BA

[Mayfly]

Any-one else beginning to get concerned about the future of BA? They lost £401M last year & now the cabin staff want to go on strike again. It's not just the money they will lose over this that worries me, but the loss of good will in the long term.
You can't blame any-one for not wanting to book holiday travel with them.

I confess to not knowing the nitty-gritty behind the problems but I've never been in favour of strikes - my thoughts tho' some may disagree is if you don't like the job or the way it's carried out find another!!!! In this day & age there are plenty of people out there looking for employment - if you have a job think yourself lucky......

[Xplumberlives]

They (both B.A. and the staff) have been in self destruct mode for at least two years now!

[Jigsaw]

I am in full agreement with MF on this.
XPL is right as well, BA have done themselves no favours either.
At the moment though, regardless of anything else they employ the very people that want to pull the ladder from beneath them. Do Strikes really help?

[Sooty655]

I spent a lot of my working life in the Middle East, where workers rights are twofold -

1) You have the right to agree with management.

2) You have the right to be deported.

It may be an unacceptable approach in the eyes of the militant left, but when I went out there in the 70s it was a welcome change from a country striking itself to destruction.

[Dan4th]

I have always been amazed at the lack of
consequential thinking among certain
labo(u)r organizations who DESPISE those
they work for and seemingly would RATHER
see their employer go belly up than have to
make even the tiniest concession to their
demands....

It does, however, need to be said that there
are many unions where membership is
required and a clique holds the reins. I'm
forced to wonder what the percentages are
for those pro/anti strike here -- not that
the union is likely to release these numbers.
Could be 50.1 versus 49.9 or the clique could
be manipulating the figures.....

Danf.

[Mayfly]

I am in full agreement with MF on this.
XPL is right as well, BA have done themselves no favours either.
At the moment though, regardless of anything else they employ the very people that want to pull the ladder from beneath them. Do Strikes really help?

>>>>>faints [thud]<<<<<<<

[Jigsaw]

I am in full agreement with MF on this.
XPL is right as well, BA have done themselves no favours either.
At the moment though, regardless of anything else they employ the very people that want to pull the ladder from beneath them. Do Strikes really help?

>>>>>faints [thud]<<<<<<<

You don't even know My Father, do you?

[RLN]

I can't comment on the BA situation, but when large companies are involved with a dispute with their staff, the Unions have to be very careful as they are, rightly, subject to the law far more than they used to be. Any action now has to be by ballot, and being a secret ballot, the whole process is undertaken by "The Ballot Reform Society". They are independant of Companies, Unions and Government, and they send out the ballot forms and count the results. This does away with any intimidation from either side. The Unions have to follow this process as they could otherwise be involved in a lengthy legal case with both the Company and/or the Crown Prosecution Service. It doesn't really matter what the result may be, as the resulting costs and fines could cause a Union to be bankrupt. This doesn't help their case with Company or their members. As a result, Unions are amenable to compromise these days, and more prone to "sabre rattling". Ultimately, the work force has the right to withdraw their labour, rightly or wrongly.
As usual, I'm probably wrong.

[Bovril]

my problem with the cabin crew ... why do they think they can command such a salary? after all i bet a waiter in a restaurant isnt on that much.

[Ducati Boy]

D4th our unions are not like yours. We dont kill people if they dont join, we dont kill them at all actually its not British. Not all management is reasonable and BA have been giving their staff a bit of a kicking in a high handed way to get to the point they are at. If folk want to strike it must mean they have reached a breaking point, so if its a legal strike one has to accept it as so.

Bovril: Just because someone gets more money than someone else is hardly reason to question their salary rights. After all this is not about salary as I understand, its about cost cutting by cutting labour and increasing the work for those who remain.

Theres lots more of this to come folks, perhaps if the bonuses they paid to their executives had been used to keep the labour at work, there might be no strike threats at all.

[Bovril]

salary is all part of it .. why do you think they want to cut numbers? BA cabin crew are rumoured to be on 30K and Vigin on 15K... dont they both do the same job/amount of work? for 30k a year the BA crew should be working twice as hard ?

[Ducati Boy]

How do you know they don't?

[Bubbles]

How do you know they don't?

Have you not read any of the cabin crew threads on PPrune??

[Ducati Boy]

How do you know they don't?

Have you not read any of the cabin crew threads on PPrune??

Now what sad soul would want to do that! The place is axe grinders than a lumber jacks convention!

[Bubbles]

It is amusing to see just how out of touch with reality they are, those poor dears earning upto 100K a year and shock of shocks actually having to do some work!!!!!

[Checkflaps]

It is amusing to see just how out of touch with reality they are, those poor dears earning upto 100K a year and shock of shocks actually having to do some work!!!!!

For a moment there, I thought you were on about the lot on UKAR going on about TVOC aircrew wages.

G

[Bubbles]

Nahhhh, i didn't use the word "tossers" now did i?

[Mayfly]

Well the strike has gone ahead then - I think the out come of this will be very interesting!!

[Yorkie]

I seems that BA managmnet have taken their ball home (Quite rightly in my eyes, having never worked in a work place that can be ruled by unions. we just do as the boss tells us, and it's a bonus not a right to get a pay rise)

No perks for anyone who went on strike..... Love it.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8584720.stm

[Mayfly]

Quite right too - it's a perk not a right & form any part of any employment contract..........

[RLN]

Interesting. If this is an official strike, then BA are sabre rattling.
Removing anything from workers who are involved in a dispute without negotiation would be seen as victimisation, and they would have to prove their case in a court of law.
Although the cheap flights etc. are not written in the terms and conditions, they are an implied term of contract through custom and practice, not just in BA, but throughout the industry. Again BA would be on a sticky wicket in court.

[Mayfly]

From my understanding they have been through all that & any potential strikers were warned before hand

[RLN]

Again even if they were warned, it is victimisation. One of the fundamental rights of an employee is the right to withdraw their labour. For a company to change terms and conditions (even implied terms) without consultation, and agreement of the unions involved is illegal. Threatening to do so could, in itself, cause a strike.

[Stigish]

This must be so frustrating for BA. Their hands are basically tied now.
The employees going on strike must surely realise they are one of the main reasons BA is losing money by the second.
No one wants to risk using them at the moment because of the threat of constant strikes. Like its been pointed out already, they are one of the highest paid in the industry and they are demanding more from a company that cannot currently make a profit.
Sadly this could lead to the demise of BA, then they'll all end up jobless. Take it from me, there are very few jobs out there at present and I'm sure there are even less with the remaining airlines, if any at all.

Who would want to employ cabin crew/baggage handlers or anyone else from BA that supported the strike action anyway?

[Yorkie]

As you may have noticed from my previous posts, I am not a union man, nor do I agree to what they do some of the time.

If BA give perks, non contractual to staff, then warn the staff that any conduct that affects the running of the company will mean that the perk is removed. they then have the right to remove the perk when the staff have cost the company £m's however the staff that haven't cost the company will continue to recieve it.

that sounds right to me, am i reading it wrong?

The other side of the coin is that if i decided that I wasn't coming into work tomorrow because i demand a pay rise, they would sack me and get someone else to do my job. Now the unions have to answer that one, because the advice they are giving their members is B*llsh*t because it they carry on there will not be a BA (probably sell out to Saudi airlines or AA) and the unions will not be able to touch the cabin crew as they will be employed abroad.


Ok down off soapbox now, appologise for language. My father in law is a union man and we had a heated debate at his house earlier today.