« Guido Fawkes, Will Straw and Justine Roberts discuss the impact of the blogosphere on the election campaign on the BBC's Daily Politics | Main | Bob Crow announces the RMT strike by signal workers »
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c61a053ef01310fbc4840970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Unite's Tony Woodley announces that the strike by BA cabin crew will be going ahead :
This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
BA should emulate the wise action of Ronald Reagan and sack every one who strikes. Later, the Conservatives must seek no strike agreements with all transport workers, and if the unions prove intransigent, then impose them.
The egregious Bob Crow flexing his muscles today, I note.
Posted by: MartinW | March 19, 2010 at 04:14 PM
MartinW.,
It would be illegal to sack workers on strike. This point has been addressed on a number of times in the Courts. Even those well known members of the Establishment, the Law Lords, have made it clear that such action would leave the company open to massive claims for damages.
"Later, the Conservatives must seek no strike agreements with all transport workers, and if the unions prove intransigent, then impose them."
May I make the presumption that if you wish to impose a 'no strike' deal, you have no objection to the setting up of a mandatory independent Pay Award Body, with the awards paid in full and on time.
Posted by: Allan | March 19, 2010 at 04:34 PM
"Later, the Conservatives must seek no strike agreements with all transport workers, and if the unions prove intransigent, then impose them."
Why Stop There ?? Suspend democracy, bring back feudalism and un-abolish slavery while we are at it.
And make all human beings the personal property of a particular corporation.
Posted by: Bedd Gelert | March 19, 2010 at 04:35 PM
It should be legal for companies to sack workers who go on strike. Whether workers are allowed to strike should be a purely contractual matter.
In return legislation outlawing secondary picketing and telling the Unions how to run themselves should be repealed. Whether a company has a closed shop should also be subject to contract.
In short, get the government out of legislating on business-labour relations. Do not give artificial support to either side.
Posted by: RichardJ | March 19, 2010 at 04:49 PM
Surely you CAN sack everyone who goes on strike ? What you can't do is pick and choose/discriminate by sacking some strikers and not others.
Why should anyone who doesn't turn up for work be entitled to keep his job?
Posted by: clive elliot | March 19, 2010 at 05:04 PM
Charlie Whelan's Operation Blackmail is on.
Posted by: Super Blue | March 19, 2010 at 05:07 PM
Just another nail in the coffin for BA. Those voting to strike are acting out of pure self interest. They must realise by striking BA will lose customers to competition, worsening their losses and threatening more the future of thousands of BA employees and BA suppliers, but as long as they get a better deal in the short-term, they don't care.
Posted by: Chavscum | March 19, 2010 at 05:23 PM
Some interesting stuff.
N.B. hunting union members with dogs is no longer legal, (regretable, I know) and the EU would probably stop it anyway (what would you expect from a bunch of foreign wimps).
Maybe you should hurry up Admin's creation of the new icon denoting frothing at the mouth....
Posted by: Alex | March 19, 2010 at 06:26 PM
@chavscum
"Those voting to strike are acting out of pure self interest".
Excuse me, but isn't acting out of self interest a conservative virtue...?
Or are people you don't know personally not allowed to act out of self interest..
In which case, can you suggest whose interest should they act in?
Posted by: Alex | March 19, 2010 at 06:31 PM
or...in whose interest they should act..?
Posted by: Alex | March 19, 2010 at 06:32 PM
I quite expect these clowns to blackmail the general public but risking the very future of BA is Samsonian.
Posted by: Super Blue | March 19, 2010 at 10:27 PM
I think BA will lose some customers to short-haul airlines but it will still retain its long-haul base over Virgin. None the less we need to tighten strike laws asap once in government!
Posted by: HYUFD | March 20, 2010 at 01:07 AM
I honestly don't believe that anyone can be blamed for wanting to better their working conditions. Whether that means more pay, bennifits or just general conditions. Unions do serve a purpose but honestly the only ones who win in a strike are the union boses. Perhaps everyone involved should take a look at this website http://www.poverty.com/
This includes not only union bosses but management and the crews themselves. Things arn't so bad when you look at the big picture and perhaps we should all be a little more gratefull for what we have.
Posted by: Paul | March 30, 2010 at 05:38 PM
the crews, if sacked, will take jobs on less money at different airlines as its all they know. This in turn will affect the crews of the other airlines. Dog eat Dog, when it suits
Posted by: trev | April 01, 2010 at 10:40 PM