BA dispute – Pride and promises

I did not think I would be commenting on this subject again but, instead of fading into apathy and compromise it is back again. BA made another of its final offers and the union involved was expected to ballot the cabin crew. But the unions did an about turn and has delayed the ballot despite admitting that it was the best deal they could achieve through negotiation. Why? Because I believe they think it would be too damaging for the union.

The crazy thing is that the main disagreements that caused the strike have mainly gone away in that BA has won the essential core of disputed issues. All that is left is the argument concerning staff travel perks. What is the problem? Well, in précis BA gave advance notice that all striking cabin crew would lose these perks. From what I understand the union went to the crew and told them to take no notice as they would get the concessions back for them within the dispute settlement. Partly on this basis enough of the crew voted to strike.

We now have a very large, proud and, in my view, arrogant union that promised something they are having difficulty delivering. Initially BA said a firm no to any kind of renewal of perks to strikers. They pointed out that they told the union at the time they would not move on this once the discounts were forfeited. This silly issue involving a reasonably small number of cabin crew now reached a disproportionate level of intensity purely because the union had dug itself a big negotiating hole and jumped in it. A perfect example of the expression ‘pride comes before a fall’.

And then BA relented. Well, not exactly relented but at least came up with a compromise of sorts. They offered to give the perks back to strikers. But there is a catch as they were not going to give this up for nothing further in return. BA have demanded a guarantee of no industrial action for at least 3 years and also any current legal action by the unions to be stopped.

They then went further to say all strikers would lose their seniority status for these discount and standby tickets until 2013. This is quite ‘serious’ as seniority and years served determines where you are in the queue for these tickets. To places like Barbados there can be scores of crew standing by. In fact, on one memorable occasion BA had to send a 747 to Barbados purely to pick up stranded standby staff. The strikers do not want to lose their status but BA knows that this is the only thing they can do to appease all those majority of staff who did not strike. After all these loyal staff would be pretty mad if they saw the strikers getting away with it by winning this point.

So, the soap opera continues. The argument that led to the strike have to a great extent gone. Instead a bi-product of the negotiations may cause yet another strike possibly some time in March 2011. At least Christmas is safe…I think. The union will ultimately ballot the staff once more but will not recommend the latest BA offer which they are now saying is “a step too far.” This sounds a bit different to their earlier comment about it being “the very best available through negotiation”.

What a fuss over a few cheap staff tickets. However daft I do not see where resolution will come from without a major and damaging stand down by the union. They know that this is no longer really about tickets. It is about the credibility of the union movement in the UK. What a mighty hole they dug for themselves over such an unimportant argument

‘Unite’d they fall at BA

It is now getting really disappointing as, after the most recent ballot, the Unite union claims another mandate to strike. They claim the cabin crew are behind them but I would question that after looking at the following vote results.

BA has around 13,000 crew of which about 11,000 are with the disputing union (Unite). The number of crew to actually vote was 5,105 (approx 39% of the workforce) and 3,419 wanted to strike. This means the percentage of BA crew voting to strike was a mere 26%. A mandate to strike? I don’t think so. Especially as I hear that because there is a little remaining internal solidarity amongst the crews it was enough for those who no longer wish to strike to not vote at all this time around. Otherwise it would have been a very different result.

One of the saddest things about this is the impact this dispute has had within the various factions amongst the cabin crew. Many of the main strike supporters are well known in BA circles as long time militants and non representative of the main workforce. Separately some non striking crews have had their cars vandalised in the BA secure staff car parks and face great hostility when they try to work. I cannot see the scars of this strike action healing for years to come let alone by the ultimate end of the dispute. They have turned against each other in a very emotional manner.

Meanwhile the union is fighting for its future credibility after making promises of regaining concessions and lost travel perks as the strike intensified. They got it horribly wrong as, from what I can see, BA has drawn a clear line in the sand and said not only ‘no further’ but ‘you will get less’ as the action continues. Whilst this has been going on BA has not only won the support of its investors, many clients and most TMCs but also issued new contracts to non striking staff and started employing a whole new workforce.

So now we have a different kind of ‘impasse’. OK, the current dispute is no nearer resolution and the strikers are still being used as cannon fodder by Unite in it’s increasingly political campaign but meanwhile BA have quietly advanced plans to make the striking crew surplus to requirements. They must be sharpening the axes at H.Q as I write.

Is there going to be a winner in this dispute? Yes there certainly will. BA will finally clean up a significant amount of the industrial mess left by previous executive management and ultimately build foundations that will enable them to compete more effectively with their rivals. But there will be losers too. A union with a bruised ego and a whole lot of crew out there trying to find new jobs only to discover that the pay is not what they have come to expect. Ironic really.

Unite's ulterior motive

Someone said something interesting to me yesterday about the BA dispute. We were talking about why the Unite union is persisting with strike action and he highlighted a possible motive that MIGHT have some merit.
Probably the best chance for future union longevity is re-nationalisation. If this strike brings BA to its knees there is a compelling argument that says the government would have to step in rather like they did with the banks except more so.
An interesting concept.
He also told me how sour relationships between striking and non striking crews has become. For example it has been said that some strikers have been running their keys along the side of non strikers cars in the staff car parks. how nice and democratic that is.
Meanwhile the BA tough stance continues. Again there is a view that if BA gave strikers back their travel perks the whole thing would be over. BA is saying that they made it absolutely clear from the outset that if people went on strike this perk would be gone for good and they cannot or will not go back on it. Meanwhile BA has taken the opportunity to sack one particular union rep that has been causing huge discord for years and this too illustrates their stance.