Last edit by: NWIFlyer
Routes to/from LGW*/LCY/STN are NOT affected. Only flights to/from LHR* are potentially affected. If you think you may be affected, post 2714 (click here) may be helpful.
*The LGW-JFK flight has seen a lot of cancellations for the current strike period.
Current strike period:
Next announced strike period:
Previous strike periods:
Routes affected:
As a possible indication, for the fifth strike period BA announced the following cancellations:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/27910044-post2131.html as well as flights to and from Doha on all affected days (17 - 20 February).
Mixed fleet routes are listed here, though note that other (non Mixed Fleet) flights from Heathrow are also being cancelled.
Note for context in terms of how many routes might actually be affected: there are about 4000 members of MF (of which ~2,700 are Unite members and therefore eligible to take industrial action) and 15,000 total cabin crew
Background Details from BA:
Strike 19th July-1st August
2nd August-16th August
Background Details from Unite:
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/br...ty-pay-levels/
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/br...refuses-talks/
Latest negotiating position:
Talks at ACAS in June appear to have failed, with a further two week strike commencing 1st July announced on 16th June.
Key upcoming dates:
Ballot results for industrial action:
*The LGW-JFK flight has seen a lot of cancellations for the current strike period.
Current strike period:
- None
Next announced strike period:
Previous strike periods:
- 25th December 2016 from 00:01 for 48 hours. (Strike action was suspended following ACAS discussions and revised offer.)
- 10th & 11th January 2017
- 19th January 2017 for 72 hours until 21st January
- 5th-7th & 9th-11th February 2017
- 17th-20th February 2017
- 22nd-25th February 2017
- 3rd-9th March 2017
- 16th-19th June 2017 (suspended pending further ACAS talks)
- 1st-16th July 2017
- 19th July-1st August 2017
- 2nd-15th August 2017
- 16th-30th August 2017
Routes affected:
As a possible indication, for the fifth strike period BA announced the following cancellations:
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/27910044-post2131.html as well as flights to and from Doha on all affected days (17 - 20 February).
Mixed fleet routes are listed here, though note that other (non Mixed Fleet) flights from Heathrow are also being cancelled.
Note for context in terms of how many routes might actually be affected: there are about 4000 members of MF (of which ~2,700 are Unite members and therefore eligible to take industrial action) and 15,000 total cabin crew
Background Details from BA:
Strike 19th July-1st August
2nd August-16th August
Background Details from Unite:
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/br...ty-pay-levels/
http://www.unitetheunion.org/news/br...refuses-talks/
Latest negotiating position:
Talks at ACAS in June appear to have failed, with a further two week strike commencing 1st July announced on 16th June.
Key upcoming dates:
- Latest negotiated position (@ 23rd Oct 2017) between BA & Unite to be balloted. Rumoured that the union is recommending acceptance.
Ballot results for industrial action:
- First ballot, November 2016: Yes 79.5%, No 20.5%
- Second ballot, December 2016: Yes 70%, No 30%
- Third ballot, March 2017: Yes 56%, No 44%, turnout 72%
BA 'Mixed Fleet' cabin crew dispute [agreement reached]
#2686
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,696
If its during legal strike days, as notified by the union, why is it illegal?
I'd appreciate if you could point out the relevant portion of UK legislation.
In the UK staff are not permitted by law to work on a legal strike day, and withdraw services at some point during the day?
There are clearly MF unionized crew who have worked on legal strike days so far. Is the union required to provide the company a list of staff who will or will not be striking in advance?
I'd appreciate if you could point out the relevant portion of UK legislation.
In the UK staff are not permitted by law to work on a legal strike day, and withdraw services at some point during the day?
There are clearly MF unionized crew who have worked on legal strike days so far. Is the union required to provide the company a list of staff who will or will not be striking in advance?
#2688
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,696
ABZ has been one that has had the odd cancellation - usually no more that one rotation cancelled on any one day and on several days no cancellations. However I don't think it was ever the last flights of the day which were cancelled.
#2689
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,118
The notice provision requires that unions provide the employer with notice on whether strike action will be continuos or discontinuous, a list of the category of employees affected, the number of employees affected, and the workplace of the employees affected. Where an employee has more than one workplace, the employee is associated with the workplace to which s/he has the closest connection.
I see no provision prohibiting legal strike-eligible employees from withdrawing services part way through a strike period, after having first arrived at work. The Union is required to notify an employer that an employee is affected/legally permitted to strike, but the same employee is also legally permitted to show up at work.
