Showing posts with label British Airways strike. Show all posts
Showing posts with label British Airways strike. Show all posts

Wednesday, 17 March 2010

Who’s Afraid of Politics?

Everyone it seems. ‘It’s not political, it’s industrial’ protested Tony Woodley, joint general secretary of Unite. Prime Minister Gordon Brown made the same point with the added epithet that the proposed strike was deplorable.


Who are they kidding? Arguing for or against strike action means taking a political stance and making a political argument for support. In fact, despite their protestations, everyone is taking a political stance.

For the first time in a long while, politics has been pushed onto the agenda by the intrepid stance of BA cabin crew who refuse to accept that they must pay for the recession. Even the hyped-up forthcoming general election hasn’t been able to stir up such a catfight.

Willie Walsh, the British Airway’s chief executive and former trade unionist for the moderate airline pilot’s union at Aer Lingus blames the union’s cynical action for the disruption of his customers travel plans and claims that most of the cabin crew have offered to carry on working. To avoid chaos BA are e-mailing passengers about flight information. They have trained 400 pilots and 600 ground staff to work as temporary cabin crew and have also chartered 22 aircraft and crew to keep some flights running. Mr Walsh warned that he will be forced to implement deeper cuts from the cabin crew budget if the strike goes ahead.

Shareholders have welcomed Mr Walsh’s management style and support his determination to make savings. Share prices in BA have gone up.

The government have rallied around the defiant British Airways management.

Lord Adonis said the strike was ‘totally unjustified’ and argued that the BA strike would destroy the company.

Gordon Brown intoned “It is not in the company’s interest, it is not in the workers’ interest and it is certainly not in the national interest” and branded the strike action as deplorable.

The Tories say they would have deplored the strike action even earlier than Gordon Brown and accused the Labour Party of being in the pockets of Unite; the latter having donated £11m to party funds over a period of three years and whose members have often been putforward to become successful Party candidates.

The media have joined forces in their condemnation of the strike. The Times leader argues ‘Mr Walsh is entirely right to stand his ground. The position of Unite is not just unreasonable, it is self-destructive. It poisons BA’s position with its customers. It harms the union’s own political allies. And it endangers both the future of the airline industry and a flag-carrying British company. In this dispute, Mr Walsh is being reasonable, and greatly to his credit, equally strong-willed.’

On the opposing side, the union appears to be trying hard to defend its position but one gets the feeling that it’s been pushed into a more radical stance by the militant cabin crew and that they are desperate for a deal. Instead of raising the political game and making a strong case for solidarity they continue to plead for talks.

Tony Woodley of Unite claims Mr Walsh is ‘looking for war. He doesn’t want a negotiated settlement.’

Steve Turner, Unite’s national officer for aviation, will meet officials from the Teamsters, a powerful US trade union, to discuss an offer of support. No one knows whether this support will involve solidarity action to frustrate BA flights or simply a gesture of sympathy and possible financial aid.

To be fair, Tony Woodley did make the point on Newsnight on Monday this week that he was proud of the better pay and conditions of BA staff. That shows they are doing a good job as a union, he added. However, it is no surprise that BA cabin crew are looking to replace both general secretaries with one of their own preferred candidates, Len McCluskey who they feel would better represent their interests.

The lesson from all of this is clear. When push comes to shove, you have to take sides and that means being political. In this case, I support the BA cabin crew.

In general these days, political self-interest is rarely expressed and as in the forthcoming general election one is left wondering whether we should bother with politics at all or if there is any side to choose.

If you're wondering whether politics is still worthwhile then, in the spirit of the BA cabin crew, be daring and check out the Institute of Ideas who are getting stuck in at The Battle for Politics this Saturday. I know for a fact that Claire Fox, the director and stalwart of BBC4's The Moral Maze, is not afraid of anything.

Thursday, 17 December 2009

BA strikers asking for more? What the Dickens!

Dickens is our man at Christmas; the season of goodwill to all men. We all remember the young orphan Oliver asking for more. Asking for more is what downtrodden workers have always had to do to defend their livelihoods. But it seems that in today's Britain, asking for more is seen as a crime.

12000 BA cabin crew who recently voted to strike against cutbacks in staffing and changes to working practices were villified by the media and the public. How dare they ask for more! They get paid more than the Virgin cabin crew and above the London average of £24,000 for what many consider to be a cushy number with plenty of perks.

In fact in todays age of mass travel being an air steward is probably less glamorous than a waitress in a good restaurant whose working conditions are probably more comfortable and less stressful. A BA steward who voted for strike action says their wages after 23 years of service are between £29,000 - £35,000 and believes management get their money's worth.

The majority of comments from the public seem to be that if they don't like the job they should resign. 'You're lucky to even have a job' says one resentful commentator. Workers who have accepted pay cuts or been made redundant or young people who are finding it difficult to even get a job in today's recession believe that BA workers who ask for more are just being greedy and that they too should accept cutbacks to save the economy.

But is sharing the misery going to make things better for us? Why would BA workers accepting less improve our prospects? Surely, if workers in one sector succeed in defending their conditions it would mean other employers would be more hesitant about driving down conditions elsewhere. Instead of resenting other workers asking for more, we should be cheering them on because asking for more may get you into trouble but you don't get if you don't ask and it's the only way to improve our lives.

Isn't accepting less better than losing your job if your company goes bust? Not necessarily. We have to weigh up our options and take our chances. BA is not some small business outfit. It may suffer some temporary competitive setbacks but it won't go bust just yet.

Today the threatened 12 day strike by British Airways cabin crew has been blocked by a High Court injunction that deemed the action illegal because the vote included members who had already accepted voluntary redundancy. The union may re-ballot on strike action. I hope BA cabin crew will still show some fighting spirit.