The only people who will win from this sorry mess are BA's competitors ("our phones have been red hot" said Paul Charles of Virgin Atlantic etc).
To those who are berating BA management over this, look at it from their perspective. They have the double whammy of a higher cost base than the competition and lower productivity and efficiency. When yields have gone through the floor across the industry, pretending nothing needs to change is not an option. Most work groups at BA have undergone modernisation of working practices, apart from LHR cabin crew. Everything was up for negotiation but BASSA wouldn't budge. BASSA tried to stonewall BA by not turning up to meetings. They produced their own cost-saving proposals which were found by PwC to be not even one third of their intended target. When they did turn up to meetings they would turn up late, refuse to listen to a presentation from a "junior financial clerk" from Waterside on projected yields, and refuse to sit in the same room as the CC89 branch (now they claim to be one big happy family). The only surprise about imposition of changes is that it didn't come sooner.
Given BASSA's conduct in negotiations and their highly misleading communications to members, I would not be surprised if BA gets an injunction to block any strike. In fact, I think it is inevitable that there will be court action. WW also has an ace up his sleeve in that until 2011 he has the option to sue Unite for £40m for their alleged involvement in the GG walkout.
And finally, for those who think that BASSA care about all CC, why wasn't there this uproar when LGW crew underwent far more radical changes to working practices three years ago?
Last edited by ian001; Oct 26, 2009 at 2:13 pm