Lewis King

Free food and drink on our flight to Prague this morning, flown by Titan Airways just got a letter at the gate explaining it all

Lite

Bargaining rights are really about pay. At the moment, only Cabin Crew have bargaining rights, not seniors. So it is really about pay. It's about a fairer pay deal for cabin crew but about ensuring a pay deal can be bargained for for seniors too.

Waterhorse

So who pays for the hotels etc when crew strike away from base? You can be sure it won't be BA. Remember you do not get paid for days you are on strike, so the company sure as heck will not pay for ayt hotels, or medical expenses or allowances etc etc. Furthermore, why would it strand aircraft? the pilots can and will still fly them back to LHR, there is no requirement for cabin crew on empty aircraft. So all in all, the only people damaged by striking down route would be the strikers. The unions may be annoying when they call strikes but they are not stupid.

brunos

It seems that the strike has been a non-event and barely had any effect on BA flights. I flew a return to Europe yesterday and could not get any strike "feeling" at the airport. Given this impact failure of MF industrial action what will happen next?

strichener

Easy to see where in the plane you sit

You are completely ignoring that empty planes don't carry the passengers that BA still have to transport. If the planes were to fly home empty, the passengers will still expect to be transported to their destination and there are the associated costs for BA for duty of care.

It would almost certainly be more disruptive for BA if the strike included those that were scheduled to be away from Heathrow.

sxc

Yes it would be - but for people earning 18k/year, paying for a hotel in Singapore themselves and getting home from there isn't chump change.

layz

Any chance of posting a copy of this letter?

makin'miles

Rather than the union pulling all MF staff off, I'd pull staff off just a few routes downroute (ideally where flights are full and there are limited other options) and use union hardship funds to fly them back (rather than topping up the cut pay of far more staff). Not suggesting the crew are just left on their own at all.

In fact pulling off just enough crew members to drop the flight below legal minimums would have the same effect, and the bill to bring them home would be lower.

This would have significant financial effects for BA and have a large operational impact, just made for the media. It could also be accomplished for a few thousand pounds per flight - and the majority of MF would continue to be paid.

Current tactics don't seem to be working - they should turn up the heat anyway they can.

Waterhorse

It's got nothing to do with where I sit on the aircraft it has everything todo with the realities if a strike under U.K. Legislation and the practicalities that arise from that. It would've no different should it be a pilots strike. It is a long held practise that we do not strike down route. To quote a terrible old cliche, this isn't their first rodeo. The unions are not dumb and have thought this through.

Waterhorse

Those that are suggesting that MFstrike down route are missing a very simple cost dynamic. MF hotel
accommodation would not be paid for by BA, nor would they be allowed to stay in BA arranged accommodation. They would be cast adrift in a foreign destination and have to pay for that themselves after finding a hotel room for themselves. Furthermore they would have to find their own way home at their own cost

T8191

Waterhorse ... I though #1778 offered the solution. Some crew (to take the flight below min operating crew) just hop on a return flight funded by the Union. No need to stay in a BA-funded hotel at all. Think B2B, going home with any carrier that the Union can find/fund.

What happens to the aircraft and the remaining crew? Well, they'll still be accommodated, and being down-route will still be being paid @ £3/hour

jonas123

I'm not sure how big the hardship fund is, but this would be a pretty large cost to the union if it was longhaul flights. Say you have 10 crew on an aircraft flying to a destination that need to be flown back. Last minute tickets are not cheap, plus add to the fact one-way longhaul fares pretty much do not exist, so you're looking at maybe £1,000 a ticket? Or £10,000 to fly one crew group back. So to disrupt longhaul flights, you're looking at somewhere between £50,000 and £100,000. Flying the crew back from the US on AA perhaps? Well then half of that money goes back to BA just to rub salt into the wound.

Like I said, not sure what the hardship fund is like, but I don't imagine it could justify that much.

EDIT: i missed the point about taking the flight beyond minimum operating. I imagine BA could just close off first and WTP perhaps and operate with a reduced crew to a certain level.

Has it been announced how many crew actually turned up to work on the first strike? I suspect if there were more unionised crew and 100% of them went on strike, it would be more effective

BobbySteel

Sounds like the doctors' strike. Strikes with no effect to customers seem to have zero effect on management.

Worcester

There must be a significant number of people like me who stopping booking with an airline when there is the possibility of strikes.

T8191

Cheaper doing it on s/h routes, of course! And if pre-planned, return tix could be bought in advance. I'm sure those with working knowledge of routes and schedules could target flights very effectively, leaving BA ac and crews (and pax, of course) stranded all over Yerp. Not that I would necessarily approve of such action, of course... this is a theoretical discussion