BAA Strikes (BAA, NOT BRITSH AIRWAYS)

I just find it odd that they feel like they are owed the rise. Many many people aren't getting anything extra this, or next year.
 
Last edited:
The_Abyss said:
BA hasn't been an airline for well over a decade now - it is a pension fund administrator heavily in debt that happens to generate income from flying planes around the world and sometimes sorting their passengers' baggage. I'd give it 12 months to pull around, or else let it fail along with absolutely every other job that depends upon it being in business. Then we'll start to see the true cost of air travel in the UK.
Click to expand...

Still doesn't change the fact that despite several posts to confirm the matter, this is still all about BAA and not BA.
 
Pudney@work said:
Still doesn't change the fact that despite several posts to confirm the matter, this is still all about BAA and not BA.
Click to expand...

I originally replied with the same but wasn't sure if his post was a mistake or was just talking about BA lol.

Can we edit the first post and put it in big easy to read letters that this is about BAA not BA? :)
 
Haha, the pension fund comment is a definite BA and not BAA issue. I think if the title font size was changed to massive 72 point font it may help :D
 
Don't get why employers can't just ban unions in their workplace, or simply fire employee's if they refuse to turn up to work because they get all butthurt about their wages. I'm currently in a job I don't like and not making anywhere near enough to justify the working conditions and tasks. So instead I'm looking for a new job which is better, don't see why these people can't do the same.

Not like they are hard to replace.
 
What's worse is the many many people who are out of work after the recent financial crisis that would give anything to have any job for any pay.

I say sack them all and give the jobs to people who appreciate them
 
I'd imagine the staff at BAA feel very cheated because of the leveraged buy out. I'm not surprised they are in the mindset of wanting to strike, however I don't condone holding the nation to ransom.
 
shauncr91 said:
Don't get why employers can't just ban unions in their workplace, or simply fire employee's if they refuse to turn up to work because they get all butthurt about their wages. I'm currently in a job I don't like and not making anywhere near enough to justify the working conditions and tasks. So instead I'm looking for a new job which is better, don't see why these people can't do the same.

Not like they are hard to replace.
Click to expand...

Because the law surrounding unfair dismissal relating to sacking employees on official industrial action is a bit of a minefield and could cost the employers millions if they get it wrong. In a nutshell; if the union has followed correct procedure, any employee who participates in industrial action (whether a member of the union or not) cannot be dismissed.
 
Beerbaron said:
make redundancies and the only employee the back the people they want
Click to expand...

Again, there are laws about redundancy. A redundancy pool which contained only people who had participated in industrial action would not be deemed to be following the appropriate guidelines and therefore would leave the employer open to legal action.
 
shauncr91 said:
Don't get why employers can't just ban unions in their workplace, or simply fire employee's if they refuse to turn up to work because they get all butthurt about their wages. I'm currently in a job I don't like and not making anywhere near enough to justify the working conditions and tasks. So instead I'm looking for a new job which is better, don't see why these people can't do the same.

Not like they are hard to replace.
Click to expand...

You think employers should be allowed to ban unions?! Talk about an extreme reaction! Unions do a very good job, this is only one action out of the countless jobs they do for their members. You'll also probably find it wasn't even the union's suggestion to strike, it will have been the members complaints and then a vote by the union members to strike, not a "direct order" by the union.
 
jamief said:
Again, there are laws about redundancy. A redundancy pool which contained only people who had participated in industrial action would not be deemed to be following the appropriate guidelines and therefore would leave the employer open to legal action.
Click to expand...

If the company are making a loss and they are, they surely should be able to make redundancies like many companies have been doing recently
 
Beerbaron said:
If the company are making a loss and they are, they surely should be able to make redundancies like many companies have been doing recently
Click to expand...

Going on strike is far from a valid reason to sack/make someone redundant, no matter how you spin it.

Simply put, an employer cannot bring any form of disciplinary action against those who (legally) strike. It is illegal to do so.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom