Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 3,076
- Location
- a galaxy far far away
whats to stop all the cabin crew involved just calling in sick?
Poll: Do you support the BA Cabin Crew 12 day strike at Christmas?
- Thread starter Spie
- Start date
Yes. Indeed, I regularly argue that the party that is being unreasonable (determined by an independent court) should be liable for damages to the customers. The fact that some people seem to constantly think this is an attack on the unions only appears to reinforce the idea that the unions are frequently unreasonable.
No protection against dismissal.
Excellent news
Are you flying this christmas spie?
Yes, but not with BA.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2009
- Posts
- 4,325
Yeah, if you don't like the way someones running your company let them know.
My working conditions are terrible but only a select few have any backbone in our place. I'd love to go on strike but like I say, who'd follow.
And no it's not me being lazy.
I should be given my breaks without having to get in **** with my managers. I should have equipment that actually works and has the correct functions to do the job. Even a bit of basic health and safety wouldn't go amiss.
But instead my company will cut cost and cut costs (as if they're not already loaded), and the odd time they splash out it's useless rubbish like new uniforms or name badges. 1 fully functioning telxon would be lovely, or maybe a single till which hasn't got something broken.
Gah, I want to go on strike.
My working conditions are terrible but only a select few have any backbone in our place. I'd love to go on strike but like I say, who'd follow.
And no it's not me being lazy.
I should be given my breaks without having to get in **** with my managers. I should have equipment that actually works and has the correct functions to do the job. Even a bit of basic health and safety wouldn't go amiss.
But instead my company will cut cost and cut costs (as if they're not already loaded), and the odd time they splash out it's useless rubbish like new uniforms or name badges. 1 fully functioning telxon would be lovely, or maybe a single till which hasn't got something broken.
Gah, I want to go on strike.
Last edited:
Glad we agree then. I'm not coming down on either side. I don't know the exact circumstances. However obviously the cabin crew feel it is unreasonable that the company are basically reducing the number of staff. I don't think theres anything wrong with that, of course you should fight to save your jobs. BA seem to not want to dicuss things. Hopefully the threat of strike will enable them to reach an agreement, which of course is the whole point of it!
The thing is, the cabin crew are forgetting they are not acting in isolation. They are paid significantly more than those working at competing airlines (circa 50-100% depending on the airline), and they are paid more and less productive than their BA employed colleagues at Gatwick, who have already implemented these changes for some time.
If they had already poor, or even average, terms and conditions, or if the airline was in great financial health, then they would get more support from me for their position, but that isn't the case here.
BA are actually being pretty good considering the dire straights they are in, but the cabin crew seem to be blinded by their own greed, and it will cost everyone who works for BA if they are allowed to bully and intimidate their way through this dispute.
So presumably you'd support mandatory 120-hour working weeks in a recession? Or £1/hour labour?
Extreme, but you're basically saying a job is a job regardless.
I don't support it because it seems to me that they're being greedy. I might support them if they weren't already earning almost twice what their colleagues working for Virgin, EasyJet etc. were.
Soldato
- Joined
- 5 Sep 2005
- Posts
- 11,742
- Location
- Northern Ireland
I don't understand this, since when was it a right of the worker of the company to decide what direction the owners want to take the company in?
Doubt anyone will now, this has done massive damage to the companies reputation and will simply result in far far more redundancies.
well done BA staff, hows your face not it hasnt got a nose.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
In all likelihood, absolutely nothing. They may be able to "self-certify", usually for a limited number of days or they may have to see either a BA doctor or their local GP in order to complain of stress resulting from management bullying, back-ache from too much standing-up, dizziness, tiredness, etc.
Most would almost certainly be able to get signed-off for at least a week and there would be absolutely nothing that BA could do about it. This would probably cause an absolute nightmare if it happened prior to the return leg of a return flight.
Working to the strict letter of the BA rules (as BA have done in terms of the Unite ballot process) would be another very effective way for cabin crew to make their feelings apparent.
I suspect that one way or another, we haven't heard the end of this saga and that many more people will be looking at alternative carriers.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
So you're saying when this was put into effect at gatwick no jobs were lost? There was no downside to it coming in at all?
There have been no compulsory redundancies at BA during the downturn. There have been a number of voluntary redundancies, and a reduction in overall positions, but that is what needed to happen.
Thats not what I'm saying, I'm saying when Gatwick decided to take this magically offer of one less cabin crew where there any redundancies?
Or where these people moved onto Heathrow anyway and now they are looking to get rid of them again.
Something must have happened to those extra members from gatwick and I doubt very much they all went voluntary.
Soldato
- Joined
- 12 May 2005
- Posts
- 12,631
Nope.
I feel that it is more punishing the public than anything. Basically, from watching the interview with one of their reps it almost felt like he was throwing a tantrum with the prospects of strikes.
(That is obviously prior to the court ruling)