British Airways makes 'fresh attempt' to resolve dispute with cabin crew

By Cathy Buyck | June 28, 2010

British Airways on Friday made a new offer to the Unite union in what it called "a fresh attempt to end the current dispute" with its flight attendants that has led to 22 days of strikes this year.

The offer was handed over to the UK's Advisory, Conciliation and Arbitration Service, which previously stated that it had been unable to broker a deal between the sides (ATW Daily News, June 18).

The offer includes a new "top-up payment" to ensure that existing cabin crew will receive a minimum amount in route allowances irrespective of the routes they fly when newly recruited crew (on new contracts without the same route allowance guarantees) begin flying in the autumn. It also includes two years of guaranteed raises in basic salary from February 2011 in addition to annual increment pay increases. The proposal to increase staffing levels on some flights, funded by a reduction in allowances, has been withdrawn.

"We have changed our offer in line with feedback we have received from crew and we genuinely believe that it can end this dispute, which is what the vast majority of crew and our customers want," Bill Francis, BA's head of cabin crew, said.

Responding to BA's latest offer, Unite Joint General Secretary Derek Simpson said, "While we are not at all optimistic this offer provides a basis for resolution of the dispute, we will of course be considering it and consulting with our cabin crew representatives before making a formal response."

Earlier in the week, Unite set a June 29 deadline for BA to show its willingness to negotiate a solution "to the fresh issues" between the parties, warning that it would ballot its members for further strike action.

Unite is citing three new items of dispute: What it calls BA's failure to respect its collective agreements by using employees from other work areas within the company to operate as cabin crew on reduced terms, removal of travel assistance from crew who participated in the past strike actions, and the disciplinary action taken against dozens of members related to the initial industrial dispute.

Discuss this news 11

28 Jun06:59

Organized labor (labour in

By R B Quinn

Organized labor (labour in this instance) just doesn't get it!

28 Jun10:56

What don't they get? Could

By paul

What don't they get? Could you be more specific rather than throwing out inflammatory one liners that people can't respond to in an analytical and insightful way?

28 Jun11:12

Cabin crews went on strike

By Disgruntled passinger

Cabin crews went on strike and caused the company to suffer losses in the millions. Cabin crews brought company to its knees and now it is their turn to suffer. Losing privileges is a small price to pay, but pay they should as a small price for the huge losses.
If they continue to strike - they will bring the company to closure and then seek work in much worse conditions.
BA was not created for the cabin crews. It was created for making money to the shareholders and with no money to pay the employees the latter could either quit or adjust.
It is that simple.

28 Jun12:47

Why are people so quick to

By GReuben

Why are people so quick to blame the unions? The company had an equal responsibility to remain at the bargaining table until an agreement could be reached. Why did it take 20+ days of lost revenue for the company to reopen negotiations?

28 Jun14:07

Organized labor (no need for

By Jim

Organized labor (no need for the 'u') have a very strong voice and will not be pushed aside. Just wait until mamagement try to drive the pilots contract to a lower pay level!!

28 Jun14:09

Having been in unions in two

By Anonymous

Having been in unions in two different industrys, it was always obvious that the unions had not the slightest clue as to what it took to run a company. The unions would not service the customer or strike etc. and harm the customer. The unions always talk about how much the company makes, they the company makes money for the stock-holder. When you retire you need the income from the stocks you hold but the unions do not care about that and do not even understand the effects of their actions. It is still just the evil company. Not the widow whos' only income is from the dividends from the stock her husband left her.

28 Jun16:36

Unions dont have the

By Anonymous

Unions dont have the responsibility of running the company. That job rests with the executives and it doesnt take an MBA degree to figure out that launching a war with your own workforce is not exactly on the "how to successfully run the business" list. Every successful company has a history of good labour relations. In the airline industry, Continental would be a good example to look at.

BA signed a contract with the Union. When one signs a contract, it is expected to be honoured unless parties agree otherwise (at least in a civilized world thats how it works). BA arbitrarily changed the contract it had with BASSA. I wonder how many of those who leash out on striking cabin crew would be ok to have their own contracts modified without their prior consent?

Today's world is very different than it was 10, 20 years ago, indeed. Cost of living has gone up multiple times since then. So have the prices of everything except, it seems, the airline tickets. At what point should the airline employees stop subsidizing $199 airfares from New York to London and back (because I can guarantee you that it costs a whole lot more than that to transport a person and his/her baggage across the pond and make a profit)?

Anyhow, if cost cutting is such a big priority at BA, perhaps a good start would be cutting the pilot and executive/management pay. Cabin crew pay is nothing compared to what these two employee groups make, but somehow this issue never comes up.

The Union is there to protect its members, their income, and their future. Its not there to worry about shareholders' dividends or how to make the rich richer. Its also there to protect their members from the treatment that they have recently been subjected to. Unite made a number of cost-saving proposals to BA, which were flatly rejected. And the second strike could have been avoided simply by restoring travel perks to the crew (that proposal was broadcast live on BBC). I dont know how can people look at all this and still consider BA to be a well-managed company and blame the existing chaos on Unite?

If your hope for a steady retirement income is based solely on your investment into the stock market (and airline shares in particular) I think you need to rethink your investment strategies, and do it fast!

29 Jun02:35

Er, the piltos already DID

By Andrew

Er, the piltos already DID get asked by management to take a lower pay level. They accepted, and without a fight. Not quite sure why you posted a comment when you clearly don't know what's been going on at BA recently.

29 Jun04:08

BA claims it wants to bring

By Anonymous

BA claims it wants to bring its cabin crew costs “in line” with competition. If the recent launch of the new fleet is any proof, they must clearly mean “EK” when they talk about “competition” and not the other major European airlines.

How about bringing pilot costs in line with “competition” first or hiring a bunch of new ones under the terms and conditions similar to those that are proposed for the new fleet? I wonder how that would fly? Oh, and hiring a few consultants with some knowledge of labour relations wouldn’t hurt either.

29 Jun16:26

Andrew, you are not quite

By Anonymous

Andrew, you are not quite right to say that the pilots did get asked to take a pay cut, but rather not get a pay increase for two years. They did accept it without a fight. But do you know the exact terms? They will get the savings in their department back at the end of the two year period in shares (if BA makes a profit). The CEO of BA used to be a pilot, so you can think that he will look after his flock.

30 Jun16:27

paul, if you cant get a 1

By Anonymous

paul, if you cant get a 1 liner, you wont get a paragraph...