BA wins High Court ban on cabin crew strikes

[smokerjim]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

British Airways has won a High Court court injunction to stop the latest strikes by its cabin staff.

The decision was based on a technicality and whether Unite followed rules in contacting its members with strike result details.

The first of four five-day walkouts had been due to begin at midnight, but will not go ahead following Mr Justice McCombe's decision.

The union had previously said it would appeal if BA were successful in court.


Personally, I'm very disappointed, from what I'd heard on Radio 4, I'd rather hoped that the judge would see that BA had picked up on a nit picking infringement of the law, and use his discreation to tell BA "You appear rather more keen to have the law appiled to the letter now, rather than spend time in meaningful negotiations anytime in the last 14 months - would it not better to apply your energies to ending this dispute once and for all, rather than permitting, conspiring even, to drag out all the longer, to the detriment of the company, the employees and their customers?" As far as I am concerned, this judgement more than any before it, gives all management in every industry the green light to go to reach for their solicitors, before they try to reach agreement.

[DGP1]

All that'll happen is Unite will go back to the staff and ask again and this time (hopefully) get it right.

Willie Walsh, the kind of person inspires nothing but contempt (kept clean for the health of Postman and Teebs)

[westlondonpostie]

More of a worry to Unite as it may mean they are liable for BA's costs due to the last set of strikes they held.

[Broxi51]

If I was a member of the cabin crew it would only make me go out on strike all the more. In fact I would be hoping unite would want to call for even more strike action.

[DirtyHarry]

If I was a member of the cabin crew it would only make me go out on strike all the more. In fact I would be hoping unite would want to call for even more strike action.

Likewise. Walsh is a slug, the sort of creature who could only count on other slugs, such as Crozier, as being a true friend.
Seriously though, it's starting to look as though you would have had more chance of striking in either Hitler's Germany, or Stalin's Russia, than you currently do in Thatcherite Britain, that haven, that veritable paradise, for the hard-nosed, bonus driven, garbage masquerading as businessmen, or even more laughably described in some of Britain's more rabidly right-wing gutter press, as entrepreneurs.
The law courts are not deliberating on points of a draconian law only, no, the law courts are very clearly taking sides, and the side they are taking most, isn't that of the people.

[Night Tonic]

As much as workers have the right to withdraw their labour, management also have an equal right to question the legality of a strike. Nothing to do with sides at all. Its about getting it right to start with and BA's overwhelming priority is to keep planes flying. If you were a family booked on a flight, the 'voice of the people', whatever that is, would be irrelevant.

[janitor]

Not that i agree with management using the courts to union bash, but these laws have been around for quite some time now, the unions should know what is required of them, and what makes a ballot legal, it's not as if they were brought in yesterday, some of these mistakes a totally stupid, in 2007 the union informed management that a MC would be on strike that had closed down a few years previous, they really should have known as the branch used to be based in the old MC, but now had separate offices.

[BELIAL]

Quite agree, no one disputes the 82% of the membership in favour of industrial action to protect their terms and conditions,(for the third time of asking) But fancy informing them of the outcome of their ballot in a way that does not appeal to an ex public school judge, scandalous.
We are all keeping notes hopefully tick tock

[smokerjim]

The point of law the BA's case was upheld upon, was that in texts and emails announcing the (2nd) ballot result, the number of spoiled ballot papers was not announced.....and the number of spoiled papers in question? 11 - that's right, ELEVEN....not exactly a number that should have undermined a democratic ballot, or called the result into question, and certainly not something that did not offer the judge some wiggle room.

IMHO what is left is a company that looks like it might be bullying, finnicky, and just genrally more chickenshit ( http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.p ... hickenshit" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; 1st definition ), a frustrated union that also calls into question the competance of trades unions in IA ballots, an angry and temporaryily impotent membership that will retain high levels of militancy, nervous shareholders and a shakier position on the stockmarkets and finally ( when a third ballot is called & the expected yes vote for IA is returned ) worried customers that will also think about the volcanic ash cloud, and might not want to risk picking a day when everyone is except BA.....

If BA had been sent off with a flea in their corporate ear, they might have tried harder to reach agreement - I doubt BA would roll over and give in to all of UNITE's demands - and I would hope not, but from the off Walsh has acted the hard man, and been very unflexible when talking about the cabin crews & the union, and his attitude has painted him into a corner, but he seems to care more about winning, than what the actual result might be.

[heapsy]

I cannot believe in this day and age that a union fails to inform its members correctly of the outcome of the ballot. Surely they have lawyers working for them? How stupid do the Unite union look now? All they had to do was inform the members of the complete outcome. I agree that 11 spoiled papers are not going to change the result, but surely, to avoid a situation like this then you have to cross the Ts and dot the Is?

[DirtyHarry]

As much as workers have the right to withdraw their labour, management also have an equal right to question the legality of a strike. Nothing to do with sides at all. Its about getting it right to start with and BA's overwhelming priority is to keep planes flying. If you were a family booked on a flight, the 'voice of the people', whatever that is, would be irrelevant.

Oh, come on......."As much as workers have the right to withdraw their labour", we did have that right, once....but, now all we have is the deceptive pretence of a right to strike. The ruling class are in the ascendancy, the working class at it's feet allowing themselves to be trampled on, as they play this sordid game according to rules devised by their oppressors.
My message to the ruling class, and those that would waste their short time on this earth attending to their every whim and command, is.....Enjoy it while it lasts.