Provisions on notice/nature of the strike action are relatively short compared to those related to strike ballots, justified/unjustified dismissal etc.
I'd genuinely like to see legislation or a legal ruling that would indicate that such action is, indeed, illegal. To be honest, I have my doubts that it actually is (but have no doubt BA would fight such actions in the courts).
Anyway, until I see something a bit more solid than "its not legal," we can agree to disagree.
Last edited by makin'miles; Jun 20, 2017 at 2:00 pm
#2690
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: UK
Programs: BAEC Gold, IHG Gold, Virgin FC Red
Posts: 625
I was also wondering if the BA1318 on Friday is cancelled, would BA split the booking so my partner can travel earlier on the Friday with me following on the Saturday? The booking is 1 PNR. We are both Gold BAEC.
#2691
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,696
Likely Section 234A, then? I don't see any prohibition there, but then again I'm not a UK lawyer. Are you?
The notice provision requires that unions provide the employer with notice on whether strike action will be continuos or discontinuous, a list of the category of employees affected, the number of employees affected, and the workplace of the employees affected. Where an employee has more than one workplace, the employee is associated with the workplace to which s/he has the closest connection.
I see no provision prohibiting legal strike-eligible employees from withdrawing services part way through a strike period, after having first arrived at work. The Union is required to notify an employer that an employee is affected/legally permitted to strike, but the same employee is also legally permitted to show up at work.
Provisions on notice/nature of the strike action are relatively short compared to those related to strike ballots, justified/unjustified dismissal etc.
I'd genuinely like to see legislation or a legal ruling that would indicate that such action is, indeed, illegal. To be honest, I have my doubts that it actually is (but have no doubt BA would fight such actions in the courts).
Anyway, until I see something a bit more solid than "its not legal," we can agree to disagree.
The notice provision requires that unions provide the employer with notice on whether strike action will be continuos or discontinuous, a list of the category of employees affected, the number of employees affected, and the workplace of the employees affected. Where an employee has more than one workplace, the employee is associated with the workplace to which s/he has the closest connection.
I see no provision prohibiting legal strike-eligible employees from withdrawing services part way through a strike period, after having first arrived at work. The Union is required to notify an employer that an employee is affected/legally permitted to strike, but the same employee is also legally permitted to show up at work.
Provisions on notice/nature of the strike action are relatively short compared to those related to strike ballots, justified/unjustified dismissal etc.
I'd genuinely like to see legislation or a legal ruling that would indicate that such action is, indeed, illegal. To be honest, I have my doubts that it actually is (but have no doubt BA would fight such actions in the courts).
Anyway, until I see something a bit more solid than "its not legal," we can agree to disagree.
Last edited by KARFA; Jun 20, 2017 at 2:55 pm
#2692
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 38,642
#2693
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: LHR Air Traffic Control
Programs: BAEC Silver
Posts: 868
Answers to your questions are mostly quite simple:
1) The union would pay the flights home, from a strike fund.
2) On whichever carrier can be booked reasonably (many carriers fly to London).
3) Other union members will continue to work, and be paid. They aren't blind either, and if they are really motivated to make this work, I can't see this being a problem.
4) If executed properly, the staff will only notify the airline that they are walking off the job an hour or so before flight departure time, so BA will have paid the accommodation costs. They then grab a cab for the airport and head home, while BA sorts out the mess.
5) Visa status is a fair question. I imagine its pretty manageable, but this would obviously affect where the union could pull staff off downroute (although downroute is also Manchester or Aberdeen or Glasgow).
#2694
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London Stratford, E7
Programs: BAEC Gold! Thanks to FT
Posts: 3,338
I hope that holds true. We are on BA1318 on a Friday night (9pm up to ABZ) and then back on BA1317 on Sunday night (8:25pm back to LHR). The BA1317 is scheduled for a mid haul A321 so we booked Club Europe for the novelty. Hope there isn't an equipment swap...
I was also wondering if the BA1318 on Friday is cancelled, would BA split the booking so my partner can travel earlier on the Friday with me following on the Saturday? The booking is 1 PNR. We are both Gold BAEC.
I was also wondering if the BA1318 on Friday is cancelled, would BA split the booking so my partner can travel earlier on the Friday with me following on the Saturday? The booking is 1 PNR. We are both Gold BAEC.
#2695
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 6,349
Likely Section 234A, then? I don't see any prohibition there, but then again I'm not a UK lawyer. Are you?
The notice provision requires that unions provide the employer with notice on whether strike action will be continuos or discontinuous, a list of the category of employees affected, the number of employees affected, and the workplace of the employees affected. Where an employee has more than one workplace, the employee is associated with the workplace to which s/he has the closest connection.
I see no provision prohibiting legal strike-eligible employees from withdrawing services part way through a strike period, after having first arrived at work. The Union is required to notify an employer that an employee is affected/legally permitted to strike, but the same employee is also legally permitted to show up at work.
Provisions on notice/nature of the strike action are relatively short compared to those related to strike ballots, justified/unjustified dismissal etc.
I'd genuinely like to see legislation or a legal ruling that would indicate that such action is, indeed, illegal. To be honest, I have my doubts that it actually is (but have no doubt BA would fight such actions in the courts).
Anyway, until I see something a bit more solid than "its not legal," we can agree to disagree.
The notice provision requires that unions provide the employer with notice on whether strike action will be continuos or discontinuous, a list of the category of employees affected, the number of employees affected, and the workplace of the employees affected. Where an employee has more than one workplace, the employee is associated with the workplace to which s/he has the closest connection.
I see no provision prohibiting legal strike-eligible employees from withdrawing services part way through a strike period, after having first arrived at work. The Union is required to notify an employer that an employee is affected/legally permitted to strike, but the same employee is also legally permitted to show up at work.
Provisions on notice/nature of the strike action are relatively short compared to those related to strike ballots, justified/unjustified dismissal etc.
I'd genuinely like to see legislation or a legal ruling that would indicate that such action is, indeed, illegal. To be honest, I have my doubts that it actually is (but have no doubt BA would fight such actions in the courts).
Anyway, until I see something a bit more solid than "its not legal," we can agree to disagree.
The unions do employ strategists and lawyers, with the greatest of respect I would be astonished if you were the first person ever to have such an idea. Making that presumption I agree with the other posters that it probably isn't doable.
Continually asking other posters if they are lawyers is a bit tedious btw.
#2696
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,118
If it was a) achievable and b) legal I'm sure the union would already be doing it, as it would be an obvious way of disrupting the airline.
The unions do employ strategists and lawyers, with the greatest of respect I would be astonished if you were the first person ever to have such an idea. Making that presumption I agree with the other posters that it probably isn't doable.
Continually asking other posters if they are lawyers is a bit tedious btw.
The unions do employ strategists and lawyers, with the greatest of respect I would be astonished if you were the first person ever to have such an idea. Making that presumption I agree with the other posters that it probably isn't doable.
Continually asking other posters if they are lawyers is a bit tedious btw.
TBH, I find it a bit tedious for other posters to state as fact that something is "illegal" when they actually don't know that's the case, but hey we all have our bugs.
Personally, I find discussion of various pressure/strike tactics and their potential effect on BA significantly more interesting than reading yet another post asking if a flight to Timbuktu might be cancelled in three weeks time when its clear from the thread that no one knows.
#2697
Ambassador, British Airways; FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Leeds, UK
Programs: BA GGL/CCR, GfL, HH Diamond
Posts: 42,696
"Continually?" Once btw.
TBH, I find it a bit tedious for other posters to state as fact that something is "illegal" when they actually don't know that's the case, but hey we all have our bugs.
Personally, I find discussion of various pressure/strike tactics and their potential effect on BA significantly more interesting than reading yet another post asking if a flight to Timbuktu might be cancelled in three weeks time when its clear from the thread that no one knows.
TBH, I find it a bit tedious for other posters to state as fact that something is "illegal" when they actually don't know that's the case, but hey we all have our bugs.
Personally, I find discussion of various pressure/strike tactics and their potential effect on BA significantly more interesting than reading yet another post asking if a flight to Timbuktu might be cancelled in three weeks time when its clear from the thread that no one knows.
The law also obliges the union to provide figures and information which "...must be as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information in the possession of the union at the time when it complies with subsection (1)." Clearly planning to strike downroute but not saying anything to the employer and instead simply surprising the employer doesn't really fit that.
Now
- bearing the above in mind which at the very least would provide some very good arguments for BA to take action against the union if crew without notice simply stopped working downroute even though the union had provided no indication this would happen, and
- that Unite's own guidelines state that in the notice of action "You must be clear about the action we are calling on members to take.", and
- that both cabin crew and flight crew who work for BA say that striking downroute has never been done and simply would not be done
can we perhaps drop this and move on?
