[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Chris

Because it's not relevant. Either the strike ballot has been legally performed or it has not. It is not in the judge's gift to determine what may or may not have been the outcome had the irregularities been discounted.

If it has been illegally performed, then it must be set aside. Anything else is a red herring.

Do me a favour, union ballots have more regulations than any other part of our democracy, the amount of time the strike took to organise and the time scale of the redundancies coincided, if the rules were infringed here then you can say that every vote this country has ever taken is illegitimate, trouble is when people try and point this out in the courts the cases are thrown out with cries of vexatious litigation, the judge's decision was political and imo Unite are right, a very sad day for democracy.

Originally Posted by Maggy J
It's not that I have no sympathy for the workers, I just view the ploy of having a strike in the travel industry at Christmas as cynical and manipulative in the extreme.

I'd have supported such strikes at other times and in shorter timescale and spaced out more but this was the union really being uncharitable to the people whose support they really require in the future of BA if BA is to survive.

That's the thing with strikes, they aren't designed to be convenient, more to cause maximum disruption, besides there is only one group of people to be blamed for their timescale, the people that wrecked the negotiations in late October and that'd be old Willy Walsh.