[Tman]

The ruling class are in the ascendancy, the working class at it's feet allowing themselves to be trampled on, as they play this sordid game according to rules devised by their oppressors.
My message to the ruling class, and those that would waste their short time on this earth attending to their every whim and command, is.....Enjoy it while it lasts.

I'm sure they will, and all the time the "oppressed" have Wiis, East Enders and BOGOFs on cheap lager, that's the way it will stay.
There was never any serious threat of armed insurrection when the times really were hard, so why would the Great Unwashed jeopardise the happy situation of "money for watching day time TV" now?

[andy2007]

The ruling class are in the ascendancy, the working class at it's feet allowing themselves to be trampled on, as they play this sordid game according to rules devised by their oppressors.
My message to the ruling class, and those that would waste their short time on this earth attending to their every whim and command, is.....Enjoy it while it lasts.

I'm sure they will, and all the time the "oppressed" have Wiis, East Enders and BOGOFs on cheap lager, that's the way it will stay.
There was never any serious threat of armed insurrection when the times really were hard, so why would the Great Unwashed jeopardise the happy situation of "money for watching day time TV" now?

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly Tman. But it appears, that your claiming that Militants spend all day watching Soaps, playing on Wiis, and drinking Lager. And your comment about "money for watching daytime TV" is even more confusing.

Assuming I'm right about the point of your post (and if I'm wrong, I apologise). Then you obviously don't know many of us personally. Personally, I very rarely drink, because I need to drive my car (and alcohol can still be in your system the following day!). I can't stand Soap Operas, but I do have a Wii. Which we bought for our Daughter, who needs it to help with her balance and co-ordination, as she's disabled. It was recommended by her specialist.

I'm particularly concerned about your suggestion that the Militants should resort to violence to solve our problems. Violence is IMHO, the last resort of the intelectually challenged! There are of course times, when we're (people generally) attacked by a violent oponant, and we have to defend ourselves. But to go out, with the intention of starting a violent struggle, is the act of people who haven't the intelligence to solve their differences any other way.

And as for being paid to watch daytime TV: Paid by whom?
When you're on Strike, you're not paid by anyone. Although if you lack the commitment to turn up for the Picket Lines, it would enable you to watch daytime TV.

[Tman]

Jeez, what are you drinking?

Someone said this-

The ruling class are in the ascendancy, the working class at it's feet allowing themselves to be trampled on, as they play this sordid game according to rules devised by their oppressors.
My message to the ruling class, and those that would waste their short time on this earth attending to their every whim and command, is.....Enjoy it while it lasts.

which implies "something's going to happen" to the "ruling class" now you can read my reply...

I'm sure they will, and all the time the "oppressed" have Wiis, East Enders and BOGOFs on cheap lager, that's the way it will stay.
There was never any serious threat of armed insurrection when the times really were hard, so why would the Great Unwashed jeopardise the happy situation of "money for watching day time TV" now?

where you can probably discern that I'm implying people aren't "angry" enough yet for the first poster's prophecy/prediction to come true, and never will be all the time life's little pleasures (like Wii, booze etc) are available to those at the bottom of the heap.
After all, they're hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them, are they....

Now, as for the rest of your post..

[andy2007]

Jeez, what are you drinking?

Someone said this-

The ruling class are in the ascendancy, the working class at it's feet allowing themselves to be trampled on, as they play this sordid game according to rules devised by their oppressors.
My message to the ruling class, and those that would waste their short time on this earth attending to their every whim and command, is.....Enjoy it while it lasts.

which implies "something's going to happen" to the "ruling class" now you can read my reply...

I'm sure they will, and all the time the "oppressed" have Wiis, East Enders and BOGOFs on cheap lager, that's the way it will stay.
There was never any serious threat of armed insurrection when the times really were hard, so why would the Great Unwashed jeopardise the happy situation of "money for watching day time TV" now?

where you can probably discern that I'm implying people aren't "angry" enough yet for the first poster's prophecy/prediction to come true, and never will be all the time life's little pleasures (like Wii, booze etc) are available to those at the bottom of the heap.
After all, they're hardly going to bite the hand that feeds them, are they....

Now, as for the rest of your post..

I'm drinking Coca-Cola.

It seems that I was wrong about what you meant. Sorry.

But you also seem to be labouring under a misaprehension: I didn't even bring the subject of anger up, yet you seem to think that I did. I see your point about the availability of distractions, to calm people down. Although in my experience, alcohol doesn't calm people down. But it does reduce their inhibitions, which makes violence more likley, not less.

Why do you assume that the phrase "Enjoy it while it lasts." means that they'd face violence?
That may well have been what DirtyHarry meant. I don't know. But it could just as easily mean that the current Political climate, with sufficient pressure from the Unions. Could potentially loose some, or all of them, their positions. How many of them have already hit major financial difficulties, and lost their jobs, because of the Credit Crunch, and Global Recession?
Strikes are expensive at the best of times. But at the moment, the results could be catastrophic. Which is why BA are fighting so hard to avoid them now. Don't forget, they've lost all that money from the ash cloud already, and are likley to loose a lot more from it later. Which just adds to the pressure.

I'm not sure what else you didn't understand in my post. But if you'd be kind enough to point it out. I'd be happy to clarify it for you.