‘BA has chosen to ignore the strike mandate repeatedly, every vote has been overwhelming by any measure with over 75% in favour of a strike, yet BA has sought to circumvent this mandate given by its key front line.’
Um no. In fact even Unite can’t do the sums on this accurately. According to the last ballot figures, only 71% of those who voted supported industrial action. However, if you look at the figures for the total number balloted, only 56% were in favour of strike action.
‘Would the outcome of any of the votes have been materially impacted by the exploited technicalities – NO.’
Depends on whether you consider actively encouraging people who are no longer members of the union to vote. A polite way of describing that would be gerrymandering. A more appropriate one would be that this was fraudulent.
‘Why if the Walsh-Woodley talks provided an acceptable offer was the subsequent vote over 78% in favour of striking. Clearly it was not acceptable to continue to victimise strikers etc.’
See the above coment about the true figures – in reality just over half the membership voted for strike action. Oh but there was concern about people receiving more than one ballot paper and there is a difference of over 200 between the number balloted in December 2010 and the number balloted in March 2011. I leave you to draw your own conclusions.
‘For PR purposes BA claims to have negotiated yet the vast majority of the angst would cost BA financially nothing to resolve. BA has been totally intransigent.
The BA offer of pay inceases is purely for PR and is a sop – the dispute has never been about pay.
BA initiated the dispute by breaking agreements. Since then they have taken an intransigent stance with continued use of the stick, intimidation, victimisation and bullying.’
Um … NO. BASSA/Unite/CC89 have put no proposition on the table. All we have ever heard in this dispute is about a series of demands that the union side want in order to then start negotiations. BA management seem to be the only group that have put forward any kind of deals. If you know differently please enlighten the rest of us with what the union side have proposed as a deal toend this dispute – note I say end.
‘Both sides agreeing to binding ACAS arbitration on all items is the way forward. BA has thus far not agreed to this.’
Erm ,,,, did you read the offer put forward by BA. I think you’ll find that arbitration by ACAS was offered. The union has claimed that the deal was unacceptable because it also had a clause about dropping any legal action. This didn’t sit well with those who were sacked. Incidentally, I hear in the grapevine that Mr Holley lost his tribunal case. Full judgement due next week. So BA cabin crew are being whipped up by an ex-employee who clearly has an axe to grind.