Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Banjax]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

[Peachy]

If you ask me the Judges are as corrupt as the politicians running this country.
I am beggining to think it is time to up sticks and move to Mexico, very little corruption there.
 

[Nickbat]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

Not at all. BA are quite within their rights to explore every legal technicality to avoid losing millions. Unless you were sitting in the court and unless you have access to the full details of the relevant law, then you can't say it is ludicrous.

Plenty of people have used legal technicalities to their advantage. Why not BA?

    

[Banjax]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

Not at all. BA are quite within their rights to explore every legal technicality to avoid losing millions. Unless you were sitting in the court and unless you have access to the full details of the relevant law, then you can't say it is ludicrous.

Plenty of people have used legal technicalities to their advantage. Why not BA?

    

it's a very very very small technicality - even the judge was embarrassed giving the decision - effectively, everyone in a union just lost the right to withdraw labour, you are OK with that then? what other rights would you have given away? 

[Lizzie_Zoom]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

Not at all. BA are quite within their rights to explore every legal technicality to avoid losing millions. Unless you were sitting in the court and unless you have access to the full details of the relevant law, then you can't say it is ludicrous.

Plenty of people have used legal technicalities to their advantage. Why not BA?

    

it's a very very very small technicality - even the judge was embarrassed giving the decision - effectively, everyone in a union just lost the right to withdraw labour, you are OK with that then? what other rights would you have given away? 

 

No they have not BJ, what has happened is that the legal powers to stop the ludicrous strikes of earlier decades, when workers were told by their union to strike, have been upheld. 

When the union carryout the correct procedure to start a strike, to the letter of the law, then no doubt they will.  This is how it should be

However, as for the strike itself, that stands to cripple an already weakened company, what with severe competition, volcanic ash, and the previous strike, it is purely suicidal for the workers themselves if no one else.

All legal means must be used by BA lawyers to fight off / delay for as long as possible this crazy action by Unite.  After all who is going to pay for the BA staff who will lose their jobs once BA go to the wall; us, the taxpayer!!

[Nickbat]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

Not at all. BA are quite within their rights to explore every legal technicality to avoid losing millions. Unless you were sitting in the court and unless you have access to the full details of the relevant law, then you can't say it is ludicrous.

Plenty of people have used legal technicalities to their advantage. Why not BA?

    

it's a very very very small technicality - even the judge was embarrassed giving the decision - effectively, everyone in a union just lost the right to withdraw labour, you are OK with that then? what other rights would you have given away? 
 

You know him then, BJ?

Oh, and it's not a question of losing the right to strike, so much as BASSA/Unite not doing their job properly. I also think this was about the March strikes, so the withdrawal of labour has already taken place. I also understand (though I cannot guarantee) that this technicality was exactly the same one that tripped up the RMT recently.

 

[Field Marshal Dr. Opti]

I prefer the expression "withdrawal of labour"....rather than "Strike"....which implies that all the people involved are a bunch of instigators and malcontents... ......which most of the time is 'dangle berries'...

[albitz]

The Unite union is run by political mischief makers. They have an agenda which doesnt include the interest of their members imo.Glad to see they are getting a bit of their own devious medicine.
As Lizzie said, the company is already running at a huge loss,they are the best paid employees in the industry, the ash dust issue could run for years - the company may end up going under, and they will all wish they could put things back to where they were before they went on strike.

[TheBoy]

Unite is the big problem.  What that pillock Woodley *STILL* doesn't realise is that the government are not going to renationalise his industries.  This companies need to be competitive, or EVERYONE is redundant.

[Nickbat]

Unite is the big problem.  What that pillock Woodley *STILL* doesn't realise is that the government are not going to renationalise his industries.  This companies need to be competitive, or EVERYONE is redundant.

Agreed. 

[Richie London]

i was FORCED to strike in the 70s for an extra 1%, 4 weeks loss of pay to get an extra £2 quid a week.


nobody ever wins yet they will all claim victory in the end.

[Lizzie_Zoom]

i was FORCED to strike in the 70s for an extra 1%, 4 weeks loss of pay to get an extra £2 quid a week.


nobody ever wins yet they will all claim victory in the end.

You are an example Richie of what I meant, and dare I say one of thousands!

It was at the time the final ruination of whole swathes of British industry due to unions possessing just too much power in the motor industry, the docks, printing industry, steel, and of course mining!

An era to be forgotten, and yet there is Unite determined to go down the old path of self destruction!   Quite amazing and unfathomable!

[alfie]

Unless you have been forced by the mangement to take to the picket line,you cannot imagine what it is like to see scab workers crossing it and taking advantage of the working conditions that your union has fought for.
Alfie.

[Banjax]

I'm not arguing the rights and wrongs of the BA strike, I just think a dangerous and undemocratic precedent was set today.....yet another human right consigned to the dustbin 

[Banjax]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/10119196.stm

after balloting some 11000 odd members, they didn't tell absolutely everyone on every text message, email or letter that 11 papers had been spoiled..........hmm, so unless you get the procedure 100% correct (not 99.99999 as they did) then the strike can be called illegal....is that the spirit of the law?
funny thing is, i saw 100's of voters in the general election denied the right to vote, yet thats good enough - something stinks methinks 
whether you agree or disagree with the strike action, BA and the courts are being completely ludicrous in this 

Not at all. BA are quite within their rights to explore every legal technicality to avoid losing millions. Unless you were sitting in the court and unless you have access to the full details of the relevant law, then you can't say it is ludicrous.

Plenty of people have used legal technicalities to their advantage. Why not BA?

    

it's a very very very small technicality - even the judge was embarrassed giving the decision - effectively, everyone in a union just lost the right to withdraw labour, you are OK with that then? what other rights would you have given away? 
 

You know him then, BJ?

Oh, and it's not a question of losing the right to strike, so much as BASSA/Unite not doing their job properly. I also think this was about the March strikes, so the withdrawal of labour has already taken place. I also understand (though I cannot guarantee) that this technicality was exactly the same one that tripped up the RMT recently.

 

he apologised for the ruling and sympathised with the union - i'd say he's not entirely happy, but had no choice