Why the BA strike makes me angry - 11 May 2010

Posted by Paul Collins No comments

One imagines that the leaders of the Unite union hoped that by announcing the result of their latest strike ballot on the day after the General Election, they would steal at least some of the thunder of the brand new government and their first day in office. They obviously didn’t think the hung Parliament would result in such a media frenzy as the horse-trading between parties began in earnest almost as soon as the exit polls were announced.

No doubt they hoped that the announcement of a third round of strikes by British Airways cabin crew would plunge the travelling public into fresh turmoil and force BA bosses into fresh negotiations in order to avoid further PR damage to the company. However, things don’t seem to have worked out that way, and yesterday’s announcement of the strike ballot result giving those in favour of more strikes 81 per cent of the vote will have passed many people by.

But is it just about the timing of the announcement? Strikes theses days seem to be entirely calculated in order to inflict the most possible damage on the reputation of the employer. In the past, at least part of the motivation for going on strike was to attempt to get the public mood on your side and force change through the will of the public as well as the union members. Modern strikes seem to be aimed entirely at inflicting PR damage on the company and hurting their reputation.

This is part of the reason that this BA strike makes me especially angry. What good will it do the members of the union to damage the company at a time when airlines are already struggling to survive and facing multiple challenges to their profitability in the immediate future? Not only are trading conditions pretty difficult, but Europe’s airlines are also being forced (rightly, according to European law) to foot the bill for expenses incurred by their passengers during the shutdown of airspace due to the cloud of volcanic ash from the Eyjafjallajökull volcano.

The strike is supposedly to protect the wages and jobs of the BA cabin crew. Perhaps I’m being a little simple, but how can heaping financial and reputational damage on your employer, making it harder for them to make any money, possibly protect jobs and pay rises? BA is a privately-owned airline. Even though it is the UK’s flag-carrying airline and used to be nationalized, it is a private business. Personally, I don’t know anyone in the private sector who has been awarded a pay rise in the past couple of years – from CEOs to admin assistants. Almost all private companies have had to make adjustments and cut costs in order to survive this recession, and even then it is sometimes not enough to save the business.

BA cabin crew are apparently the best-paid in the business, and certainly benefit from some the best perks one could imagine in terms of time off and discounted trtavel for themselves and their families. And at a time when business are struggling to survive, they not only want to ensure their precious pay rise remains intact, but also are vehemently resisting a reduction in the number of cabin crew on each flight as a cost-cutting measure. To the outside observer this feels very much like the unions are treating the company like an old public-sector business, rather than face the reality of private sector competition and economics.

And then there is the thing that makes me really angry. Not only is the union surprised that BA hasn’t capitulated and offered them what they are demanding, they are complaining that BA is threatening to withdraw travel perks from those staff who choose to strike. What? I’m going to do whatever I can to damage your business so we can get what we want, and you dare to take away my freebies?



The ultimate threat, and I don’t think this is completely melodramatic, is that BA goes under because of the damage to its reputation or the cost of meeting thew demands of the unions.

I’m also very keen to stress that I’m not against staff striking. Those employees who are unionized have the right to take industrial action if the proper processes are followed, and that is a right I think is very important to maintain. However, any union operating in the private sector has to be aware of the commercial realities of the situation the company finds itself in. Again, they have to remember that BA is no longer a publicly-owned business – I have little doubt many union members are also shareholders, so you might think that would be easy to remember…

Post this article to:

del.icio.us Digg Newsvine Reddit MyYahoo! Facebook

Keep blogs friendly, read our posting policy for guidelines.

Found an offensive/inappropriate comment? Please report it.

© Copyright Buy Associates Ltd

All circumstances vary. BuyAssociation provides general advice for guidance purposes only. It is strongly recommended that you seek professional advice before making any purchase.