But again that's not the responsibility of the employees at all they have nothing to do with that.
This is the responsibility of the management!!!!
And the management cheated to long with them.
Moderator: Latest news team
But again that's not the responsibility of the employees at all they have nothing to do with that.
That's frightening that's a point but that's the responsibility of Brussels Airport to accept to work with a company with a huge depth.
It is a company that goes back to 1949. Then became Belgavia and finally Aviapartner. They must have done things right to last that long.. I don’t know whose fault it that got us in this mess. The reputation of BRU is at stake as well as Brussels airlines actuallly.. even though they have nothing to do with this mess. I took an SN flight last night from GVA to BRU. Departure was delayed by 1h25 min. The cabin crew gave as an excuse the late arrival of the aircraft and the strike at BRU affecting many airlines!
Thanks for the links, it was indeed informative, although the missing legal framework puzzles me a bit. But still:CTBke wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 12:57In Belgium it's not against the law, it's the grey zone and everyone has the right to go on strike
http://www.werk.belgie.be/defaultTab.aspx?id=518#
http://www.emploi.belgique.be/defaultTab.aspx?id=518
That says basically, that a wildcat strike might be legally in the (dark) grey area - but morally it is unacceptable.Kennisgeving
Deze actie, staking of lock-out, dient voorafgaandelijk aangezegd te worden door een aangetekend schrijven gericht aan de voorzitter van het paritair (sub)comité of aan de werkgever(s) (of aan de werknemersorganisaties in geval van lock-out) betrokken in het conflict.
Vervolgens moet een zekere aanzeggingsperiode in acht genomen worden vooraleer effectief tot staking of lock-out mag overgegaan worden (vb. een week of 14 dagen).
Zowel de wijze als de termijn van kennisgeving worden meestal conventioneel vastgelegd in een CAO of in het huishoudelijk reglement van het paritair comité
Niet respecteren van procedure
Stakingen die uitgebroken zijn of lock-outs die gedaan worden zonder naleving van de voorziene procedure worden over het algemeen niet ondersteund door de representatieve werknemers- of werkgeversorganisaties.
Daarnaast wordt het krijgen van een syndicale premie vaak afhankelijk gesteld van het respecteren van de sociale vrede in de onderneming of in de sector.
Actually, a wildcat strike is illegal untill the trade unions advise management/ownership that they support the strike. With this strike, this was done indeed - very soon after the wildcat strike started. The trade unions told management that the loaders strike was covered by a strike notice from... January 2018.Vic Diesel wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 14:21That says basically, that a wildcat strike might be legally in the (dark) grey area - but morally it is unacceptable.Kennisgeving
Deze actie, staking of lock-out, dient voorafgaandelijk aangezegd te worden door een aangetekend schrijven gericht aan de voorzitter van het paritair (sub)comité of aan de werkgever(s) (of aan de werknemersorganisaties in geval van lock-out) betrokken in het conflict.
Vervolgens moet een zekere aanzeggingsperiode in acht genomen worden vooraleer effectief tot staking of lock-out mag overgegaan worden (vb. een week of 14 dagen).
Zowel de wijze als de termijn van kennisgeving worden meestal conventioneel vastgelegd in een CAO of in het huishoudelijk reglement van het paritair comité
Niet respecteren van procedure
Stakingen die uitgebroken zijn of lock-outs die gedaan worden zonder naleving van de voorziene procedure worden over het algemeen niet ondersteund door de representatieve werknemers- of werkgeversorganisaties.
Daarnaast wordt het krijgen van een syndicale premie vaak afhankelijk gesteld van het respecteren van de sociale vrede in de onderneming of in de sector.
Quod erat demonstrandum.
In other words: trade unions want to support this strike... but only "kind of support it". Typical polit-speech...Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 14:49Actually, a wildcat strike is illegal untill the trade unions advise management/ownership that they support the strike. With this strike, this was done indeed - very soon after the wildcat strike started. The trade unions told management that the loaders strike was covered by a strike notice from... January 2018.
When the trade unions would have said to the wildcat strikers "...no, we do not support the strike because Aviapartner is in bad papers", the disruption would have been just one or two hours only.
From a press report, 26th October 2018: "...De staking van het personeel wordt gedekt door alle vakbonden, luidt het. Er liep nog een stakingsaanzegging sinds januari..."Vic Diesel wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 15:02In other words: trade unions want to support this strike... but only "kind of support it". Typical polit-speech...Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 14:49Actually, a wildcat strike is illegal untill the trade unions advise management/ownership that they support the strike. With this strike, this was done indeed - very soon after the wildcat strike started. The trade unions told management that the loaders strike was covered by a strike notice from... January 2018.
When the trade unions would have said to the wildcat strikers "...no, we do not support the strike because Aviapartner is in bad papers", the disruption would have been just one or two hours only.
