New strike threat

Old Oct 17, 05, 5:56 am
  #1  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,449
New strike threat

No surprises here.

http://news.independent.co.uk/busine...icle320176.ece
aristoph is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 6:11 am
  #2  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Edinburgh
Programs: Lowest of the low in all airline programs but I am in the EZY FF Program!
Posts: 4,258
Originally Posted by Indy on-line
The airline has decided the men have "a case to answer" over their involvement in a walkout prompted by the dismissal of more than 700 workers at Gate Gourmet, which supplies BA with in-flight meals.

The three union officials, who represent baggage handlers at Heathrow, could be dismissed if the disciplinary process finds them guilty of misconduct. The airline has been warned privately that if the men were sacked, the Transport and General Workers' Union (T&G) would ballot members on a strike.

One union source said: "The message coming back from our members is that if they sack them, we will have to have official industrial action. We are attempting to ensure that BA understands all the ramifications of what it is putting three shops stewards through
."
Dinosaurs. And we all know what happened to them.

BA will take the three through a proper disciplinary procedure and IF that procedure finds their actions warrants dismissal then they are entitled to take that action. The three will have a right of appeal and if that fails will have the option of going to a Industrail Tribunal. The ability to take industrial action under these circumstances should be outlawed.
Gaza is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 6:58 am
  #3  
SLF
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Europe
Programs: Various
Posts: 3,087
Originally Posted by Gaza
The ability to take industrial action under these circumstances should be outlawed.
Surely (hopefully?) is it already? Who's actually running BA?
SLF is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 7:03 am
  #4  
 
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Edinburgh
Programs: Lowest of the low in all airline programs but I am in the EZY FF Program!
Posts: 4,258
Originally Posted by ropmot141
Surely (hopefully?) is it already? Who's actually running BA?
It is my understanding that the union have to wait until all avenues of appeal have been exausted before calling for strike action. They do not however, have to wait until the outcome of the Industrail Tribunal is known.
Gaza is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 7:29 am
  #5  
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,449
I have no idea what the legal status of such a strike would be but I suspect WW will not back down and we could be in for a winter of discontent Time to start considering the alternatives for those Christmas flights?
aristoph is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 7:31 am
  #6  
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,653
Hypothetically speaking, if the T&G were to take official action, would include the staff at LGW too?
Dave_C is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 8:35 am
  #7  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: New York, NY, USA
Posts: 1,100
This is very troublesome. It reminds me of Red Robbo and all that stuff from Leyland in the 70s. BA cannot carry on in a state of constant threat of wildcat industrial action. It will drive the customers to the competition.

Do we have any idea of the timescale when these guys are likely to be dismissed and industrial action will become ripe?

Last edited by Imperial Special; Oct 17, 05 at 8:52 am
Imperial Special is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 8:46 am
  #8  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 55
Get government help and squash ths b'stards.
spencergrady is offline  
Old Oct 17, 05, 11:53 am
  #9  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New York
Programs: BA, LH, VS, Hyatt, SPG
Posts: 3,813
Originally Posted by Gaza

BA will take the three through a proper disciplinary procedure and IF that procedure finds their actions warrants dismissal then they are entitled to take that action. The three will have a right of appeal and if that fails will have the option of going to a Industrail Tribunal. The ability to take industrial action under these circumstances should be outlawed.
If after following proper process, BA dismisses the three officials, I can't see how the TGWU could credibly support official action. One the one hand, the TGWU would purport to have not supported the illegal action in August, but then on other it would support industrial action after BA dismisses a group of employees for breaking the law!

I've said it before, and I'll say it again: In any other industry, if you broke the law, cost your employer 40m and untold damage to brand and reputation, losing your job would be a given and the last of your worries.

Also, I wouldn't read too much into the Independent story. The "union official" speaking off the record could be anybody. Any mention of the words BA and baggage handlers, always leads journalists to conclude by default that strike action is on the cards.
ian001 is offline  
Old Oct 18, 05, 1:06 am
  #10  
JPB
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Programs: BAEC, LH M&M
Posts: 938
Well if TGWU do call a strike balot then BA should immediately start legal prceedings against them for the damages caused by the baggage handlers strike. By supporting the employees the TGWU is saying that when they persuaded the other employees to go on strike they were carrying out their union duties in which case the TGWU is guilty of insitgating an illegal strike.
JPB is offline  
Old Oct 18, 05, 11:07 am
  #11  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: UK
Programs: Mucci! And BA Silver previous awards - Gold 11, Silver 5, Bronze 2
Posts: 3,115
Grooooan.. not again!

Time to start polishing off the dust on those 'other' cards I hold.... And I might have to change to BA maybe...
BA or bust is offline  
Old Oct 18, 05, 3:12 pm
  #12  
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: AMS (SEA, JNB)
Programs: Mucci Reperateur des Coeurs Brises
Posts: 4,102
Originally Posted by spencergrady
Get government help and squash ths b'stards.
Is government oppression back in vogue then?

This is purely my opinion... I think amicable industrial relations goes both ways. Workers must have security and feel as though they are treated fairly. This is the responsibility of leadership and management. In return, workers must bargain fairly and cooperate on all fronts with management. This is the responsibility of union leaders.

One has only to look at Nordic countries, and to a lessor extent countries like the Netherlands, where consensus and compromise seem to take precedant over confrontation. In return for giving up many benefits and accepting absolutely necessary job cuts, many Nordic unions in exchange have gotten even greater job security and social benefits. Workers feel no need to strike, and rarely do you have the kind of shut downs as experienced in France, and disruptions suffered at BA.

BA employees seem at constant threat for redundancy, budget trimming and everything else. Even after the massive fat trimming already taken place, management still wants more. I would imagine it is difficult in such an atmosphere for workers to feel they must cooperate, or cede ground.

On the same token, workers must work together more with management to find an amicable solution and long-term compromise, and be willing to give something up rather than calling wildcat strikes, or even legal indsutrial action at all.

Who sets the agenda, and calls the shots, is debatable of course. But neither side can have it all or nothing.
SchmeckFlyer is offline  
Old Oct 18, 05, 3:20 pm
  #13  
SLF
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Europe
Programs: Various
Posts: 3,087
Originally Posted by SchmeckFlyer
BA employees seem at constant threat for redundancy, budget trimming and everything else. Even after the massive fat trimming already taken place, management still wants more. I would imagine it is difficult in such an atmosphere for workers to feel they must cooperate, or cede ground.
Given that there seems to have been no history of compulsory redundancies at BA, I'm not sure why there would be such fear. OTOH, there would seem to be plenty of evidence of archaic "working" practices still happening in various parts of BA, which are of no benefit to either BA, or it's customers.
SLF is offline  
Old Oct 20, 05, 11:25 am
  #14  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: London
Programs: Mucci. Nothing else matters.
Posts: 36,055
Originally Posted by SchmeckFlyer
Workers must have security and feel as though they are treated fairly. This is the responsibility of leadership and management. In return, workers must bargain fairly and cooperate on all fronts with management. This is the responsibility of union leaders.
...
BA employees seem at constant threat for redundancy, budget trimming and everything else. Even after the massive fat trimming already taken place, management still wants more. I would imagine it is difficult in such an atmosphere for workers to feel they must cooperate, or cede ground.
At BA, the dinosaur parts of the operation are starting to make the reformed parts feel that they are being unfairly treated by their fellow employees. It's no longer just a "management vs workers" thing. But the dinosaurs don't care.
Globaliser is offline  
Old Oct 20, 05, 3:27 pm
  #15  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: New York
Programs: BA, LH, VS, Hyatt, SPG
Posts: 3,813
Originally Posted by Globaliser
At BA, the dinosaur parts of the operation are starting to make the reformed parts feel that they are being unfairly treated by their fellow employees. It's no longer just a "management vs workers" thing. But the dinosaurs don't care.
Indeed - BA's baggage handlers seem to occupy a parallel universe to the rest of the working population of Britain.
ian001 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread