Old Jun 22, 19, 7:17 am
Join Date: Feb 2011
Programs: BA silver, aeroplan
Posts: 756
Originally Posted by Mikey Mike Mike View Post
All of the three disputes IMHO are worthy and have validity. As the ex COO of a transit organisation in Canada - I have learnt that the vast majority of crew, pilots (operators) or whoever are real people with real lives and family and care about doing a good job. (despite some of my reviews!!)
I can't comment on the pilot's cause, but Gatwick crew have been left behind for years in terms of T&Cs under the guise of competing with Norwegian. Speaking of which the same argument has been used for mixed fleet. I have to say, I am not a fan of the MF quality of service in business / first class, but they work hard, are pleasant and work under way worse conditions. I know they choose to do this, but that doesn't give BA licence to take the p**s. Worst salary, more days at work, different hotels, stricter standards on appearance and performance, airport standby, few rest days after long flights, and more nimble rostering doing the mix of SH / LH which must mean they can be pushed closed to the limits of any agreement.
The fact these disputes have been grumbling away in the background shows arrogance and a lack of humility by the BA Management negotiating team. Removing perks were merely petty, and showed such a bad misuse of power in a punitive way. That doesn't mean that crew or pilots should get everything, but some tacit acknowledgement and movement towards the middle ground is a win / win situation and shows a mature and ethical HR team and policy. . Ignoring employees who are not happy does not end well for anyone - management or staff. Unhappy staff will often reflect this in the service they offer. (I can remember the many comments during the cuts of - "Sir - I agree these cuts have gone too far but they won't listen to us?")

A progressive BA in it's 100th year should listen to employees and reward them for their performance over the years. BA100 is meant to be positive year for the company, customers and staff. It also makes good business sense to retain, motivate and incentivise staff (I wonder what the turnover is on mixed fleet) with some concessions traded off against items on the company shopping list. If BA end up in a strike situation, it will be a failure of BA to manage employees and deal with long term issues. Sure, the unions and employees have a role to play but it takes two to tango.

PS - out here in Toronto, BA100 is a damp squib. No marmite, no IPA in the lounge, no livered 747s - just an Air Belgium A340 operating one of the heathrow flights, an outsourced lounge and a reduction in seat numbers and reward flights. Bah humbug!
This is one of the most intelligent and well balanced comments on the issue at hand. Thanks
As a relatively infrequent flyer on BA the last few years (since my daughter has moved back to North America) I now only fly TATL 2-3 times a year.
Not even enough to maintain decent status and having been a victim of more than one BA “industrial action” my tolerance for it is ZERO. I have now cancelled my Ba flights in Aug and Sept to the UK and booked them on Air Canada. I flew the AC J product a few weeks ago and it was far superior to BA’s J product in all respects and I was most surprised. The lounge in YYZ was fab, as was the rest of the trip. The only comparison IMHO is the CCR at LHR is better than anything AC has but only because the booze is better. The food in YYZ’s new signature lounge is much better. And the VAT refund in T5 way better than T2 haha. And of course BA F is better but not by much that AC J
If BA doesn’t listen very carefully to its employees here And finds itself with a strike of any length and with significant disruptions and that includes travellers simply not knowing if their future travel is going to happen, I guarantee I won’t be the only one who will have had it with BA.....
There are many options for most routes now.
aircrashsurvivor is offline