BA Strike

You have to wonder what world the BA unions are living in. I was listening to one of the union reps ohe radio yesterday and he was saying how the union had done everything that it could to talk to managenment, but that they were going to strike anyway. When the interviewer pointed out some of the responses from the listeners and that nobody in other BA departments were supporting them, his attitute was that, he appreciated their position but. He was equally unsympathetic regarding the economic climate and the fact that his union could finish the company.

From what I understand, this all came about because the airline needed to make staff cuts. BA cabin crew earn around 29K and get a very nice expenses package for staying overseas. Their nearest competitor pays 20K and Virgin pays 14K. Given the economic climate BA has no choice but to cut costs and is doing so in all of it's departments. But the cabin crew don't like it and want to continue as usual. They are prepared to lose their jobs and the whole company in order to prove a point or to keep the standard of living at a level that was generous, even in a good economic climate. The question that they should be asking is who, after such a blatant display of 1970s militant action, is going to hire them once they are unemployed?

Many other industries have had to make difficult choices. Redundancies or wage cuts have affected everybody else. Why does the union at BA assume that it can carry on regardless or that they have any form of public suport?

Becuase the union is so out of touch with the economic realities of their industry and that even the members were not awair of the fact that the union were planning a 12 day campaign, I say that BA should bring on the scabs. Damn the union for endangering so many jobs with their folly.

Luck