Quote:
Originally Posted by frogstamper
this dispute has been in the works for years now until finally after all reasonable options were exhausted over 90% of the cabin crew voted for a legitimate strike. Maybe you should be asking why Walsh is being so intransigent over re-instating the travel concessions? the original dispute has been settled as far as I can see, the reason the dispute is continuing only Walsh can say.
|
Thats a MAJOR fallacy in your argument, 90% of BA CC did NOT vote for a strike. ONLY 90% of BASSA members voted to strike. members directly represented by UNITE and (of cause) none union members ACCEPTED the terms. hens why ONLY heathrow flights were affected by the strike (gatwick and london city bases were completely unaffected (except knock on affects)).
From what i understand WW has no problem with UNITE and is happy to work with them. its is UNITES far left (they work very closely with the socialist worker) origination BASSA (which is a legacy union that merged with UNITE, while keeping its own identity many years ago).
It should also bee noted that the staff travel perk HAS been reinstated (in a limited fashion) to strikers who accept the current agreement. Renistating FULL travel perk would cause MORE industrial relations issues then it solves. The VAST majority of BA staff ditest the strikers and do not what to see BASSA "win".
I strongly suggest reading the topic on pprnune that was posted above to see how the rest of the BA staff feel about the strikers as that site is populated by LOTS of BA staff members.