Despite not wanting to come back to this site (because I feel some contributors feel compelled to create division amongst the company employees: Flight crew/Cabin Crew; Management/Crew, and post inciteful comments) I just couldn't help myself: I wanted to see how the thread had progressed. It seems a little calmer and more thought-provoking now that some of the knee-jerkers have left the party!
I feel that it is really sad (and indicative of the Manager-Crew divide) that there needs to be a threat of a strike in order for some of our concerns, (many of which we have tried to convey for years) to be addressed. Yes, there are some who are always spoiling for a fight, but for such a large cross-section of the crew community and one of the first times, historically, for BOTH unions to be in agreement, speaks volumes about the state of affairs of our company.
I have stated before that I consider myself to be one of the moderate, law-abiding types. By that I mean that I have never been in any trouble with the management, indeed my manager (who I met for the first time in 10 years!) looked at my file and told me that BA needs more people like me; I have only ever reported unfit for work when I have been seriously unable to operate (I think 3 occasions in 10 years), and despite being in the possession of a brain and an honours degree, have chosen to do a job that doesn't tax my mind at all, but I believe I am good at and possess the right qualities for the job. If I were on a flight, I would want to be served by me. (ooooh, get me!). I digress...
I worked at Marks & Spencer's HQ in my last job and saw first-hand how a monolithic company operated. At the time, M&S was in severe financial trouble - and I might have saved the company a few years of turmoil, had I the chance to point out to the CEO that the way to turn the company around was not to cut the conditions and pay of the sales assistants and order them to be more productive, but to rather get rid of all the consultants on a £100 an hour and many of the anonymous middle management who I would observe flitting from one meeting to another, never accomplishing anything on their To Do lists and merely treading water. I would prefer for us to operate in the John Lewis model of a partnership, where we all work for the common good and the financial benefit of the company, but not being in the possession of a Economics degree, I don't know the ramifications of that...
Despite being the Teachers' Pet, I feel that our management operate solely on a "Stick" mentality - no Carrot, no reward. I go the "extra mile" - it is part of my job and the reason I was hired. I don't want to go on strike, and I dare say many of my colleagues don't either. But is this what it takes to get the management to listen to our concerns and try and find a suitable middle ground? Is it only because of a threat to managers' bonuses and fear for the safety of their own jobs (and unfortunately the resulting financial impact on ALL BA employees, shareholders, and disruption to our long-suffering customers) that someone like me can be given a voice?
Why did it come to this? Many of the 12 points of dispute have been on the table for OVER 10 YEARS. Those in charge of Industrial Relations now have to earn their paycheck and do what they were employed to do: resolve the dispute by involving all parties concerned and foster a culture of better communication, understanding and respect amongst us. No spin. No touchy-feely "You are not just a number, Miss 123456, you are an INDIVIDUAL" nonsense. Just honest engagement. If that were the case, there would be no need for Trade Unions. (But I still thank goodness I have them.)
Apologies for any spelling mistakes and for the length of my post, but I am jet-lagged and need to get this off my chest. Ta-ra!