any replacement would have the same objectives.
I cannot, for the life of me, understand why! What "Restrictive Practises" do we have nowadays? As far as I can see, the fight is purely for the kudos of being known as the man who smashed the unions!
And the major shareholders in the City, the ones that are able to do anything, as far as I can see support WW.
The problem lies with the fact that even our major shareholders do not have a significant holding. Standard Life has the biggest stake, and they only account for 7% of the issue. The majority of shares are held by the little people - BA serving staff and retirees who bought shares, Mum, Dad and Auntie Flo who bought a few shares at the time of the flotation and have still held on to them and the odd company pension fund. To call for a vote of no confidence is easy - to obtain the vote is more of a challenge!
The City can't be entirely stupid though, can it? If the Broughton/Walsh combo is left in place, there is a strong possibility that British Airways could collapse! These two are bringing the company to the very brink! Surely investors must see that BA is in a very deep, Broughton/Walsh manufactured crisis?