What's with all the strikes?

lemonjelly

There's gonna be more...
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8576346.stm

JasonLVC

Surely the unions must realise that bringing the country to a halt a few weeks from a general election canot be a good thing?.

Are the unions bouyant on the back of the hung parliment predictions or do they think Labour are a dead cert to win. Becuase with holidays disrupted, strikes on the trains/planes and no doubt public sector workers as well, surely this would drive voters into the hands of the conservatives.

Maybe that's the plan, get Brown out and then have the mother of all wars with the Tories (kind of The Miners, part deux).

ukcarper

Didn’t BA take an offer they had made off the table and didn’t the union say they would call off strike and put the offer to their members if BA put it back.

So it doesn’t sound as if it’s all the unions fault

Sir_Humphrey

This is a blatant attempt at Union busting.

All that will end up happening is that BA will end up like Aer Lingus after Willie Walsh's antics; a low cost airline at a non-low cost price at the mercy of Ryanair or Easyjet.

custardy

its easy sitting on the sidelines making snipes and comments
the fact is unless you are involved you will rarely see the real story online or reported in the news
ive seen that with the RM strikes

JasonLVC

ukcarper wrote: »

Didn’t BA take an offer they had made off the table and didn’t the union say they would call off strike and put the offer to their members if BA put it back.

So it doesn’t sound as if it’s all the unions fault

The offer BA tabled was on condition that the union did not set strike dates (the vote had already been done and so the union had their strike in the bag, but dates had not been set).

Union went ahead and set the strike dates and so BA withdrew their conditional offer as the conditions of that offered had been broken by the union. (I guess once dates were set, bookings would plummet and BA lose £££ hence the importance of not setting dates in public).

The Union's had said yesterday that if BA were to table an offer they would consider it, I guess they were thinking BA would table the offer they had previously withdrawn....alas, BA have tabled a new offer today which is, according to the union, worse than the previous offer.

There are some bluffs and double bluffs being played here by both sides, looks like Unite acted tough and got a good compromise deal withdrawn so the strikes go ahead.....if BA can pull off the 65% flights they think they can, they'll have dealt Unite a bloody nose from their own membership. If that is the case, it will only get a lot lot worse for both sides to come.

Sir_Humphrey

JasonLVC wrote: »

The offer BA tabled was on condition that the union did not set strike dates (the vote had already been done and so the union had their strike in the bag, but dates had not been set).

The anti-Union laws have not helped reach a resolution here as strike ballots are time-limited. Unite could not hold off the strike for too long as they would need a new ballot.

Pete111

Sir_Humphrey wrote: »

This is a blatant attempt at Union busting.

All that will end up happening is that BA will end up like Aer Lingus after Willie Walsh's antics; a low cost airline at a non-low cost price at the mercy of Ryanair or Easyjet.

More like a blatant attempt by a union to stamp their feet and get in the news before a GE to remind Labour who pays the bills...

I think it's telling that many of BA's Gatwick cabin crew do not support their Heathrow colleagues. They (and the rest of the airline industry) have been flying with the 'reduced' number of cabin crew for years to no ill effect apparently

http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/BA-Staff-Expresses-Anti-Strike-Dissent-On-Online-Forums-Some-Even-Cancelled-Union-Membership/Article/200912315501661

ukcarper

JasonLVC wrote: »

The offer BA tabled was on condition that the union did not set strike dates (the vote had already been done and so the union had their strike in the bag, but dates had not been set).

Union went ahead and set the strike dates and so BA withdrew their conditional offer as the conditions of that offered had been broken by the union. (I guess once dates were set, bookings would plummet and BA lose £££ hence the importance of not setting dates in public).

The Union's had said yesterday that if BA were to table an offer they would consider it, I guess they were thinking BA would table the offer they had previously withdrawn....alas, BA have tabled a new offer today which is, according to the union, worse than the previous offer.

There are some bluffs and double bluffs being played here by both sides, looks like Unite acted tough and got a good compromise deal withdrawn so the strikes go ahead.....if BA can pull off the 65% flights they think they can, they'll have dealt Unite a bloody nose from their own membership. If that is the case, it will only get a lot lot worse for both sides to come.

If they were prepared to offer the deal then why not offer it again to stop the strie. I think Sir Humphrey is right

JasonLVC

ukcarper wrote: »

If they were prepared to offer the deal then why not offer it again to stop the strie. I think Sir Humphrey is right

Of course it is union busting. Unite have rattled their sabres and BA have stood up to them. BA have sought legal opinion and confirmed their plans are above board, fair and reasonable. They made a reasonable offer at the last minute and had it spat back in their face, so why offer it again - nothing has changed so why would Unite accept it a 2nd time?. Would you keep asking to be let into a pub after being told to go away?

Unite so far have had to have two ballots as the first one was illegal (in unions law terms) and the second one had a marginal outcome....if it was such a strong mandate from the members, then BA would not have mustered 65% of their flights as normal.

Unite come out of this as shamoblic if you look at it neutrally, although unions action evoke a very black and white response from people - you either agree with them or disagree withthem, there is rarely any unbiased opinion which is what unions count on for support, when in reality common sense and reason should be prevailng.