BA go for injunction

BA statement:

Our lawyers wrote to Unite yesterday evening to highlight potential flaws in the ballot process that led to seven days of strikes in March and the 20 days of strike action planned from next week.

The Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 requires unions to send everyone eligible to vote details of the exact breakdown of the ballot result. This point of law was clarified in April following Network Rail’s successful application for an injunction to stop a strike by the RMT.

We do not believe Unite properly complied with this requirement. We wrote to the General Secretaries of the union yesterday asking them to explain to us how they discharged this obligation and, based on Unite’s replies, we believe that they failed to comply with the legal requirement.

On this basis we have applied to the High Court for an injunction to stop the 20 days of strikes planned from Tuesday.

If the union has failed to comply, all the strike action that resulted from that ballot would be unlawful and their members would only have limited protection while taking part in strike action. The union would also be liable to BA for some of the financial losses that we have suffered as a result of the strikes.

We make no apology for looking at every option possible to protect our customers and our company from this completely unjustified strike and the union’s cynical attempts to destroy our airline.

Clearly, until the Court has heard the case, and with just days to go before the strikes are due to begin, it is critical that we stay focused on our contingency plans to ensure we can do a great job for our customers should the strike go ahead.

Uh uh ....

Looking at the reaction on the thread on PPRUNE, this is going to be interesting...

My personal view on all this is that maybe if these companies treated their staff with the respect employess deserve such things wouldn't happen.
On another note, I am very happy I'm not travelling anywhere with BA this year, because coupled with the constant ash threat I'd be a very worried bunny!

We obviously don't know all the ins and outs but I do get the impression that BA are playing hard ball and are being deliberatly provocative.

I'm not saying that BASSA are all sweetness and light either and I dont subscribe to the 'loony lefties ruling over their members' view in some of the papers either.

I note that the new Government are maintaining the previous ones position of getting the company and the union to talk.

I do know that the union put forward plans to save somethinhg like the £ 80 - 100 million BA were asking for. All I heard from BA was that the unions costings were 'wrong'.

That was the only comment (well in the media anyway).

Nothing on what the suggestions were - not if they were feasable or not or if of they needed some extra work or clarification.

No offer to work through the costings properly which I would expect of a reasonable company.

My final thought on this is 'where are the BA board'?

What are they doing in all of this? Have they decided on this hardball strategy or has WW dictated it to them and they have just rolled over. What about the views of the 'ordinary' shareholders? I bet some will be supporting the managagement but I would guess a fair few are as bewildered as the rest of is about why a fairly bog standard industrial dispute has got so far out of hand.

The "savings" issue is a very good example of where the problems lie in this dispute.

BA needed an annual cut in costs to help reduce its massive annual losses.
All other BA groups within the workforce accepted this - they read the books and saw the need. They took the cut.

BASSA refused. Eventually with great publicity they said they would accept a pay cut.
BUT:

the cut was mainly from the low paid staff such as at LGW where they had ALREADY taken a cut.
the cut was for ONE year only - and was to be reversed the following year.
even for that one year the numbers did not add up - it was much less than other groups had accepted.

The strike is not about pay - it is about imposition of a reduction in staffing levels. A reduction of the LHR levels to the already existing and accepted levels at LGW. This is why LGW is not striking and working as normal - BASSA has already accepted that their levels be cut and has even suggested that LGW staff take a further paycut to finance the retention of the LHR levels.

Pete sums it up very well here.
The PPRUNE thread referenced by Mandy above is now 140 pages long - very little of which is actually about Willie Walsh vs BASSA. It is 90% about BASSA vs the rest of the BA workforce, many of whom are (or were) also in UNITE!

It is not just the pilots (BASSA try to make out that it is) it is the ground staff, the office staff, the baggage handlers, the engineers, sales, ticketing, operations and also many of the cabin crew. Over 40,000 staff in BA - only 5-6,000 voting to strike and making statements such as:

"I'd rather see the company go down than change my terms and conditions"

You can imagine how the other 30,000+ feel when they have already taken severe cuts to try to save the company and their pensions.

According to the BBC breaking news headline, BA have won an injunction:

British Airways wins High Court battle to avert cabin crew strike

[Bazz]

BA have won on a technicality about how the union notified members, Unite say they will appeal. As far as tonight is concerned the strike is off.

Looks like injunction overturned and strikes back on. I hate these things coming down to court interference, but still a sad outcome.

I am having a nightmare because of this strike and have been put on others carriers with additional overnight stops, downgraded to economy so not at all happy for a 12/13 hour flight to Asia for a 4 day business trip.

I have no other options as all the prices have gone up to ridiculous levels (The court injunction has made it harder as I thought it wouldn't go ahead). Virgin quoted me £1700 for a return to HK in economy - guaranteed seat as a gold card holder.

However, I do support Willie Walsh. The newer airlines have changed the airline industry and BA need to change just like any other company at present. The traditional American carriers are on there knees with the same problems.

For now I can't book any flights with BA and if it doesn't sort itself out then I can't see how BA will survive. Its seems to be at a deadlock.

For the customer all we will see is higher prices.

And with BA about to announce a 600M GBP loss for last year, this is all going to end in tears. The staff who would rather see the company go down might just get their wish.

That will be a sad day indeed.

Iain