As the BA strike continues, let's spend a little time looking into the ins and outs of this dispute.
Now I will admit that I have been known to fly quite a bit and that recently this has been in the comfort of club class on British Airways. It is true to say that I've paid through the nose for this privilege. However, when you compare the comfort of the front cabin to the comparative squalor of the World Traveller cabin, I consider this to be money well spent.
As I understand this dispute, BA want to reduce the number of cabin crew on the long haul flights flying out of Heathrow airport from 15 to 14. I reflected upon this as was returning from Barbados to Gatwick airport a few weeks ago. Now given that the staff on this particular flight had already 'suffered' this massive reduction in manning, I am forced to say that I did not notice that the comfort and service had particularly deteriorated when compared to similar flights that I had taken from Heathrow.
Now admittedly from the extreme comfort of my full flatbed seat I may have noted that the champagne did arrive a little more slowly and that due to be BA's recent cost-cutting exercises the meals were only up to the standard of a four-star restaurant instead of five, but that was about it. I certainly failed to notice any reduction in the extended rest periods taken by the cabin crew during the fight. In fact, if anything, they seemed to be a little longer than I remembered.
So if the Heathrow flights are forced to work to the same standards as the Gatwick flights, I frankly doubt that anyone will notice the difference.
Taking the above into account, and bearing in mind that Gatwick flights already work to the proposed Heathrow conditions, the reader may be forced to assume that the motivations for the strike must be to do with something other than manning levels, sickness rules, pay rates, and rest periods. If the standard of service that I have experienced on Gatwick flights is reflected at Heathrow, then why is there a problem?
The Conservative party have referred to the current period as Labour's spring of discontent. Given that this is a clear reference back to Labour referring to the Conservative's winter of discontent, I think we can dismiss this as a soundbite. Or can we?
Next week, Alistair Darling delivers his final budget before the general election. It has been muted that the civil servants are preparing to strike on budget day. Given that this government has poured money into the civil service in terms of both pay increases and manning levels, it is hard to see why.
The Unite union donates vast sums to the Labour Party coffers, so it knows that Gordon Brown can do very little to intervene in its manufactured dispute with BA. It also knows that it really doesn't have a case in creating 'Fortress Heathrow' when the very terms and conditions that it is disputing have already been accepted at Gatwick.
We are forced therefore to compare the two strikes and come to the conclusion that they are politically motivated. Neither union wishes to bite the hand that feeds them -- namely the Labour government -- perhaps they are just trying to bite of a finger from that hand.
If so then we are forced to ask whether that finger is our current Prime Minister. Rumour has it that a similar coup d'etat was executed on Harold Wilson. Is it history repeating itself and, if so, then we are forced to ask ourselves who really runs this country?
READ MORE » Bad Attitude...
