Forum menu
The BA strike is coming up and it looks like they will be flying their 747 fleet as "cargo only" flights during the strike, and flying the 777's and A320's with "brought in staff". Other planes will remain grounded.
So how do you feel about people going on strike in this day and age? Should the pilots be flying cargo only flights or backing up their cabin crews? And should the airline be flying planes with "brought in" or "picket line crossing" cabin crews?
pretty poor show all round. If BA don't move into the 21st century they will will go under..
I think that if the vote is legal then strikes, while generally undesirable, should be allowed to proceed. The strikers shouldn't be allowed to intimidate those who choose to work however, and I can't see why anyone else should be coming out in sympathy.
This particular case strike seems mental to me, and the Unite leadership are particularily disagreeable and with an agenda above and beyond the needs of their membership. It seems clear that BA need to do something to compete, and while I can see there are leadership failings in the company, reducing cabin staffing to levels already prevalent in the industry doesn't seem like an unreasonable step.
I was slightly surprised to hear the Labour leadership calling the strike deplorable - they might not like it or agree with it but that's too strong a term for something that's entirely legal. It's the sort of language you might have expected from the Tories, but shows how far Labour have strayed.
It's the workers prerogative to with-hold their labour to fight for better pay and conditions. I'm sure that when BA goes tits-up, they'll all be able to get other jobs giving them exactly what BA aren't.
Or maybe not.
Ha ha look at the BA add to the left.
Don't have a problem with people going on strike as long as the reason is genuine.
It's the workers prerogative to with-hold their labour to fight for better pay and conditions. I'm sure that when BA goes tits-up, they'll all be able to get other jobs giving them exactly what BA aren't.Or maybe not.
erm not can't see any BA cabin crew accepting ryanair t&c's...
Its usually a failing on both sides. It irritates me to blame the union leadership - huge vote in favour from the membership on this one. It seems to me its one of those " line in the sand" moments
Management are refusing to negotiate and must accept the blame for peeing of the workforce to this extent.
Good management with good employer/ employee relationships don't have strikes
Sack the lot and give the jobs to people who really want them .Employees are a pain in the ass.B A are trying to run efficiently and make savings ,save a bit now or the whole company goes tits up later ? Which way do they want it.Then all their glorified bus conductors can go on the dole
The Unions were born and grew as a truly beautiful thing back when people were pieces of shit to use and abuse.
Sadly, like bloated rockstars they forget where they came from and how to interact with others.
Surely to deny people the right to strike is wrong? Anyone has a right to strike and people have a right to not agree with it, but it doesnt make it wrong.
Employees are a pain in the ass
Surely this attitude sums up why unions still exist?
I like it when students go on strike
what are they hoping to do? bring the country to its knees?
Management must accept their share of the blame - this appears to be in part at least a provoked showdown. I bet it escalates to other parts of the business. 38 union activists being disciplined, offer withdrawn on the threat of strike, threats to sack all strikers,
It takes two to have a fight - look at Johm Lewis for an example of how to have good employee relationships.
I have employed people who skived on sick pay whilst I struggled to keep a small business going.Now I don't bother and work alone
what are they hoping to do? bring the country to its knees?
'Downing' (surely the wrong wording?) pints would cripple the entertainment industry 😆
Let me just say:
General Motors
Bring back the workhouses.
TandemJeremy - Member
Management must accept their share of the blame - this appears to be in part at least a provoked showdown.
If you are suggesting that BA provoked Unite by not unconditionally agreeing to all of their demands then you are correct.
Nope - share of the blame - they have escalated it and made a settlement harder. Things like withdrawing the offer on the table that the workforce were about to vote on because of the threat of a strike that was in the future - that makes a settlement harder - that offer could have been a basis for settlement but by withdrawing it they basically said - no compromise - its our way or the highway.
The legal hoops mean a strike vote has to be long in advance and by giving notice of strikes it gives opportunity to negotiate. the management refused this opportunity.
If a large % of the workforce vote for something then they are pissed of with the management.
Edric64, sounds like your working alone is probably the best solution for all concerned. Well negotiated. Spectacularly good management on your part.
How do STW'ers feel about workers going on strike?
I'm fine with it.
How would STW'ers feel about their bosses making unilateral changes to their terms and conditions?
johnners - MemberHow would STW'ers feel about their bosses making unilateral changes to their terms and conditions?
That would depend on whether or not those changes to T&Cs would mean I still had a job in a few months time.
If TJ downed his leftism STW would be sucked into a Tory vortex.
How would STW'ers feel about their bosses making unilateral changes to their terms and conditions?
Some might consider moving to another job.
How would STW'ers feel about their bosses making unilateral changes to their terms and conditions?
If I downed tools on STW, STW would ascend into witty and interesting banter 😀
I'm on strike next Wednesday !
How will i feel whilst taking the road bike round the Isle of Bute ?
Better than work !
Until payday 🙁
Is Bob Crow for real. Seriously?
Edric64, sounds like your working alone is probably the best solution for all concerned. Well negotiated. Spectacularly good management on your part.
I guess you've never employed the great British Public deadlylarcy?
I'm with Edric.
I find it annoying when I need to use their services but can understand where they are coming from.
