BA Gatwick Cabin Crew Dispute Update – 1st May
|We have received a reply from our Head of Cabin Crew in response to the imposed 3-Day Las Vegas grievance, their comments include: –|
|‘We have no intention of requesting an alleviation from you to operate the Vegas trip. The arrangements set out in the e-mail of 11 June 2015 related to a specific number of flights over a set period of a month, and in circumstances that are different. It does not set a precedent that we must follow now.”|
As you can see from the tone, the company is becoming increasingly entrenched and unreasonable in their position. This response is unacceptable, and we have escalated our items of dispute to our full-time officer and the final stage of the dispute resolution process. If we are unable to find resolution through the grievance and dispute resolution processes, it may necessary to take industrial action.
At this point, we thought it wise to review our items of dispute with the membership and remind ourselves why we find ourselves at odds with our employer.
Firstly, the imposition of the 3-Day Las Vegas was, in our view, when the company crossed the line. As you know we have always adopted a pragmatic and reasonable approach with BA, working with them to find solutions. We will not however tolerate imposition, this is a step too far.
When Gatwick cabin crew operated 3-Day Las Vegas trips in 2015 the company negotiated an alleviation with the TU and crew received an additional £85 payment, as well as an extra day off. Similarly, in 2017 our Head of Cabin Crew negotiated an alleviation to operate 3-day Oakland trips. This recent imposition essentially see’s trip allowances slashed from £224 in 2015 to £153 in 2019. We do not believe it is fair or reasonable for the company to impose a 32% cut in allowance pay when British Airways is reporting profits of £1.9 billion. This naturally led us to our first item of dispute:
Imposed 3 Day Las VegasThe company has imposed a 3-day trip pattern in contravention of the rules applicable to local nights rest arrangements for longhaul duties in excess of 12 hours 30 minutes. In doing so, the company is also imposing a pay cut on Gatwick cabin crew.
During the first round of dispute resolution talks our Head of Cabin Crew asked the TU why we thought 2010 crew should expect to be rostered to the MOA. Alarmed, we replied that 2010 cabin crew are entitled to be rostered to the MOA as the company committed to this, in writing, and have done so for the past decade. Concerned at being asked this question and realising the implications for all 2010 cabin crew, we immediately asked the company to restate their commitment to rostering 2010 crew in keeping with the MOA. Initially, the company agreed to this however our Head of Cabin Crew later changed their mind and is now refusing. This led to our next item of dispute:
2010 Cabin Crew RosteringThe company is refusing to clarify in writing whether they are willing to continue to roster 2010 cabin crew using the guidelines and principles laid out in section 1 & 2 of the MOA. This includes roster planning, limitations, preference bidding and days off for both long haul and short haul operations.
Next, with the introduction of the CEO A320 aircraft at Gatwick the company informed cabin crew of their intention to remove Inflight Retail. As you know commission earnings on shorthaul make up a massive proportion of our pay. Gatwick cabin crew cannot afford to take a pay cut on shorthaul days. Nor do we believe you deserve one in consideration of the mammoth profits BA is currently reporting. This resulted in our next item of dispute:
LHR/LGW A320 CEO RedeploymentThe company has failed to provide details or make clear how they intend to mitigate anticipated loss of earnings resulting from the proposed removal of ‘Inflight Retail’ from densified A320 aircraft.
Another key element of our dispute is the deceitful way in which British Airways misled the TU and changed the collective agreements clause in new CSM’s and New Entrant contracts. We believe this is an attempt to break our union and weaken cabin crew terms and conditions. Naturally leading to our next item of dispute:
Collective Agreements ClauseThe company has misled the trade union and changed the ‘Collective Agreements’ clause contained in both the Gatwick Customer Service Manager and Main Crew contract of employment to the detriment of our members.
As you know we continue to see our members routinely working out of rank. Working out of rank undermines, disrespects and devalues the CSM rank, whist putting our main crew colleagues under unnecessary pressure when forced to work up on shorthaul duties. This raises our next item:
Working out of RankThe company continue to work Gatwick cabin crew arbitrarily and unnecessarily out of rank.
And all of these issues are on top of our other items of dispute which include routine and ongoing breaches of our flying agreement, clearly demonstrating a desire to circumvent the agreement wherever possible; weakening and diluting your terms and conditions.
Breaches of the MOA Flying Agreement
Standby Construction Rules
The company continues to roster ‘Single Day’ standby duties in breach of the Gatwick agreement. The company has failed to ensure rule compliance in regards pro-rata/fair share allocation of standby.
Day Off Rules
Rosters are routinely published out of compliance with ‘Day Off’ rules.Crew control are failing to allocate additional days off to crew called to operated applicable trips from standby.
Long Range Rest Rules
The company has failed to code the long-range ruleset into the carmen rostering system.
7 Day Work Blocks
The company continue to breach rules in relation to restricting the length of work blocks. This is especially acute with new entrants and ‘Inspire’ crew.
Protection of Days Off Rules
The company is failing to observe rules in relation to ‘Protection of Days Off’. In addition, they are routinely denying crew owed days off when facing a delayed return to base.
7 Day Work Blocks – Days Off
The principle of 3 days off following a 7-day work block is being circumvented in delayed return to base situations with crew operating work blocks in excess of 7 days and only accruing 2 days off.
Night Duty Rules
British Airways is deliberately misinterpreting rules relating to start times following night duties to the detriment of our members.The company have been non-compliant with night duty rules by planning night duties preceding a night stopping duty.
Roster Changes Past Clear Time
The company is making changes to cabin crew’s rosters post clear time and/or removing crew from rostered duties and reassigning them to standby duties in contravention of Standby Construction rules.
Contacting Crew On Days Off
Crew Control are contacting cabin crew on days off to notify a cancellation and not offering crew members the opportunity to report at the original time, as per the ‘Contact During Time Off’ ruleset.
Lastly, there are number of other important issues that need to be addressed. These include:
900 Hour Days
900-hour days are not being planned for the purpose of managing crew hours, but instead planned to circumvent Standby Construction rules.
Availability of Part Time Contacts
Since 2012, the company has failed to make offers of part time to a satisfactory level within the cabin crew establishment.
Forced Unpaid Leave
Crew Control are insisting that ad-hoc leave be taken as unpaid in contravention of the agreed process to discharge paid leave, followed by lieu days then lastly unpaid.
Contracting 2010 Colleagues Out of NSP
The company continues to surreptitiously contract crew out of the British Airway Gatwick NSP (Post 2010).
Considering all of the above Gatwick Cabin Crew clearly have every right to feel angry and let down with their employer. Our voices will be heard, one way or another.
We believe it’s time that Gatwick Cabin Crew were shown the respect they rightly deserve. We all work incredibly hard under increasingly difficult circumstances. We do not deserve for our pay to be cut or our terms and conditions to be eroded. We have already made many sacrifices over the past 10 years which has made BA Gatwick a veryprofitable and successful business. Any further cuts or attacks on our terms and conditions is simply exploitation and corporate greed.
If the company refuse to come to a negotiated settlement with your trade union, then the time will come for us to stand up. Enough is enough, we deserve respect and we deserve to be fairly treated and rewarded for the contribution we make to this airline.
United, your Gatwick Reps