BASSA were livid last week when UNITE agreed to table BAs proposal in return for 21 days extension for potential strike action, hence the strike dates were announced to undermine those within UNITE and put the BA proposal off the table thus denying Cabin Crew a say.
This saddens me. A strike should ALWAYS be a last resort in this kind of business. I mean the very, very last resort. If Unite at large felt that the BA proposal was good enough to warrant discussion and good enough to warrant the negotiation of an extension, the proposal should have been given the attention it deserved before strike dates were called.
There does seem to be a sense of urgency withn Bassa at times when it comes to going on strike. It's no secret, however, that a small pocket of Bassa members are intent on a strike going ahead, even if Walsh offered them a black cheque, almost.
Nevertheless, the union's leaders (I'm talking Bassa now) have been elected by their peers to lead the union and make these difficult decisions - they can't get it right all the time, but they normally do.
Originally Posted by Alpine Skiier
You seem to have missed the numerous statements that WW agreed to a three-week extension for balloting as long as no strike dates were announced.
You've got to look it in the face and accept that the current situation is 100% down to McCluskey and BAASA.
I didn't miss them at all, but my post was being deliberately open minded as to who said what. Bassa claims one thing, BA claims another. I'm not really equipped to decide who I believe in this particular instance.
BA claim the caveat was presented WITH the deal, Bassa claim to have known nothing of the caveat and that Walsh withdrew the offer in a red-faced rage at the end of a TV interview.
Who to believe??!
So don't underestimate what I have or haven't read - I'm just keeping a very, very open mind.