Alurker
So many arguments have been made up to justify this strike that nobody knows what it is really about.
BASSA says that BA had no right to change some of the working conditions because they are contractual.
They do not even object to the changes or the need for the changes but to the way BA enforced them. BA on the other hand claims the changes were non contractual. A judge is to rule on this in Feb.
All the other arguments (like: you need 15 people to keep pax happy) were introduced by BASSA, not by us. The epitome being that they were worried the changes would do harm to the BA brand, possibly destroying it forever.
Even the most fervent strike supporter must by now agree that never has been more harm done to an airline (or a company) than by the unions to BA. Agreed?