Mike Southby

I’m sat here watching the on-going battle between British Airways and Unite – the union representing the BA cabin crew – on Sky News.  So as we all know, Unite members were due to start the first of their most recent bouts of strike action later this evening at midnight.  BA have today sought an injunction at the High Court and have been granted this effectively ruling the strike action illegal as Unite did not follow the correct procedures during their most recent ballot (you’d have thought they would have learnt by now); so it got me thinking, just why are the cabin crew so against BA, after all BA pay their wages and in the current financial crisis I’d have thought they would have been glad of the job, especially as it’s the sort of job (I’d imagine) which they choose not only for financial gain, but also for the lifestyle and associated perks.

A quick search and I find this document on the Unite website outlining why they are striking.  So, point for point here are my thoughts:

• “In November 2009, management imposed cuts in staffing levels that crew believe are damaging the airline’s standards as a premier carrier”

Well actually, isn’t that the managements job?  I mean to look at its business model and operating costs and make cuts if necessary.  Certainly, BA would not be the only company to have been forced to make budgetary costs during the recession.   As for the cabin crew believing that the policy and reductions are damaging the airline’s standards as a premier carrier I have two thoughts.  Firstly, that’s not your decision to make; you’re paid to do a job so get on and do it.  Secondly, what standards?  I refuse to fly long haul with BA as I feel the standards over the last 10 years have dropped significantly, not least owing to a large proportion of the cabin crew staff that I have found rude and inattentive compared with some of the newer airlines still in their infancy.

• “Staffing levels have been cut from four to three on the Euro-fleet, while long-haul crews have seen reductions of between one to three”

We’re in a recession, honestly what do people expect?  Surely it’s better to reduce the staffing levels and maintain the operability of the airline?  Or should they keep things as they are and wait for the company to go bust?  I do feel for those affected, honestly I do but when the figures don’t add up changes need to be made, its basic business.   The reduction in crew should not cause any problems in the real world but means simply that those lucky enough to keep their jobs have to work that little bit harder.

• “Unite members say that service is suffering because of these cuts”

Of course they do, otherwise they could not justify the industrial action.  Regardless, based on my experiences and that of colleagues I would again argue what service?  Perhaps if the cabin crew stopped counting how many colleagues were on the same plane and concentrated on serving the passengers albeit having to work that little bit harder, the service levels would organically improve.   After all the biggest judge of service is the passenger, not the cabin crew.  If the passenger feels that the service received was good they will return, the more passengers that return the more money the company will make and the staffing levels will no doubt return to where they ‘should be’.  Surely by striking the service is suffering more?

• “This dispute can only be avoided if BA is prepared to make a serious attempt to find a negotiated settlement”

Actually it could all be avoided if the Unite members simply stop causing a problem and get on with what they are paid to do – their job.

• “The airline should start by putting the offer made during negotiations back on the table so that Unite can give members the right to accept or reject BA’s proposal.  Unite is prepared to halt the strike while members are consulted and will stand by the crew’s decision.  The ball is clearly in BA’s court”

Since when do people accept a job and then demand their own working conditions.  No, sorry but you knew the deal when you joined, if you have to serve 3 passengers instead of 2 I’m sorry but that’s life.  BA as a company has the right to change policy without asking your permission; I do not see how the cuts have a noticeable impact on your day to day roles apart from meaning you have to work a little harder.  Just go ask a factory worker about hard work.  Besides, re-read the statement.  Whilst I am not sure of the exact circumstances it reads that Unite want BA to remake an offer that they have already made?  If this is the case then why discount it when it was made, it’s not BA’s fault that you said no without even offering your members a chance to vote.

• “BA has been applying bullying tactics.  British Airways’ management, under its boss Willie Walsh, has bullied and intimidated staff for months now.  Over the last two months 38 workers who are union members have been suspended and now risk losing their jobs”

And no doubt if this were to be true they would have legal recourse through the courts.  If there were clear undisputable evidence then why is Willie Walsh not facing charges?  Unsubstantiated hearsay should not be a reason to cause strike action.

The document then goes on the list ‘The Facts’:

• “BA crew are not overpaid.  70% earn less than £20,000 per year”

I don’t understand what this has to do with anything.  Before signing a contract of employment salary is clearly outlined and accepted.  Besides, as I mentioned before cabin crew largely are attracted to the role by the travel perks and benefits, which Unite conveniently play down.  Let’s not forget the 1.52million people in the UK currently claiming Job Seekers Allowance; I’m sure they’d love to become cabin crew for the existing pay and conditions.

• “BA cabin crew are not mindless militants, they are highly trained professional who are proud of the BA brand.  They do not believe that you can run a premier airline with too few crew”

I actually agree with this in part, I think it’s Unite who are the mindless militants in this case, not the cabin crew.  As for being proud of the brand I simply have one question.  If the cabin crew are so proud then why seek to damage the brand further?  Why not instead work with the resources they have available to ensure its success.  The way things are going I see no winners and that, ultimately, means more job losses.

• “Despite a year of talks BA has refused to listen to its cabin crew and has imposed cuts in crew numbers that seriously undermines the high service BA customers’ expect”

Of course this is subjective.  I’m sure that there would have been opinion groups established to report to management the views of the cabin crew, it’s naïve to think that every employee would be able to have their thoughts listened to, but I fail to believe that they have not listened to any genuine concerns.  The cuts that have been imposed have been done so to ensure the on-going survival of the airline.  I’m sure that if the recession had not hit then this would not have happened but let’s be fair, you cannot blame BA for the recession.

It strikes me that this has got out of hand, I wonder if with the benefit of hindsight whether a lot of the cabin crew affected would have pushed this so hard.  Ultimately the prospect of strike action is causing long lasted damage to BA; a lot of customers are simply not willing to take the risk and are booking with rival airlines.  I for one don’t blame them.

Instead of the legal back and forth, I wish the courts would simply stop strike action and stop Unite from going round and round in circles, giving BA and the airline industry in general time to recover and rebuild after the recession.  Of course on the flip side, perhaps BA should be seen to be being a little more approachable to its staff.  Ultimately decisions are made for business reasons and I see no reason why this should not be the case but I’m sure they could work a little harder to justify their decisions with their employees and prevent so much animosity.

Now that’s off my chest, I think it’s time to change the channel, EastEnders has started ;)