Ba Staff 12 Day Strike Over Xmass - Million Stranded

[TAWP]

If they don't like the pay, change jobs. Anyone that walks out should be subject to immediate dismissal. <deleted> unions and socialists adding laws to protect these mafias.

[geriatrickid]

If they don't like the pay, change jobs. Anyone that walks out should be subject to immediate dismissal. <deleted> unions and socialists adding laws to protect these mafias.

Well, now that yo have made clear that you do not believe in the collective bargaining process do you have any other Mussolini era views to express? A worker has the right to suspend labour if working conditions violate the terms of the collective labour agreement. Do you know what the reasons are for the labour dispute? It takes 2 parties to have a labour dispute.

If the labour position is illegal, the courts will issue an injunction accordingly if management makes the request.

So, in your perfect world where there is an abundance of skilled labour and where management can impose any working conditions it so wants, where do basic workplace safety rules and collective agreements come into play? Let me guess, you are going to regurgitate the usual free market twaddle. Thing is, the free market works both ways. Labour is an input, a resource, just like the cost of fuel or bolts. The market sets the price for the resources and part of the market process is how labour is paid for and the availability of the resources. Works both ways.

If everyone walked away from jobs they didn't like, there would be workplaces with no workers. D-oh.

[TAWP]

If they don't like the pay, change jobs. Anyone that walks out should be subject to immediate dismissal. <deleted> unions and socialists adding laws to protect these mafias.

Well, now that yo have made clear that you do not believe in the collective bargaining process do you have any other Mussolini era views to express? A worker has the right to suspend labour if working conditions violate the terms of the collective labour agreement. Do you know what the reasons are for the labour dispute? It takes 2 parties to have a labour dispute.

If the labour position is illegal, the courts will issue an injunction accordingly if management makes the request.

So, in your perfect world where there is an abundance of skilled labour and where management can impose any working conditions it so wants, where do basic workplace safety rules and collective agreements come into play? Let me guess, you are going to regurgitate the usual free market twaddle. Thing is, the free market works both ways. Labour is an input, a resource, just like the cost of fuel or bolts. The market sets the price for the resources and part of the market process is how labour is paid for and the availability of the resources. Works both ways.

If everyone walked away from jobs they didn't like, there would be workplaces with no workers. D-oh.

My dear socialist 'friend' (Comrade?), I do believe in bargaining, collectively or not. I do however not support blackmail, even if protected by legislation.

An employee offers their skills to an employer, that makes them a proposition in salary and benefits. Under no time is the employer forcing the job-seeker to take the position. This is when the bargaining takes place. However, accepting a job under the proposed terms, then while being hired refuse to do the work assigned unless some new conditions are meet and in many cases with force and violence oppose OTHERS (that might not share their position) from working, is the signs of a mafia.

When the unions go on strike in my country they place out 'strike guards'. Why do they do this? Because the hate the free choice of man. They are against anyone not following the collective as robots.

Do you know that in my home-country my boss could not give me, or more to the fact a co-worker that was even more skilled, an appropriate raise as the union (which we were NOT members of) forbid salary raises that deviated with more than 0.5% of the package-raise the 'collective' had agreed upon? I.e. if my boss would give any of us a HIGHER raise then we would be breaking the agreement and all the other workers could be pulled out in a strike.

The unions in my home country has via their proxy-party and government ruled the country into failure for the last 80 years under a socialist nightmare that will lead tghe nation into collapse in the near future if the path isn't changed.

I believe in freedom of choice. How can I be force to not work or hindered to enter my office when an union I am not a part of decides to go on to strike, some times in support of a third party in another segment of the country? (So called 'sympathy strike'.)

Of all the union-reps I have ever been in contact with they always talk about 'right'. The 'right' to equal pay (lasy gets same as the productive). The 'right' to a job (from who?). The 'right' to have a high living-standard (payed by whom?).

They have no sympathy if their actions if a company goes under as they see it as their right to get all of this and no questions asked. And if the company goes under the unemployment-check from the socialist government still covers up to 80% of their salary for atleast a year(!) - payed by some invisible fairy no doubt and not by us that are working.

Just an FYI, I currently work 7 days a week and have had 0 (zero) days vacation this year to a salary that is less than half of the unemployment check I would get back home. How about some people REALLY start to work before they go on strike and complain about things being unfair?

[TAWP]

If everyone walked away from jobs they didn't like, there would be workplaces with no workers. D-oh.

I had to read your post again as you seem to be so confused. Some part of your reply really doesn't make sense. Being for free choice is to support Mussolini, wow...did you ever attend school?

And your last line is truly the icing on the cake.

You really fail to realize that this would be a GOOD thing? This would be a display of the awesome power of the free market. A company that cannot hire anyone because no-one wanted to do it for the salary given, how on earth can that be any display of failure on the free market? It is clearly the opposite.

Improve the conditions of the work, raise salaries, decrease workload etc and people would not walk out of it.

What is so hard to get?

It is the force shutting down and prohibiting of willing workers that is the mafia's signature I oppose.

Remember Ådalen -31 when thousands of unionized workers walked to a factory to lynch immigrants that dare to take jobs to survive. That is what the mafia is about. Xenophobes that want money for themselves and would kill from stopping other truly poor or disenfranchised from getting the same chance.

[ignis]

Will be a back log even before the strike, many airports in the UK closed as snowed under. the ones that are open have problems as many Roads closed, and trains not running, so how would passenger get to a different airport.

Edited December 19, 2009 by ignis

[sbk]

The Christmas strike has been overruled by the British courts. However:

Three-day strike at BA looming after union vows to reopen ballot

British Airways faces the prospect of a three-day strike in the new year after the union representing cabin crew told the company that it was to reopen a ballot of its members.

“This ballot will run as soon as humanly possible. Lawyers are looking at this as we talk,” Tony Woodley, the joint general secretary of Unite union told The Times.

Unite told BA that the ballot would be held early in the new year. The announcement came after a High Court judge granted an emergency injunction banning a 12-day strike planned for Tuesday.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/travel/ne...icle6962217.ece

[Thongkorn]

Strike Canceled. I have been reading some of the posts, I am not militant or a socialist, But when you take a job and agree with the terms, then the company change them, somethings wrong , I thought it was a two way contract, I work for an agency, Over the year they have completely screwed us ,Changed work time hours to suit them selfs , altered the working week from 40 hours to 42 , with no extra pay, Also said that we will be working from Day today , not knowing if you have a job the next day. We are expected to take Bank holidays as Holiday time , The company has just made the biggest profit in its history, And to really make things Sh.t , they have just rewarded the people who work along side us, the company workers 2 and a half percent pay rise and a £200 Christmas bonus, If it was not for the agency workers the company workers would not be able to function, depots would close down in days , The agency workers are the back bone of this company, I have been on this job for 9 years , some have been on 19 years , we get treat like skivies under the guise of , because of the current financial situation bull sh.t. So i have some sympathy for the air line workers , how far can anyone be flexible i am that flexible i am called jelly man, some times people have to stand up and say enough is enough.

[caf]

Strike Canceled. I have been reading some of the posts, I am not militant or a socialist, But when you take a job and agree with the terms, then the company change them, somethings wrong , I thought it was a two way contract, I work for an agency, Over the year they have completely screwed us ,Changed work time hours to suit them selfs , altered the working week from 40 hours to 42 , with no extra pay, Also said that we will be working from Day today , not knowing if you have a job the next day. We are expected to take Bank holidays as Holiday time , The company has just made the biggest profit in its history, And to really make things Sh.t , they have just rewarded the people who work along side us, the company workers 2 and a half percent pay rise and a £200 Christmas bonus, If it was not for the agency workers the company workers would not be able to function, depots would close down in days , The agency workers are the back bone of this company, I have been on this job for 9 years , some have been on 19 years , we get treat like skivies under the guise of , because of the current financial situation bull sh.t. So i have some sympathy for the air line workers , how far can anyone be flexible i am that flexible i am called jelly man, some times people have to stand up and say enough is enough.

BA made the biggest profit in its history?? You don't work as a reporter on The Nation do you?

One or two other "facts" in your post may need a bit more research

[TexasRanger]

Lots of companies are doing it now, including mine, you just need to roll with the punches and suck it up. The alternative is the company folding and having no job at all.

Strikes disgust me.

[TAWP]

Strike Canceled. I have been reading some of the posts, I am not militant or a socialist, But when you take a job and agree with the terms, then the company change them, somethings wrong , I thought it was a two way contract, I work for an agency, Over the year they have completely screwed us ,Changed work time hours to suit them selfs , altered the working week from 40 hours to 42 , with no extra pay, Also said that we will be working from Day today , not knowing if you have a job the next day. We are expected to take Bank holidays as Holiday time , The company has just made the biggest profit in its history, And to really make things Sh.t , they have just rewarded the people who work along side us, the company workers 2 and a half percent pay rise and a £200 Christmas bonus, If it was not for the agency workers the company workers would not be able to function, depots would close down in days , The agency workers are the back bone of this company, I have been on this job for 9 years , some have been on 19 years , we get treat like skivies under the guise of , because of the current financial situation bull sh.t. So i have some sympathy for the air line workers , how far can anyone be flexible i am that flexible i am called jelly man, some times people have to stand up and say enough is enough.

This is the facts you are being feed to keep the strike-mentality going? It's like sitting at a clan-meeting in some extremist camp in Aghanistan...

Agency...you mean like Manpower etc? It is your JOB to be an expendable workforce in case of emergency. Surely you cannot be surprised that they first give raises and bonuses to the full employees in the company? Don't blame companies, the invention of Manpower and other companies came from the socialist governments need to regulate or allow the unions to stipulate extreamly harsh rules in what employees one could fire in times of hardship. Including, but not limited to, no being allowed to fire drunks, under-achiever, old staff that has no interest in being up to date with new procedures or technology, 'last in-first out'-rules etc etc...

Oh, and if you take a job and have a contract that contract cannot be altered without both sides agreeing to the change. At least in a real world...

[Luang]

In 1982 I flew BA from Heathrow to San Francisco via Seattle. We left at 1300 hours. The cabin crew served us a meal. When they'd cleared up they went down the back of the plane and got their heads down. There was NO cabin service till just before we arrived in Seattle. I vowed then never to fly with them again.

I flew with them in 1996, Rio-Heathrow. Initial flight was cancelled and next flight was two days later. They gave no reason or apology but did provide hotel accom (though this is to be expected). In defence of the staff though, they served me, and a 'new Brazilian friend', drinks throughout the night without any sour faces. (though, many of them seemed to be Brazilian too).

So mixed review from me.

[Luang]

If they don't like the pay, change jobs. Anyone that walks out should be subject to immediate dismissal. <deleted> unions and socialists adding laws to protect these mafias.

Unions are there to protect unscrupulous employers pissing all over the workers. Something i'm sure you will never equate.....**flame removed**

[geriatrickid]

Tawp, although it is indeed wonderful that you can read as demonstrated by a recitation of the Ron Paul brigade manifesto, there are a couple points you seem to overlook;

1. We do not live in a free market environment. Free market would mean that airlines receive no benefit from public funds. I'm not talking about obvious things like taxpayers providng funds for aerodromes and the like, but I am refering to such things as NHS (this transfers a large portion of group medical costs to the public purse), financing support of lease guarantees (have a look at the incentives given to aircraft manufacturers which in turn mean reduced costs of equipment which in turn benefits airlines) and funding to providing service to under utilized airports. If an airline truly worked in a free market bubble I would be more sympathetic to your arguments.

2. When a company signs a collective agreement with its workers it should not make that agreement only to keep coming back to revise that agreement. It's called bad faith negotiating and is bad form.

3. You seem to be in favour of free choice only if you agree with the position. If the workers have the legal right to engage in a protest, then that is their free choice. As I predicted, the courts said the vote was invalid, so the strike was off.

What you do not seem to understand is labour management. If workers are unhappy, they will go on strike. They also come down with "illnesses". They also can take vacations at inopportune times. Such actions are legal and cannot be stopped. Workers can also enforce every safety rule and regulation including all of the rules that apply to cabin behaviour and luggage. If cabin staff initiated a follow the rules process at any airline, PAX would be screaming, flights would be delayed and some might not even depart at all. In your free market world, only the airlines would be responsible for airline safety. We saw how well that approach worked with 1,2 Go. Cabin crew and ground crew co-operation are necessary for an airline to function. The suspended strike is a hollow victory if it leads to anger within the workforce and widescale retaliation. It's time the airline management addressed the reality that the business models do not work. They have not reflected the nature of travel for over a decade and they certainly do not reflect the vagaries of fuel prices, and aircraft pricing.

In your perfect world, you believe that labour is easily replaced. it is not. You cannot easily shift in skilled labour. Despite everyone's animosity to the cabin crews, they are trained and experienced. Do you think it would be easy to replace these workers with new workers of the same calibre that would be prepared to work for the proposed reduced wages and benefits? And even if such labour was found, don't you think that there would be a repeat of the labour problems after a short time? Your managment model does not account for human behaviour. You can't keep bringing in low wage earners, otherwise you end up with the social problem that England now has courtesy of its importation of cheap labour in the 60's.

Most importantly of all, leadership requires one to give clear and comprehnsible direction. BA, like most airlines with the exception of JetBlue, SouthWest, Singapore, Malaysia, and AirAsia has been without such leadership for a long time.

You have never managed a large number of people have you?

If respecting the collective bargaining process is "socialist" then I am in very good company with a lot of principled conservatives.

it takes two parties to make labour relations go sour. The union is playing the only card it has. Unfair and tough as it is, it is what happens when we live in a semi free society. I disagree with the labour strike and workplace actions, but if it is legal, I must respect that legal right as much as I disagree with it.

Edited December 20, 2009 by geriatrickid

[TAWP]

If they don't like the pay, change jobs. Anyone that walks out should be subject to immediate dismissal. <deleted> unions and socialists adding laws to protect these mafias.

Unions are there to protect unscrupulous employers pissing all over the workers. Something i'm sure you will never equate......**flame removed**

Thank you for you well-formulated response, comrade.

[TAWP]

Tawp, although it is indeed wonderful that you can read as demonstrated by a recitation of the Ron Paul brigade manifesto, there are a couple points you seem to overlook;

*sigh*

Just an FYI, I am not an American, and I was a Libertarian long before Ron Paul was known outside his nations borders.

1. We do not live in a free market environment. Free market would mean that airlines receive no benefit from public funds. I'm not talking about obvious things like taxpayers providng funds for aerodromes and the like, but I am refering to such things as NHS (this transfers a large portion of group medical costs to the public purse), financing support of lease guarantees (have a look at the incentives given to aircraft manufacturers which in turn mean reduced costs of equipment which in turn benefits airlines) and funding to providing service to under utilized airports. If an airline truly worked in a free market bubble I would be more sympathetic to your arguments.

Why would I be against your point that airlines should not receive any handouts etc? Of course I am against that. I am also against the massive bailouts for Wall Street and European banks etc. But don't confuse yourself. No-where in any rule-book does it say that one can only work against unions if the market has been completely protected against socialists or corporatist elements. One can be oppose of them all at once.

2. When a company signs a collective agreement with its workers it should not make that agreement only to keep coming back to revise that agreement. It's called bad faith negotiating and is bad form.

It is bad form and only goes to show that under a true Libertarian system the workers would be better protected against this as a contract could not, unless explicitly stated in the legal contract, be revised by one party without approval by both.

3. You seem to be in favour of free choice only if you agree with the position. If the workers have the legal right to engage in a protest, then that is their free choice. As I predicted, the courts said the vote was invalid, so the strike was off.

The workers have a free choice to protest, no-where did I say they did not.

I also said the company being the subject of a walk-out (that wasn't the case here, but if there was one) would have the right to terminate the employment of the employees engaged in such an act.

[TAWP]

What you do not seem to understand is labour management. If workers are unhappy, they will go on strike. They also come down with "illnesses". They also can take vacations at inopportune times. Such actions are legal and cannot be stopped. Workers can also enforce every safety rule and regulation including all of the rules that apply to cabin behaviour and luggage. If cabin staff initiated a follow the rules process at any airline, PAX would be screaming, flights would be delayed and some might not even depart at all. In your free market world, only the airlines would be responsible for airline safety. We saw how well that approach worked with 1,2 Go. Cabin crew and ground crew co-operation are necessary for an airline to function. The suspended strike is a hollow victory if it leads to anger within the workforce and widescale retaliation. It's time the airline management addressed the reality that the business models do not work. They have not reflected the nature of travel for over a decade and they certainly do not reflect the vagaries of fuel prices, and aircraft pricing.

In your perfect world, you believe that labour is easily replaced. it is not. You cannot easily shift in skilled labour. Despite everyone's animosity to the cabin crews, they are trained and experienced. Do you think it would be easy to replace these workers with new workers of the same calibre that would be prepared to work for the proposed reduced wages and benefits? And even if such labour was found, don't you think that there would be a repeat of the labour problems after a short time? Your managment model does not account for human behaviour. You can't keep bringing in low wage earners, otherwise you end up with the social problem that England now has courtesy of its importation of cheap labour in the 60's.

Most importantly of all, leadership requires one to give clear and comprehnsible direction. BA, like most airlines with the exception of JetBlue, SouthWest, Singapore, Malaysia, and AirAsia has been without such leadership for a long time.

You have never managed a large number of people have you?

If respecting the collective bargaining process is "socialist" then I am in very good company with a lot of principled conservatives.

it takes two parties to make labour relations go sour. The union is playing the only card it has. Unfair and tough as it is, it is what happens when we live in a semi free society. I disagree with the labour strike and workplace actions, but if it is legal, I must respect that legal right as much as I disagree with it.

Of course skilled labour cannot be easily shifted. Which would mean the employeer would work harder to keep their workforce happy if the was no union and 'lowest level of cooperation' as noted by law etc. See for instance the silly notion of 'minimum wage', that effectively has forced a lot of people to never be able to negotiate any higher salary for themselves but to always be counting on being in this bracket of salary-receivers. The failure of the regulations is that in the long run they will not empower the individual worker.

And just a funny FYI, in my home-country the growing xenophobic party has received most of its voter-base from blue collar unionized workers that voted for the socialist party in the previous elections.

People that talk about 'solidarity' and 'justice', while being staunchly opposed to citizens of other European countries to be able to travel there and receive work. You see, the 'solidarity'-part only ever goes as far as 'me, my family and friends wallets', never to the truly disenfranchised.

That is the hypocrisy I see and despise. And this comes back in negotiations with unions. (Again, the local mafia back home had reserved the right to negotiate the terms of us non-unionized workers too and we had no right to oppose it. Even if it meant we would get a lesser valued contract. This is the reality of a socialist model.)

(To admin: Seriously, could the retarded quote-limit hack be removed anytime soon? It doesn't stop quote-tunneling only, since it is poorly written and not counting the nested levels of quotes. Hire a decent php-dev...having to break up one (1!) quote-level reply into several posts is counter-productive. And creates issues with spam-timer kicking in )

[duchovny]

Another nail in the thailand tourism coffin.

Fewer drunks in Pattaya or Patong or Nana is bad for business ?

It is if you're in the business of selling alcohol, which many here are.

Then again, if you're silly enough to still be involved in a tourism biz in Thailand........

[djlest]

B stands for British

so stands to reason that they will never be happy and always think they are hard done by...

how do i know this?

im British too - unfortunately!

Personally Qatar and Thai airlines are way better - the attitudes of the staff are so much better than the Brits.

Our country has gone to the dogs along with peoples attitudes. BA is just an extention to this - strikes for the sake of striking!