BRITISH
AIRWAYS, STAFF AND STRIKES
JANUARY 27th 2007
As the
industrial society was forming on the base of societies based
agriculture, artisanship and traditional hierarchies of ownership,
organisation, loyalty and local self-support, it was inconceivable that
we could have arrived at structures and norms of industrial relations
without either trade unions or the organisation of collective
bargaining, with strikes as the ultimate sanction. In present times,
there are quite a few industries and occupations where, due to multiple
connections and consequences, the effect of bringing operations to a
halt is likely to bring widespread and irreparable damage in the
immediate, medium and long term. In these, use of the strike weapon is
not appropriate. Other means for employers and employees must be
formally arranged. There are many ways to put pressure on an airline
management without bringing flights to a halt.
Arguments
concerning the amount of days off taken by cabin crew are perfectly
capable of being logically resolved by discussion between
representatives of management and staff. There is no case to be made by
comparing a national average of days off for illness with those of
cabin crew. It is perfectly permissible to go to work in a terrestrial
office with suspicions of the onset of an illness, but it is not
acceptable to commit oneself to a responsible position in an aircraft
which once airborne cannot be evacuated and in which your performance
at 100% capacity, even in emergency, is demanded.
Airline pilots,
although sharing a source of cabin air, are not in physical contact
with the mass of travelling public to the same extent as cabin staff
who distribute and collect a variety of items potentially contaminated
by travellers. It is therefore illogical to compare illness statistics
between aircrew and cabin crew.If there is anecdotal evidence that
cabin crew are abusing sickness claims in order to take planned leave
of absence, a way must be devised to deal with this which does not
affect the legitimate, responsible application for sick-leave. If pay
levels are an issue that relates to this, the two elements must be
brought together i negotiations, not kept artificially apart. It is
possible that a bad practice of ignoring sick-leave abuse has been
associated as a package with lower than acceptable pay.
On the face of
it it would appear that some people with debatable motives are taking
advantage of those with a genuine case against an oversimplified course
taken by management. That there are some with debatable motives is made
more plausible by the fact that when the overwhelming vote in favour of
a strike was passed, those at the cutting edge were shown on TV
cheering, laughing and clapping. How could people taking serious,
damaging action as a very lat resort, bound to cause chaos and some
inevitable deaths and millions of pounds loss for their company, take
this vote in an atmosphere other than one of deep regret and sadness.
JANUARY 29th 2007
By dealing with the questions of pay and sick-leave sensibly and
together the strike has been called off as of 13:55 today. I should
bloody well think so too.