I avoided BA in my flight to Rome in July and France in January in case they striked-annoying as Easyjet are naff and don't always use the same airports.
Ok Im annoyed but understand their plea. But are they not payed more than most airlines?
I don't know the true facts of why they are striking I have too much work as it is mmyself, so my comments are full of poop lol
But are they not payed more than most airlines?
It's mainly LHR long haul cabin crew who are causing the hassle here. They ARE paid a lot more than almost anyone else in the industry.
Ok Im annoyed but understand their plea. But are they not payed more than most airlines?
Can't they see that their employer is at the mercy of market forces? Unions seems to be all or nothing.
I dont know why the BA staff are going on strike, and as its unlikely to affect me, dont really care, but in principle I'm definately in favour of the right to strike.
One sad fact is that low levels of solidarity between workers actually makes full-blown strikes more likely as such things as work-to-rules, and 'doing the job properly' can't be enforced. Unions have no option other to call for the only act that will be respected.
Some might consider moving to another job.
Lame.
Lame.
Lame. It's disappointing, even for you Flashy 🙁
Could your blogboys not suggest anything better to go forth and post today?
One sad fact is that low levels of solidarity between workers actually makes full-blown strikes more likely as such things as work-to-rules, and 'doing the job properly' can't be enforced. Unions have no option other to call for the only act that will be respected.
Good point!
Could your blogboys not suggest anything better to go forth and post today?
Lame.
Lame.
Lame. It's disappointing, even for you Darcy
Why the **** do you persist in this? It's really rather dull.
My point was merely that some workers who disagree with a change to their working conditions might consider moving jobs. Is that a bad thing? No. It's called "choice". "Free will", if you will.
Some might consider moving to another job.
No no no. You only move to another job after you have contributed to the decline of the company you work for. Then you spend a period on the dole watching your children learn from your **** up.
In the normal world, if you dont like your pay and conditions you look for a better job.
In the modern Unionist world you parasitically destroy your income/security because you are told to. If you dont you are threatened, bullied and victimised for standing out from your striking colleagues*.
Whereas I'm sure the Union Bosses are all on guaranted jobs or protection.
*The next time theres a strike down at Trafford council with Pickets attempting to block the honest and hard worker. I will AGAIN stop my bike and ask them if they are proud of themselves. I've received a mouthful twice before. Did I back down? No. I was even told (the last time) to 'mind my own business'. To which I replied I am a Trafford tax payer. Sad bullying ****s.
It worries me when the union bosses include the likes of Charlie Whelan.
The likes of Captainflashheart, should secretly enjoy some strikes;
my union, The CWU, was on strike last year- It, and the workforce were successfully portrayed as the bad guys, and at the end of the day the negotiations ended in the union accepting huge pay cuts, massive increases to already unmanageable workloads, and lots of us being forced to leave the job voluntarily (without redundancy)
I hope you all don't complain when you get twenty junkmail leaflets with your 5pm mail delivery.
You don't get paid if you go on strike. It's not an option that is taken lightly, particularly by those that are lower paid and more likely to mucked around by management. That's my general opinion about taking industrial action, I haven't really been following the BA dispute.
Come on Flashy, merely copying and pasting? You're struggling this evening. What your proposing is that employers can act with impunity because workers have a choice and can **** off each time the employer unilaterally decides to change contracted working conditions and or pay. Now, and follow this if you will, because you are struggling this evening, allowing employers to continually act this way in the knowledge that workers have to move if they don't like it always results in an advantage to the employers. This always happens. Workers have only one thing they can withdraw, and that is their labour.
deadly, I think there are some who would point out that employers, especially large corporate ones exist only to selflessly provide public-service, jobs and fluffy bunnies, and its only the evil, unionised workforce that seek to destroy this utopia. 🙄
Now save your bile STW, that way you'll be able to enjoy it more if Lloyds TSB staff vote in favour of industrial action over the new pay and conditions deal 
I predict some people on here might die of indignation.
"Sadly, like bloated rockstars they forget where they came from and how to interact with others."
Not unlike executives then I guess.
BA need to compete. simple. Change is essential and inevitable. That said, given the volatility of UNITE I would have said that I would have gone about applying these changes in a mores sensitive way.
The thing that UNITE never, ever seem to grasp is that a business losing £350m a year is not sustainable, and will lead to the demise of the union itse;f as they'll have no one left to represent!
jimbo, while it may/ may not be true of BA, (I'm not to say),
I do question the automatic mantra many always repeat of 'change is essential and inevitable'
Most changes I've seen are not to benefit anyone other than shareholders, at the workforces expense, absolutely not to improve service to the public.
I'm willing to bet that if 'essential, inevitable' change came knockin' on your door you wouldn't be so philosophical...
I would not deny them the right to strike, but I think they are wrong on this one. I don't believe this is about bosses abusing the rights of workers, it's about the survival of the firm.
Workers and bosses (who are also workers) are in the sh1t together. If BA can't be competitive they will go bust and [b]all[/b] their jobs will be lost. If the employees and their union want BA to survive and thrive they have to commit to supporting the firm in any way they can. and that might mean personal sacrifices, not strikes.