British Airways cabin crew vote for Christmas strike

Originally Posted by Chris

Oooo, let me guess, let me guess, it's all Maggie's fault isn't it!

It is? How's that work then?

Originally Posted by ntluser

If the BA management and the unions do not resolve this amicably there may not be a BA to work for in which case everyone will be in the same boat -unemployed.

So, because the majority of people would end up unemployed it is alright for new contracts to be pushed through without consultation?
The end of the day BA is still a very healthy business, one that is well capable of looking after it's employees.
It has chosen not to, the workers have chosen to use their democratic right that people have died in wars for, you have nothing against that have you?

[LondonRoad]

I suspect that it's a game of bluff and counterbluff and you're right Maggy it's Joe Public who suffer.

I think the Union's hand has been forced though.

BA's CEO has been said in the past that you don't get anywhere negotiating.... not the best attitude to have in industrial negotiations. He's cocked up union negotiations in the past and is doing so again. The cabin crew staff, whose actions many on here are quick to denounce, care far more for BA and it's customere service than BA management. They have invested far more time and energy than any of the management have. BA cabin staff will still be there to pick up the pieces after Willie Walsh has merged BA with Iberia and {predictably} soon after rides off into the sunset with his mega bucks bonus and share options.

90% voting for strike action in a turnout of 80% really reflects how disgruntled this group of workers really are.

If Walsh can't meet with Unite before the strike to thrash out a compromise agreement then the demise of BA will be his responsibility.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

It is? How's that work then?

Ooh, another one clearly not had their cornflakes, may have been the hot milk

---------- Post added at 09:14 ---------- Previous post was at 09:11 ----------

Originally Posted by LondonRoad

I suspect that it's a game of bluff and counterbluff and you're right Maggy it's Joe Public who suffer.

I think the Union's hand has been forced though.

BA's CEO has been said in the past that you don't get anywhere negotiating.... not the best attitude to have in industrial negotiations. He's cocked up union negotiations in the past and is doing so again. The cabin crew staff, whose actions many on here are quick to denounce, care far more for BA and it's customere service than BA management. They have invested far more time and energy than any of the management have. BA cabin staff will still be there to pick up the pieces after Willie Walsh has merged BA with Iberia and {predictably} soon after rides off into the sunset with his mega bucks bonus and share options.

90% voting for strike action in a turnout of 80% really reflects how disgruntled this group of workers really are.

If Walsh can't meet with Unite before the strike to thrash out a compromise agreement then the demise of BA will be his responsibility.

Totally agree, but to add, after the demise of the company you will not see walsh begging on a street corner, selling the big issue, or being turfed out of his house.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

You're the one clearly not awake with the larks my son.
Did I mention her name? No, but you can have half a point.
Any more takers?

You didn't need to mention her name. When it comes to blaming Prime Ministers from the last century for today's industrial problems, you have form:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34893842-post287.html

[ntluser]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

So, because the majority of people would end up unemployed it is alright for new contracts to be pushed through without consultation?
The end of the day BA is still a very healthy business, one that is well capable of looking after it's employees.
It has chosen not to, the workers have chosen to use their democratic right that people have died in wars for, you have nothing against that have you?

Your post is based on your belief that BA is a very healthy company. What evidence is there that your belief is valid?

My post is based on the belief that BA is not a healthy company for the following reasons.First, as a result of the recession, BA has reported losses which will worry shareholders.Second, the fact that the workers want to strike is indicative that industrial relations within the company are poor.Third,the strike will result in refunds to customers which will reduce the income to BA weakening its position.Fourth, the impact of the strike if it goes ahead will damage future customer relations with the result that some customers may not wish to travel with BA because they are unreliable.

As I understand it, the workers have exercised their democratic right to strike because they do not wish to have new contracts foisted on them without consultation. If that's the case, I'm just wondering why the union has not sued BA for breach of the present contract or taken BA to arbitration?

Further, the workers must still want to work for BA because if they were so aggrieved by the management action, they could have resigned en masse and left the management with a massive organisational headache.

As this hasn't happened, we have to conclude that the strike is a negotiating tool designed to force the BA management back into contract re-negotiations.

If your belief is wrong and this situation is not resolved, BA will probably go belly up and there will be a lot of unhappy, unemployed people.

If my belief is wrong, the management and unions will keep battling it out until they reach an agreement or until they create a situation where BA goes under.

It is, as I said earlier, a situation requiring common sense and compromise.

As for democracy, it is a two-edged sword that needs to be used wisely. Though it gives you freedoms,it does not ensure that you will necessarily use them for your own good.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

the workers have chosen to use their democratic right that people have died in wars for, you have nothing against that have you?

Sorry, I missed this little gem earlier. Which war was fought over the right to withdraw labour?

[LondonRoad]

Originally Posted by Chris

Sorry, I missed this little gem earlier. Which war was fought over the right to withdraw labour?

I suspect arc2004 was alluding to wars fought to protect democratic rights, one of which is right to withdraw labour.. but I also suspect you knew that

[nomadking]

The airline has also proposed new contracts for fresh recruits and newly-promoted staff.

Where does it say that existing contracts are going to be changed?

[webcrawler2050]

Back to the good ol' days of the sweatshop and kids up chimneys hey ?
Recession is no excuse for workers democratic rights to be ignored, it is all very well commenting on here or elsewhere against taking action when the ones taking the swipes are not directly involved, ie; not working for the company involved.
No doubt the boss of BA will still be ok over the festive season.
There are two sides to every story.

No not at all, I am saying that no matter what recession we are in, I am sick to death of hearing strike this strike that, people should just stop moaning about their "rights" and what they think is "right" and do the job they are paid for. It's a no wonder, why people use Temp's and Outsourcing.

Originally Posted by Chris

You didn't need to mention her name. When it comes to blaming Prime Ministers from the last century for today's industrial problems, you have form:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34893842-post287.html

Now again, point me in the direction of the thread you initially commented on, where it is I mention her name, stupidly saying " I have form " means I did?
Until you do behave yourself.

[punky]

Originally Posted by LondonRoad

I suspect arc2004 was alluding to wars fought to protect democratic rights, one of which is right to withdraw labour.. but I also suspect you knew that

Germans can strike too, you know.

[LondonRoad]

Originally Posted by webcrawler2050

No not at all, I am saying that no matter what recession we are in, I am sick to death of hearing strike this strike that, people should just stop moaning about their "rights" and what they think is "right" and do the job they are paid for. It's a no wonder, why people use Temp's and Outsourcing.

So everybody should just get on with it and allow the culture of management by bullying to dominate. Meanwhile you see the status of the organisation you have been proud of being continually eroded due to management ineptitude. That's not the world I want to live in.

This isn't a bunch of left wing militants who have voted overwhelmingly to withdraw their labour. This is middle England calling.

---------- Post added at 12:22 ---------- Previous post was at 12:20 ----------

Originally Posted by punky

Germans can strike too, you know.

Would they have been able to if the result of that tiff had been different?

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by punky

Germans can strike too, you know.

IIRC it was their(as well as Japan) reluctance to strike after WW2 that allowed them to build a strong economy.

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Now again, point me in the direction of the thread you initially commented on, where it is I mention her name, stupidly saying " I have form " means I did?
Until you do behave yourself.

Allow me to repeat myself:

You didn't need to mention her name. When it comes to blaming Prime Ministers from the last century for today's industrial problems, you have form:

http://www.cableforum.co.uk/board/34893842-post287.html

I've put some of it in bold to make it clearer.