Poll: Do you support the BA Cabin Crew 12 day strike at Christmas?

[Gaidin109]

I agree with the right to strike, and perhaps this initial judgement was wrong, but where do you draw the line on strike action as being reasonable? Surely there must be a line somewhere?

I don't think you can draw a line that would be relevant to strike action on the whole when applied to individual disputes. Each dispute needs to be evaluated on it's owm merit.

The current BA one for example is over the re-instatement of perks removed from those that striked over the now settled dispute. Good faith and a reasonable show of good will on the part of BA would have ensured that those perks were in fact re-instated as were people who were sacked (although I do not know the details on the reasons for the sackings beyond what I read today blaming it on the strike action they took).

Who is being unreasonable now, the Union who are faced with some of it's members being rewarded for not going on strike, or asking the company to treat all it's employees the same and putting the dispute behind them as it is now settled or BA management, namely Willie Walsh who is being vindictive in the extreme.

Different acts entirely, so an entirely irrelevant comparison.

No really irrelevent to the example, both are in essence ballots and are conducted in a similar fashion. Different yes, but to illustrate the ridiculous nature of the technicality ruling, apt.

 

[stockhausen]

Breaking news there Meghatronic

 

[Gaidin109]

What about the bullying and unreasonable Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson?

Do you approve of the suspension of the bullying hooligans within the cabin crew pending disciplinary action?

Do you think that the right to strike should be completely free from consequence for those who choose to partake in it?

If Unite feel that it's leaders have acted in an unprofessional way or acted against the best interests of it's members then they should be suspended and investigated, but this is for the Union executive and its members to decide. Similarly with the BA board and Willie Walsh.

In regard to consequence, Strikers do not get paid, so they do bear part of the consequence. The money BA lose, is compensated to some extent by the lack of need to pay them. So the consequences are relative, but shared regardless.

 

[stockhausen]

What about the bullying and unreasonable Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson? ...

Whom do you think that Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson bullied? The Irish hooligan Willie Walsh

... Do you approve of the suspension of the bullying hooligans within the cabin crew pending disciplinary action? ...

Do tell, please, who are these bullying members of cabin crew? Have they all been identified and named by the wholly independent Brutish Airways?

... Do you think that the right to strike should be completely free from consequence for those who choose to partake in it?

I certainly don't think that forcing workers to strike by arbitrarily and unilaterally changing their terms of employment and attempting to destroy their union should be completely free from consequence - sack the Irish hooligan Willie Walsh - do it today!

 

[Dolph]

I don't think you can draw a line that would be relevant to strike action on the whole when applied to individual disputes. Each dispute needs to be evaluated on it's owm merit.

The current BA one for example is over the re-instatement of perks removed from those that striked over the now settled dispute. Good faith and a reasonable show of good will on the part of BA would have ensured that those perks were in fact re-instated as were people who were sacked (although I do not know the details on the reasons for the sackings beyond what I read today blaming it on the strike action they took).

Sacking a small group for striking is highly unlikely because it would be torn apart in an employment tribunal. I find (knowing the history of unions and the behaviour of the Unite union and the previous unions that merged to form it) the suggestion of bullying and harrassment of staff far more credible. However even then an employment tribunal would soon slap BA down if it wasn't.

This is the key thing, there is plenty of protection for employees without the union.

Who is being unreasonable now, the Union who are faced with some of it's members being rewarded for not going on strike, or asking the company to treat all it's employees the same and putting the dispute behind them as it is now settled or BA management, namely Willie Walsh who is being vindictive in the extreme.

Those who did not go out on strike aren't being rewarded, those who went on strike are finding it wasn't consequence free. There is a significant difference between the two.

Should those who carried on completing their duties be treated the same as those who refused?

No really irrelevent to the example, both are in essence ballots and are conducted in a similar fashion. Different yes, but to illustrate the ridiculous nature of the technicality ruling, apt.

Perhaps, although Unite's ability to run a clearly legitimate ballot has to be questioned, especially with their history of polling ineligible former staff...

 

[Dolph]

Whom do you think that Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson bullied? The Irish hooligan Willie Walsh

BA and it's customers.

