[Tim2soza]

When I check in to fly to SYD from LHR on an upcoming strike day, I will make a point of apologising to BA staff for choosing an alternative airline. I cannot risk my business trip to the threat of strike action. I will suffer a wedgie seat to get there. (I’m afraid a 60% chance of flying is 39.99% too little.)

—

A dear family friend once had Health and Safety demanding fire doors in her grade 1 listed office. English Heritage said they would throw the book at her Charity if the fire doors were installed. Impasse.

So she invited both parties in, sat them in the board room, gave them lots of coffee, left the room with an apology, locked the doors, called the room and told them they were staying there until resolved.

20 mins later, it was.

[Cwyfan]

Have I missed something here?

I understood that the original dispute had reached a mutually satisfactory solution. What is now in dispute is whether BA can alter non-contractual conditions, and discipline its own staff for breaking its rules during the dispute.

As a shareholder, I would prefer that to be tested in court rather than by strikes, and I can only assume that Unite know the answer and will not therefore go down that route, leaving BA no choice but to stand firm.

I hope these so called perks are being taxed correctly as whenever I travel business these days, there are always staff travelling too. Why are they in other than cattle class, when instead loyal paying customers could be upgraded and vacate a seat for them?

It would help them see what there service really is like for the vast majority of customers

[Speedbird]

I am due to travel with BA in First during the strike period. Can anyone tell me what the service level was like during the last strike in BA First. The information on the BA website seems to be a similar offering to Club World. Any information would be helpful

[NTarrant]

Geo you are unfair to say that kmcottrell is envious and you are very wrong to say that the crew are entitled to perks. There are many companies in the travel industry that do not give perks to staff, the same as there are some retailers that don’t either.

No one is entitled to perks or concessionary travel, there is no law that says companies have to offer this or anything else as a benefit in kind.

[MartynSinclair]

Indeed indeed. The fact that i fly an exec jet, does not give me or my collegues the right to load an empty leg with family and friends.

As a BA shareholder, I wrote to the board suggesting that all staff travel perks be suspended until such time that the company were able to afford this giveaway. As VK so rightly points out, the fact that there are 600 BMI crew available, I am sure a percentage of them live within a commute of the BA bases where they may be needed.

I know of BA flight deck crew who live in all 4 corners of the globe and rely on staff travel to get them to work on time. Reporting for duty whatever level of crew should not be dependant on ones abilty to get a free or discounted ride. Spot on their Mr. T

[Cwyfan]

I am all for motivators, even perks, but if they are the best paid already what is the point? It is shareholders profits that are reduced by both of these. A perk for a hard-working regularly attending member of staff is one thing, but when it is treated as a right by all it is another.

Are you at the negotiations, or just reading about it like the rest of us? If not how do you know

In my opinion, the union has shown its true colours by its wildcat action threat, which to me is way beyond what are acceptable industrial relations, and sadly the staff appear to accept this cavalier attitude to customer relations

I have respect for anybody putting their money where their mouth is and being willing to lose pay in pursuit of what they consider to be a just cause, but this is residual blackmail of the worst sort. BA gave notice about the consequences of striking, and knowing that, the staff went out. It was their freedom of choice to say that they accept that by doing what they did they accept the consequence, so now they want the consequence annuled. They need to learn to live with the consequences of their action, unless it violates employment law

[Cwyfan]

So there we have it! If staff want to maximise their opportunity for cheap travel, they should act in a way that creates empty seats. A real peverse incentive. Put that way, if ever there was a case for removing a perk, it is that.

If BA want me to give them a little extra income, I will outbid that 10%+tax of the full fare anyday, and I am sure the seats would be full of people like me. As a shareholder, I just get 10% off, not 90%

I would also take issue with the use of the word entitled to a concession…concessions should be earned

[MartynSinclair]

Sky News made and interesting commentary @ 11.50 (papers review). This is a fight to the death between WW and Unite. if WW wins he will get the keys to a Lordship and be able to go where he wants. Either way, it looks like WW will go within the next 6 months anyway.

It seems that the long term solution that WW is looking for is purely for his own ego.

WW gets paid a serious amount of money – he should not be gambling on BA’s stratergy.

On the ticket concensions Geo, you need to understand the economics of carrying pax. One extra pax (carried free or at a reduced price) has a direct cost to the airline. I do not buy this story about endearing workers to the brand by offering free or reduced travel, when the majoirty of staff use teh “perk” in order to live in remote locations, with a cheaper cost of living. Travel concnessions should be a privalidge and not a perk – bottom line as Unite went to court to ensure the strike was legal, BA should also challenge in law whether they are legally oblidged to continue to offer concessionary travel. i am sure the postions can be filled by staff who coul dlive without the need for concessionary travel.

[JohnPhelanAustralia]

For those people suggesting that Willie Walsh needs to be replaced for negotiations to continue – your argument would have much more weight – and logic – if you said that Walsh AND the leaders of Unite/BASSA should be replaced.

To argue that only Walsh is the stumbling block is to show clearly your pro-union bias. If you say the problem is with the people involved in the process, then it has to be the people on BOTH sides who are to blame.

And as for the debate about staff getting fares for 10% of the retail cost – I have long thought this ludicrous. I don’t know of people in any other industry who get a 90% discount on goods/services from their employer. I have no problem with staff getting discounts of 10 or 20% – maybe even up to 50% – but 90% off is ridiculous.

[MartynSinclair]

John I agree – replace both – inject fresh ideas and a fresh team.

[VintageKrug]

Youtube latest from Willie:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iUbgbMCgsoY&

And Willie’s earlier letter which sets out the actual issue here, and past history, rather than the fiction peddled by geo and others that BA Management have not negotiated or made concessions to attempt to avoid strike. Here is that letter:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/guest_contributors/article7129146.ece

The blame lies squarely with BASSA who are not in alignment with Unite, which I believe wants to stop this strike.

You should remember that WW is himself a Union man – that’s how he first made his name at Aer Lingus, in the Pilot’s Union.

Excellent Times editorial from before the revised ruling:

Regardless of the outcome of legal squabbles, a walkout by BA crew is indefensible

“In a democracy, the right to strike is important. But that does not mean that all of those who wish to strike are right. The Court of Appeal may have ruled the proposed strike of British Airways cabin crew illegal only on a technicality but the nature of this ruling should not affect anybody’s understanding of the proposed industrial action itself. It would have been counter-productive, stupid, and wrong.”

“Willie Walsh has taken on the unions with a mixture of courage and common sense. It is time for BA’s workforce to stop thinking only of themselves, and start thinking of their company, the economy, and most of all, their passengers.”

Whole piece worth a read if you have a spare few minutes.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article7130098.ece

[Cwyfan]

If the perk has no value, why are they going on strike for it

I never believe people who say that they do not want to go on strike, but then do. They have a free choice, and if their union is not doing what they want, they should replace it

[MartynSinclair]

VK

A superb business stratergy, take on the unions, see the unions win in court, stick to your principles, continue taking your salary, have a mere 7% public shareholder support…………………………………oh and as a side issue, announce a loss of overr 500 million sterling which will equate to 600 million sterling by the end of the strike.

Makes Gordon Brown look like a saint really.

You go for it VK, I think you should apply for WW job once he is fired!

[openfly]

BA cabin crew are some of the highest paid unskilled workers in the land. They are pampered to like no other. They think they have a job for life…not so.
I was disgusted to see them celebrating at the reversal of the decision. Shreaking like alley cats because they were about to cause more damage to their employers, BA, and, more importantly, to the travelling public, and the economy.
This will be the final straw for many travellers.

[Tim2soza]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article7132639.ece

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/seealso/2010/05/daily_view_ba_strikes.html

[Author]

Posts