Which is just a lie as far as I know. You'll hardly find any ramp workers of AP at the airport. Same for the cargo operations BTW.luchtzak wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 15:28 The management of baggage handler Aviapartner has sent a bailiff to the strikers. The trade unions would stop employees and block carts used on the tarmac. That is what De Tijd writes. (sorry, no time! google translate )
https://www.hln.be/nieuws/binnenland/di ... ~a797e543/
Agree, but who's fault is that? Shareholders? Top management? Middle management? Ground force? We don't know, so "shared responsability" seems fair then.
No, we read what you write. But you fail to understand the gravity of the situation. Negative own assets 15 mio €. Close to 25 mio € reported loss. Close to 25 mio € short-time-debt for which there is not enough money. A lot of companies with better figures are declared bankrupt daily.
Sure I accept this this are numbers you can't discuss them but that's not the problem of the employees.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 16:46Agree, but who's fault is that? Shareholders? Top management? Middle management? Ground force? We don't know, so "shared responsability" seems fair then.
No, we read what you write. But you fail to understand the gravity of the situation. Negative own assets 15 mio €. Close to 25 mio € reported loss. Close to 25 mio € short-time-debt for which there is not enough money. A lot of companies with better figures are declared bankrupt daily.
For a company that is so much in distress, a strike like this is a catastroph. Do I have to write that 10 times before you are willing to accept this?
Legacies from the past are the problem from all people working there. But even when I repeat that 10 times, you won't accept it.lumumba wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 17:22Sure I accept this this are numbers you can't discuss them but that's not the problem of the employees.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 16:46Agree, but who's fault is that? Shareholders? Top management? Middle management? Ground force? We don't know, so "shared responsability" seems fair then.
No, we read what you write. But you fail to understand the gravity of the situation. Negative own assets 15 mio €. Close to 25 mio € reported loss. Close to 25 mio € short-time-debt for which there is not enough money. A lot of companies with better figures are declared bankrupt daily.
For a company that is so much in distress, a strike like this is a catastroph. Do I have to write that 10 times before you are willing to accept this?
Seriously?lumumba wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 17:22Sure I accept this this are numbers you can't discuss them but that's not the problem of the employees.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 16:46Agree, but who's fault is that? Shareholders? Top management? Middle management? Ground force? We don't know, so "shared responsability" seems fair then.
No, we read what you write. But you fail to understand the gravity of the situation. Negative own assets 15 mio €. Close to 25 mio € reported loss. Close to 25 mio € short-time-debt for which there is not enough money. A lot of companies with better figures are declared bankrupt daily.
For a company that is so much in distress, a strike like this is a catastroph. Do I have to write that 10 times before you are willing to accept this?
If like you said it's not viable anymore let it die .
But in any case you can't ask employees to work like slaves to save a company.
For sure the employees did there part and even more from there the frustration.
But the management did not keep there promises and did not suceed to make it work.
You make one mistake here the ground staf is not responsible for the strategy and the contracts.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 17:33Legacies from the past are the problem from all people working there. But even when I repeat that 10 times, you won't accept it.lumumba wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 17:22Sure I accept this this are numbers you can't discuss them but that's not the problem of the employees.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 16:46
Agree, but who's fault is that? Shareholders? Top management? Middle management? Ground force? We don't know, so "shared responsability" seems fair then.
No, we read what you write. But you fail to understand the gravity of the situation. Negative own assets 15 mio €. Close to 25 mio € reported loss. Close to 25 mio € short-time-debt for which there is not enough money. A lot of companies with better figures are declared bankrupt daily.
For a company that is so much in distress, a strike like this is a catastroph. Do I have to write that 10 times before you are willing to accept this?
Sure, people are going through a difficult time there, with heavy workload and unpleasant working conditions. But that applies for all people working there. Not the least for the CFO who has to find the money to pay the October salaries.
Hopefully with more loyal, different employees than the people who make their own company go bankruptlumumba wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 18:03You make one mistake here the ground staf is not responsible for the strategy and the contracts.Passenger wrote: ↑29 Oct 2018, 17:33Legacies from the past are the problem from all people working there. But even when I repeat that 10 times, you won't accept it.
Sure, people are going through a difficult time there, with heavy workload and unpleasant working conditions. But that applies for all people working there. Not the least for the CFO who has to find the money to pay the October salaries.
They are not involved and they are payed much less the the management...
They are responsible for the flights to depart safely.
And it looks they did there best to be flexible but there is limit and that's where we are.
The management did not succeed to make it work and the ground staff is exhausted.
Point now it looks it has to die and start again....
I understand you already get a financial compensation for this, correct? At the same time, nothing prevents you from taking a snack, a sandwich or a drink with you in the van. You may be busy most of the time, but there is always a chance now and then to take a quick bite. This problem may occur regularly in certain periods, but it is not happening every day. Be aware that in many other job positions and industries, people face the same problem on a daily basis. Truck drivers eat behind their steering wheel while driving. Some office workers eat behind their computer while continuing their work. Obviously this is not healthy and desirable, but it is a consequence of the global economic rat race.