Originally Posted by
lowcostdolly
...Furthermore I think he will sack these people not for going on strike but for an "irretrievable breakdown in the working relationship".
I reckon you could be on the right track in that he will have crunched the numbers and worked out whether it is cheaper to keep them on or fire them. He doesn't have to come up with a clever way to get rid of them though. If they don't turn up for work they are in breach of contract and can be dismissed. It will be an unfair dismissal if in the first 12 weeks, and loss of earnings and compensation will be ordered by a tribunal. He will have worked out what the payback period will be if he hires new staff at a lower salary. I reckon he will be quids in within five years, a short timeframe when you look at how may years it's going to take to top up that pension fund.
Given BA have tried to engage I don't think he will have too much of a problem on this and it is a valid reason for dismissal.
Well, all we know is what the two sides are telling us, and I would be surprised if either were telling the truth.
are there any winners here
From a passengers point of view it would be nice to see BA reduced in size, I think passengers would win if that happened, they have abrand spanking new terminal at LHR and it is a shame to have it wasted on this lot.