Originally Posted by wiggy
If Mr Woodley and Mr Simpson are to be believed one of BA's "carrying on's" that's blocking agreement is the CEO's refusal to interfere in the Disciplinary process. A question for you: Do you think the CEO should halt the disciplinaries, irrespective of the offences that are alledged to have been committed?
Mr. Walsh is stuck between a rock and a very, very hard place with this issue.
Despite what Bassa would have us believe, nobody has been suspended for taking part in industrial action.
People have been suspended (or are facing disciplinary action) for alleged bullying and intimidation.
I don't for one second believe that all of the people in question are guilty. I've met some of them and they aren't the kind of people who'd be guilty of this kind of behaviour (delighted to say that atleast one of them is now back at work).
HOWEVER, as someone who has had anonymous 'hate' notes in his dropfile at work and nasty messages on Facebook from a user called 'Scabby Hunter', I would personal be absolutely livid if I discovered that someone who was genuinely guilty of bullying was let somewhat off the hook because of these negotiations.
Bullying has no place in the workplace and to effectively sweep under the rug a number of cases of alleged bullying would completely undermine the company's zero-tollerance policy.
I do sincerely hope that the majority of those currently
wrongfully facing the action are reinstated very, very soon.