Do tell, please, who are these bullying members of cabin crew? Have they all been identified and named by the wholly independent Brutish Airways?

The union have given more information out about them than BA have, although not named them directly.

I certainly don't think that forcing workers to strike by arbitrarily and unilaterally changing their terms of employment and attempting to destroy their union should be completely free from consequence - sack the Irish hooligan Willie Walsh - do it today!

Well, it's a good thing that BA are not in any way changing their terms and conditions of employment as per the earlier high court ruling then....

Care to try a different justification based in fact?

 

[CraigN]

Im sorry i simply do not care for all your arguments

i will state again.

"According to a 2009 survey for the Civil Aviation Authority, BA's cabin crew are well paid in industry terms with average earnings of £29,900 a year, including bonuses and allowances, compared with £14,400 at Virgin Atlantic.

The airline also proposed new contracts for fresh recruits and newly promoted staff. These included a single on-board management grade, no seniority, promotion on merit, and pay set at market rate plus 10%."

This is the original reason for industrial action. Money

I still maintain that this is now a case of neither side willing to back down. Everyone is lost in the argument over what is right and wrong when it comes to a persons rights.

Show me someone who has not not been effected in some way by the economic downturn. Business have to tow the line. My firm has made redundancies twice in the last two years i have had a pay freeze for the same period. Im glad I still have a job !

BA staff come across as greedy and when there employer seeks to punish them by removing perks they strike about that.

If they had not been so greedy in the first place they wouldnt be in this mess.

I hope Iberia buy them / merge with BA and all the greedy tools loose there jobs.

 

[stockhausen]

... My firm has made redundancies twice in the last two years i have had a pay freeze for the same period. ...

Perhaps you should join a Union then?

 

[gjrc]

Im sorry i simply do not care for all your arguments

i will state again.

"According to a 2009 survey for the Civil Aviation Authority, BA's cabin crew are well paid in industry terms with average earnings of £29,900 a year, including bonuses and allowances, compared with £14,400 at Virgin Atlantic.

The airline also proposed new contracts for fresh recruits and newly promoted staff. These included a single on-board management grade, no seniority, promotion on merit, and pay set at market rate plus 10%."

This is the original reason for industrial action. Money

I still maintain that this is now a case of neither side willing to back down. Everyone is lost in the argument over what is right and wrong when it comes to a persons rights.

Show me someone who has not not been effected in some way by the economic downturn. Business have to tow the line. My firm has made redundancies twice in the last two years i have had a pay freeze for the same period. Im glad I still have a job !

BA staff come across as greedy and when there employer seeks to punish them by removing perks they strike about that.

If they had not been so greedy in the first place they wouldnt be in this mess.

I hope Iberia buy them / merge with BA and all the greedy tools loose there jobs.

agree with all the above...

derek simpson on the news harping on about "the democratic right to strike"....

wtf??? who has the right to strike?? get real!! this annoys me beyond words tbh.

plus i am meant to be flying next w/e to NYC.

 

[[TW]Fox]

If it's such an easy job with over-generous rewards, maybe you should apply for a cabin crew position at BA, rather than seethe with jealousy on the internet.

Isn't that exactly what you do about anything to do with City Financial institutions? I remember many discussions about RBS which went along the same lines as those you now criticise people for in here..?

The difference being that in this case I doubt anyone is jealous of the cabin crew, they simply beleive they are being unreasonable. Which they are.

 

[CraigN]

I don't need to hide behind a union.

I understand the fundamental terms of a business.

BA employees do not and in the long term this will just damage BA. Less custom = less income = more cost reductions.

If i want to earn more money i ask for more and justify the request or i move jobs.

I don't expect it to be handed to me on a plate each year as a nice cost of living + 5% increase.

 

[Dolph]

Perhaps you should join a Union then?

because that works so well to ensure that the business survives to employ people... I mean, the workers of Rover were so glad their union insisted that there be no redundancies leading to BMW selling it on to someone willing to give in to ridiculous demands...

 

[CraigN]

indeed unless you work for a charity the aim is always to make a profit.

if revenue is down and workload is not up then you have to cut costs.

