BA win - Victory for common sense

Mr_Lahey

will-in-estoril wrote: »

BA crew members have taken out mortgages based on their salaries. What are they supposed to do now: roll over and play dead?

These are ordinary men and women fighting for basic rights, so often decried by the Daily Mail and rest of the right wing press.

I agree, the odds are stacked against them, largely due to anti-union legislation passed in the 80s and not repealed by new Labour, yet they still stand up to be counted.

I am very sorry if anyone misses a couple of days in Paris over Easter, but will be far sorrier if the staff lose their homes because they can no longer afford the repayments.

Walsh and other senior BA managers have had years to sort this out: look at the mess they made at Manchester!

There is an old saying and whilst i cannot say who the author is it goes something like this:

If you do not like your job (or aspects of) then get another job.

will-in-estoril

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

There is an old saying and whilst i cannot say who the author is it goes something like this:

If you do not like your job (or aspects of) then get another job.

And here's another. Unlike the above, not invented: 'Stultus est sicut stultus facit.'

Mr_Lahey

will-in-estoril wrote: »

And here's another. Unlike the above, not invented: 'Stultus est sicut stultus facit.'

To be fair Forest Gump said that

will-in-estoril

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

To be fair Forest Gump said that

Obviously someone you can identify with!

Mr_Lahey

will-in-estoril wrote: »

Obviously someone you can identify with!

And the thinly veiled insults start already, it is called a difference of opinion Will It may be hard for you to comprehend and perhaps impossible, but not everyone agrees with you and when they don't, its not a personal insult.

So, if you wish to continue this debate then please do, if all you can do is fire insults then i suggest you don't bother

will-in-estoril

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

After this blow now, surely Unite, combined with all the bad press they have had will stop trying to ruin things for everyone with their pathetic little hissy fit.

Mr_Lahey wrote: »

I disagree, from what i have read it is Unite who are using bullying tactics to 'protect' its members from unavoidable practices/cuts by BA.

Unite has had bad press since day one, the public are tired of unions bullying antics and holding passengers to ransom.

I will take no lessons about insults from a newbie who does not shy away from using language which belies the bile and venom they clearly hold towards anyone not in step with their reactionary views.

If a sensible debate is to be had it needs to be without the loaded language normally associated with the Daily Mail and Express.

malkie76

I do hate it when posters start to throw insults rather than address fair points to them. It suggests that they cannot debate the points to them.

Yes, BAs staff have homes to pay for. What's the better option? That they take a cut in line with the rest of the industry, or 100% unemployment for everyone?

These are hard times in all sectors, and they need to be realistic about BAs current financial situation. If they suceed in killing BA, they'll all be offered new contracts with BA version 2, and the terms will be much worse than they are currently being offered.

Your comments about loosing a weekend in Paris are very narrow minded.

Mr_Lahey

malkie76 wrote: »

I do hate it when posters start to throw insults rather than address fair points to them. It suggests that they cannot debate the points to them.

Yes, BAs staff have homes to pay for. What's the better option? That they take a cut in line with the rest of the industry, or 100% unemployment for everyone?

These are hard times in all sectors, and they need to be realistic about BAs current financial situation. If they suceed in killing BA, they'll all be offered new contracts with BA version 2, and the terms will be much worse than they are currently being offered.

Your comments about loosing a weekend in Paris are very narrow minded.

I came to respond to Wills most recent post but i doubt i could put it better than that.

C_Mababejive

Indeed...a victory for common sense.

I appreciate that the union and its members wish to preserve terms and conditions.
I would wish to do the same,but that can only happen in a company which is financially stable.

A situation cannot continue in which the actions of employees are a direct threat to the stability and future of the company which pays their wages.

So now that there has been a victory for common sense, maybe its time for some vanquishing? (see my sig)

We dont want a load of disgruntled BA workers shuffling back with a bad attitude.

Maybe its time to re-interview them for their jobs and let those who are unhappy,choose to leave?