Regardless of whether we agree or disagree on the legalities, it isn't going to happen.
#2698
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: somewhere north of stateside...
Posts: 4,118
Ok well let me lay this out for you so we can end this since you don't seem to want to let it go. The law I mentioned earlier clearly says part of the notice from the union must include "a list of the workplaces at which the affected employees work." The workplace if you are striking downroute may arguably be the downroute destination as that is where you are refusing to work.
The law also obliges the union to provide figures and information which "...must be as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information in the possession of the union at the time when it complies with subsection (1)." Clearly planning to strike downroute but not saying anything to the employer and instead simply surprising the employer doesn't really fit that.
Now
- bearing the above in mind which at the very least would provide some very good arguments for BA to take action against the union if crew without notice simply stopped working downroute even though the union had provided no indication this would happen, and
- that Unite's own guidelines state that in the notice of action "You must be clear about the action we are calling on members to take.", and
- that both cabin crew and flight crew who work for BA say that striking downroute has never been done and simply would not be done
can we perhaps drop this and move on?
Regardless of whether we agree or disagree on the legalities, it isn't going to happen.
The law also obliges the union to provide figures and information which "...must be as accurate as is reasonably practicable in the light of the information in the possession of the union at the time when it complies with subsection (1)." Clearly planning to strike downroute but not saying anything to the employer and instead simply surprising the employer doesn't really fit that.
Now
- bearing the above in mind which at the very least would provide some very good arguments for BA to take action against the union if crew without notice simply stopped working downroute even though the union had provided no indication this would happen, and
- that Unite's own guidelines state that in the notice of action "You must be clear about the action we are calling on members to take.", and
- that both cabin crew and flight crew who work for BA say that striking downroute has never been done and simply would not be done
can we perhaps drop this and move on?
Regardless of whether we agree or disagree on the legalities, it isn't going to happen.
Thanks for "laying this out for [me] so we can end this", but right away your argument has a big hole. Regarding a downroute place of work, the exact same section of of the legislation states (in 234A-5D):
"For the purposes of this section, the workplace at which an employee works is
(a)in relation to an employee who works at or from a single set of premises, those premises, and
(b)in relation to any other employee, the premises with which his employment has the closest connection."
On its face, it would seem to me that this is London for LHR-based cabin crew, and not wherever they happen to be, although there could be a court ruling or legal precedent that provides further clarity on this point.
At the end of the day:
You and I both agree that striking downroute is unlikely (or it may have already been done).
You and I also agree that strike action to-date has not produced the intended results. We may also agree that Unite has been rather ineffective and unimaginative in the management of the strike.
Where we disagree, however, is on legality. I have questions about legality of certain strike action, while you've stated as fact that certain action is "illegal" but have been unable to back this up with legislation or rulings.
Your most recent post "laying it out for me" did little, to be honest, to lay out any facts - it laid out your opinion. We're all entitled to our opinions, but opinions don't create or change facts. And the fact is that questions regarding the legality of such action are still very much outstanding on this thread.
Happy to move on, and this is the last you'll hear from me on this subject (unless downroute withdrawal of labour happens, of course, in which case I won't be able to resist popping back in ).
Be well, and no, I don't believe that MF is operating Timbuktu services.
#2699
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Programs: Lemonia. Best Greek ever.
Posts: 2,259
Can we now stop this very silly argument? Unite are not going to take on BA's lawyers by using downroute stoppages. It is as simple as that.
The BA/Bassa branch was extremely wealthy before and during the non-MF Wimbledon holidays/strikes a few years ago. (We still do not know where their money is now).
They decided not to take action downroute. They will have taken legal advice.
Unite's solicitors are not daft.
The BA/Bassa branch was extremely wealthy before and during the non-MF Wimbledon holidays/strikes a few years ago. (We still do not know where their money is now).
They decided not to take action downroute. They will have taken legal advice.
Unite's solicitors are not daft.
#2700
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: London
Posts: 3,500
We have seen on many occasions with BA strikes that their unions are indeed not the brightest, and either get poor legal advice or choose not to follow it.
Thinking that 'if it was allowed it would have happened' is too simplistic. It may be legal, it may be not - you can't infer anything from the fact that previous strikes haven't used this tactic.
Thinking that 'if it was allowed it would have happened' is too simplistic. It may be legal, it may be not - you can't infer anything from the fact that previous strikes haven't used this tactic.