BA seemed to understand this there staff do not.

 

[scorza]

because that works so well to ensure that the business survives to employ people... I mean, the workers of Rover were so glad their union insisted that there be no redundancies leading to BMW selling it on to someone willing to give in to ridiculous demands...

Ever hear of negotiation? If Rover had too many staff then it was the duty of BMW to downsize appropriately and negotiate this with the Unions. There are plenty of examples of redundancies happening at unionised workplaces and BMW manages to get on fine with its German unionised workforce.

 

[Dolph]

Ever hear of negotiation? If Rover had too many staff then it was the duty of BMW to downsize appropriately and negotiate this with the Unions. There are plenty of examples of redundancies happening at unionised workplaces and BMW manages to get on fine with its German unionised workforce.

They tried, the union response in the UK was 'No'. Labour backed them and suggested the business should be sold back to the UK. It was, and only lasted a few years afterwards, leaving everyone out of employment because the new employer agreed not to address the productivity problems following discussions with the union and the government.

The law of unintended consequence in full effect, the problem was that it was clear to anyone with a brain what the problems were...

 

[scorza]

They tried

They obviously didn't try very hard did they? There may have been specific problems with the Unions at Rover I don't know, but it's a gross oversimplification to say that because of this one failure all union activities are a bad thing.

Who knows, maybe if the Conservative government in the '90s hadn't pushed through the ill thought out sale to BMW in the first place (destroying a partnership with Honda that by all accounts was working pretty well).

 

[stockhausen]

... i am meant to be flying next w/e to NYC.

Are you hoping to fly with BA and if so, when did you book your flight?


ps - what on earth could possess to to want to go to New York anyhow

 

[Deleted member 66701]

the appeal decision was announced at the pcs conference in brighto this morning and was greeted with a standing ovation.

its a victory for democracy, the unions but above all a victory for workers to exercise their human right to withdraw their labour when in dispute with their employer. a great day.

in other news, we passed a motion yesterday and pcs will be perusing a court case against the government to pay compensation for loss of earning for members that took strike action over the civil service compensation schem cuts. cuts that last week were deemed illegal by the high court. if there is acall for unions to pa compensation over strikes that are subsequently deemed illegal on a technicality then we are quite capable of retaliating.

in solidarity

posted from mobile

 

[Dolph]

They obviously didn't try very hard did they? There may have been specific problems with the Unions at Rover I don't know, but it's a gross oversimplification to say that because of this one failure all union activities are a bad thing.

Who knows, maybe if the Conservative government in the '90s hadn't pushed through the ill thought out sale to BMW in the first place (destroying a partnership with Honda that by all accounts was working pretty well).

The unions at Rover were the crazy militant type (much like BUSSA/Unite). I have no problems with more moderate/sensible unions that actually try and work to improve the employees lot short and long term by recognising the business situation as well as the need of employees.

As for the conservatives, they had nothing really to do with the sale, beyond a few words of support in the commons, and their view at the time was right (as BMW had a credible turnaround strategy for Rover that was later scuppered by the unions and Labour due to the number of job losses necessary to bring Rover into the modern day).

Funnily enough, the head of the union involved was one Tony Woodley...

 

[Dolph]

the appeal decision was announced at the pcs conference in brighto this morning and was greeted with a standing ovation.

its a victory for democracy, the unions but above all a victory for workers to exercise their human right to withdraw their labour when in dispute with their employer. a great day.

in other news, we passed a motion yesterday and pcs will be perusing a court case against the government to pay compensation for loss of earning for members that took strike action over the civil service compensation schem cuts. cuts that last week were deemed illegal by the high court. if there is acall for unions to pa compensation over strikes that are subsequently deemed illegal on a technicality then we are quite capable of retaliating.

in solidarity

posted from mobile

Seems perfectly fair to me, I'm equal when it comes to people having to pay for their screwups, and Labour's attempt to ride roughshod over employment law via using legislation to change redundancy terms for some workers deserved to get shot down in flames.

I look forward to PCS members getting their compensation, and BA getting compensation for the disruption planning at Christmas.