QUOTE
By Simon Zekaria
Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
LONDON (Dow Jones)--British Airways PLC's (BAY.LN) cabin crew Friday lost a legal battle to overturn changes to pay and working conditions at the U.K. airline.
The High Court in a ruling also denied an injunction bid by staff, supported by the union Unite, against BA imposing cost-cutting plans set out in November last year that freeze cabin crew pay and reduces crew numbers on board long-haul flights from London's Heathrow Airport.
The ruling will come as a blow to Unite, which argued that the airline's plans to reduce crew levels were illegal as existing numbers were fixed by collective union agreements and that the proposals alter terms and conditions of individual cabin crew members' contracts.
BA said in a statement that it is "extremely pleased" with Friday's ruling that the changes it made to "onboard crew numbers on flights from Heathrow were reasonable, did not breach crew contracts and can remain in place."
Unite called the outcome "regrettable."
The airline said Unite demanded the plans be reversed despite the "severe financial impact" on the company of such action.
Judge Christopher Holland said BA's action to cut costs could be deemed reasonable given the state it found itself in last October.
"The now undisputed fact is that BA was then in a very serious financial state, such that management reasonably had urgently to do something in the interests of the company, its employees and its financial backers," he said in a written judgment.
Legal experts said the ruling finding in favor of BA reflects a trend in the courts supporting companies in contractual employment disputes.
"Courts are tending to sympathize with employers, especially when the changes are implemented to reflect business needs in the current economic climate," Employment specialist Emma Clark at law firm Fox said. "Unite's position at BA is weakening on a daily basis."
Following the court ruling, BA called on Unite to abort possible future strike action. "We believe it should reflect on the court's decision rather than impose an unnecessary strike on the travelling public," the airline said.
However, Unite Assistant General Secretary Len McCluskey failed to give the airline reassurance. "The judgement makes absolutely no difference to the substance of our dispute with British Airways," he said in a statement.
"We remain in negotiations with the company and hope that management will address the real concerns of cabin crew. Should they fail to do so industrial action remains a possibility".
Cabin crew represented by Unite in December voted to strike to protest the changes, but BA was granted an injunction to prevent the industrial action due to procedural issues with the union's ballot. Unite has re-balloted its 12,000 cabin crew members on further possible strike action from March. The result of the ballot is expected Monday.
However, experts said striking or legal action, while potentially unavoidable, would be unnecessary and costly.
Partner and employment specialist Philip Henson at law firm Bargate Murray said BA and Unite should now seek to resolve their differences away from the courtroom, as well as avoid the spectre of unilateral industrial action.
"The parties will no doubt be at loggerheads in their separate negotiation discussions. I would suggest that mediation would be the best way for the parties to come to a workable solution, rather than continuing the monthly jaunt to the High Court, or the union ballot box," he said.
Clark at law firm Fox added: "I expect the union will call further strikes, but I believe they should think very carefully before they do so as such actions could result in serious damage to BA and a huge loss of goodwill."
Earlier this month, BA said third-quarter pretax losses narrowed due to a decline in operating costs but warned it is still on course for its worst fiscal-year performance.
It said its pretax loss in the three months to Dec. 31 narrowed to GBP50 million from GBP122 million in the same period a year ago.
Like other airlines, BA has faced a difficult couple of years as demand for travel, in particular lucrative premium traffic, fell in the wake of the economic downturn.
As a result, the airline has been in a drive to cut costs, which it has achieved through cutting capacity and spending, and striving for a more efficient work force. Last year it asked staff to volunteer for redundancy, part-time work, working for free and taking unpaid leave to help the carrier "fight for survival."
At 1503 GMT, BA shares were down 0.5% at 209 pence, while the benchmark FTSE 100 index was up 0.01%.

C_Mababejive

will-in-estoril wrote: »

BA crew members have taken out mortgages based on their salaries. What are they supposed to do now: roll over and play dead?

These are ordinary men and women fighting for basic rights, so often decried by the Daily Mail and rest of the right wing press.

I agree, the odds are stacked against them, largely due to anti-union legislation passed in the 80s and not repealed by new Labour, yet they still stand up to be counted.

I am very sorry if anyone misses a couple of days in Paris over Easter, but will be far sorrier if the staff lose their homes because they can no longer afford the repayments.

Walsh and other senior BA managers have had years to sort this out: look at the mess they made at Manchester!

Its a valid point you make but if BA folds, no one will have a job.

We cannot have a situation in which a major company,in financial difficulties, is compelled to meet unrealistic demands.

The company needs to show that it has dealt with this issue,that it can start afresh and build customer confidence becuase at the moment, BA will probably not be peoples first choice of carrier.

Many people are suffering hard times at present.

I work for a major international company which makes millions of pounds of profit but still,each and every one of us has had to tighten our belts,work harder,work longer and even do great wadges of unpaid overtime to weather the storm. Our union negotiates with the company to make agreements which are fair and which preserve jobs,income and the stability of the company.

I know its a bitter pill to swallow but each and every BA employee needs to accept that the company is struggling to survive and they must ensure that they do their bit to help and make BA the proud carrier of choice that it once was ,instead of living in the past and trading on past glories.