your base salary. Ask any salesman that. Ask anyone who does overtime. Idiots. But your salesman or person working overtime wouldn't like it if his / her bonus / overtime payment was stopped without discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrant Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 But your salesman or person working overtime wouldn't like it if his / her bonus / overtime payment was stopped without discussion. I expect they would look for alternative employment. There are lots of airlines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 But your salesman or person working overtime wouldn't like it if his / her bonus / overtime payment was stopped without discussion. Get realistic. A bonus is just that, a bonus, if the company does well and you meet your personal targets - the company don't have to pay a bonus. Overtime and commission can be changed at will, in every company I've been in, this happens. The person can leave and find a new job, or carry on under the new scheme. But again, the point is that you should not be living beyond your base salary means. Simple really. Then when a company is in the poo and decides not to pay a bonus/change the commission structure/withdraw overtime, you aren't royally shafted. I have bugger all sympathy with BA cabin crew at Heathrow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trousers Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 I expect they would look for alternative employment. There are lots of airlines. They couldn't logistically all move to other airlines though, could they? How many 'spare' jobs do these other airlines have? Yours devils-advocately... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Get realistic. A bonus is just that, a bonus, if the company does well and you meet your personal targets - the company don't have to pay a bonus. Overtime and commission can be changed at will, in every company I've been in, this happens. The person can leave and find a new job, or carry on under the new scheme. But again, the point is that you should not be living beyond your base salary means. Simple really. Then when a company is in the poo and decides not to pay a bonus/change the commission structure/withdraw overtime, you aren't royally shafted. I have bugger all sympathy with BA cabin crew at Heathrow. Many, many people - particular in the sales field, have target bonuses written into their contracts of employment. My son's basic salary is a (comparative) pittance - his target bonuses are huge. That is the way of sales (in IT and I imagine in many other industries). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Many, many people - particular in the sales field, have target bonuses written into their contracts of employment. My son's basic salary is a (comparative) pittance - his target bonuses are huge. That is the way of sales (in IT and I imagine in many other industries). Yes, of course. But if your salary is £30k and your OTE is £80k. You DON'T live to an £80k lifestyle, simple. And Trousers; I suggest they find jobs here, seem to be plenty of them: http://www.careerintravel.co.uk/cabin-crew-latest-jobs.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Yes, of course. But if your salary is £30k and your OTE is £80k. You DON'T live to an £80k lifestyle, simple. And Trousers; I suggest they find jobs here, seem to be plenty of them: http://www.careerintravel.co.uk/cabin-crew-latest-jobs.htm From the snippet you posted, I didn't get the impression that they WERE saying they did live on their bonus. My other half works shifts and gets an unsocial hours additional payment. Maybe their long haul payments are similar? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Yes, of course. But if your salary is £30k and your OTE is £80k. You DON'T live to an £80k lifestyle, simple. And Trousers; I suggest they find jobs here, seem to be plenty of them: http://www.careerintravel.co.uk/cabin-crew-latest-jobs.htm They should go for aurigney - then they would realise how good they had it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redondo Saint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 Some people need to get some reality checks! A huge amount of salary packages have been reduced in the last 18 months to cope with the recession. It appears to me that the BA salary package is much higher than the industry average and it needs to change. BA is not a state owned business where they can go to the treasury and ask for more money - it's a commercial venture and as such subject to commercial pressures. I have always liked BA as an airline and am upset that it appears to be facing disaster. I am also upset that I have to chose United Airlines instead of BA this week to make sure I get to my meetings in UK and Spain. A much welcome business class ticket that BA will not get because of potential striking crews. BA used to be the gold standard in short and long haul flights. Very sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Saint Posted 11 May, 2010 Share Posted 11 May, 2010 So did anyone hear enough of what FF on radio 5 to give an update? The argument seems pretty one sided at the mo so just wondering if the other side of the argument is good enough to change anyones opinions? There was a clip on drive time - Duncan arguing with a hostie. The hostie said if unite had accepted the deal last year then the hosties would have had a share scheme, a bonus scheme a an extra free ticket per year. Incidently, they said that Duncan is now a full time employee of Unite so it seems like he is now sorted. 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