Don't blame BA cabin crew
Published in
The Guardian Monday 15th March 2010
It was BA's management who pulled the deal off the table.
How does this serve the airline or staff? says Unite assistant
general secretary Len McCluskey
Last Friday the British Airways cabin crew dispute could have
been within sight of a settlement. The union, Unite, had agreed to
put the airline's offer, on crew numbers and terms and conditions,
to its members. We had also set strike dates to be activated in the
event that the membership turned down the proposals, which had been
squeezed out of a reluctant management after months of talks.
Barely an hour later BA boss Willie Walsh snatched the offer off
the table, without a word to the union. Clearly, he did not want
the cabin crew having a say, a point which has apparently escaped
those politicians who have been wading in on the company's side. I
don't blame Gordon Brown for trying to bring together parties to
resolve the dispute, but it is unfortunate that politicians always
seem to want to kick unions and employees without considering
management's responsibilities.
Much of the political positioning seems based on the
misapprehension that Unite is refusing to talk to BA. In fact we
have talked the hind legs off a donkey and will talk the front legs
off too, if it will help.
Some people believe it is wrong that BA cabin crew get paid more
than colleagues at other airlines. According to that argument,
competition among staff means levelling down pay, while boardroom
competition means levelling it up. I make no apology for the fact
that union-organised employees are better paid than the majority of
private sector workers denied our support and protection. That's
what we are in business for.
And cabin crew bear no responsibility for BA's difficulties, and
should not be singled out to pay for them. It was not cabin crew
who fouled up the launch of Terminal 5, with its devastatingly bad
publicity. It was not cabin crew who organised the fuel
price-fixing racket which has cost BA hundreds of millions in
fines. The airline's reputation for dirty tricks? Not cabin crew
but management.
It is no surprise, then, that BA is also inept at industrial
relations. But it takes a special sort of mismanagement to build on
these catastrophes by then getting into a confrontation with the
very people smarter airlines use as a marketing tool – the cabin
crew on whom passengers depend for their safety and comfort.
Over the last few months these employees have been bullied by
some of the airline's pilots, harassed by its managers, demonised
by its PR specialists and stalked online by its internet snooping
brigade. It is testimony to the determination of these
"middle-England" employees that they have twice voted for
industrial action to defend their dignity in the face of these
tactics, worthy only of a Victorian mill owner.
But BA cabin crew have not been blind to the economic realities
of the airline's position. They offered the company a package of
savings which would have more than met their requirements – an
extraordinary £60m worth of concessions. The fact that BA prefers
the greater risk and cost of industrial action makes it clear that
there is another agenda at work here.
This dispute is now a clash between two brands. The BA brand – a
premium airline in which skilled professionals deliver a quality
service for passengers. And the Willie Walsh brand – all threats,
bluster and grandstanding – a brand that Walsh will no doubt wish
to take on intact to his next employer, whatever the wreckage left
in his wake. As Mae West nearly said, managers who are macho
generally aren't mucho. It's time for calmer heads.
Email to a friend
