Not travelling home for Christmas...

[monster]

British Airways hit by strikes from Dec 22 to Jan 2. MIL flies out on the 23rd, returning on the 1st. Fortunately, not with British Airways because they cut their service to Detroit a couple of years ago. Karma, BA, karma.

It's going to really screw a lot of people if it happens, though.

Simon Calder, travel editor of the Independent said that those affected might find it difficult to arrange alternative travel plans.

"This is going to cost one million people their Christmas trips," he said.

"The travelling public are going to be absolutely appalled that so close to Christmas they have been left with no other options.

"There are no seats available on most other airlines, if you do find alternative seats it is going to cost you a fortune,"

[busterb]

Monti, what did BOAC turn into? I think I flew on British Caldon??? once

[glatt]

If British Airways goes on strike at Christmas, they deserve to go out of business, and all the strikers deserve to lose their jobs permanently. This is not how you get sympathy for your cause.

[xoxoxoBruce]

I didn't see anything about the BA strike at the link, but I did see the Brits want 22 more Chinooks, 10 by 2013. Glad I'm getting out, fucking slave drivers.

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by glatt

If British Airways goes on strike at Christmas, they deserve to go out of business, and all the strikers deserve to lose their jobs permanently. This is not how you get sympathy for your cause.

Whilst I have some sympathy for that point of view, it must be noted that management have been singularly crap in their dealings with the workforce. More specifically in their refusal to deal with the workforce. I heard one of the workers on the radio today. She was almost in tears at the prospect of such a long and disruptive strike. But they feel they've been left little choice. Essentially, as in any such 'negotiation' between workforce and management this amounts to a game of chicken.

Of course, in the current climate BA have to make savings, they have to cut costs and that is going to impact on their workforce; but there are ways to do that without shafting the workers. For a start, management could have been conscientious in including the union in their plans, instead of just dumping a bunch of staff-cuts, wage-cuts and changes in employment conditions onto their workforce and refusing to listen to/include the union reps in their decision making process.

Much of this appears to be down to the current CEO. The lack of regard he has shown to the staff, most of whom have been incredibly amenable and willing to go along with changes, is appalling.

[glatt]

Oh, I know perfectly well that a threat of strike is a negotiating tool. But if they do actually go out on strike, the flying public is the victim. If an airline completely screws me over, I will never fly on that airline again. The two sides will be pointing at each other as they both lose their jobs when the airline goes under.

[DanaC]

True enough. I just get a litle frustrated when the workforce are 'blamed' for striking. Often, such blame is directed at the workforce, without a recognition of the blame that is due to management.

[TheMercenary]

Latest news sounds like this really may be a possibility. I hope it doesn't happen Monnie. News reports on the BBC don't sound very hopeful.