This dispute at BA is a clearly defined attack on trade unionism, which if it succeeds, could cause a meltdown amongst unions not just in the UK, but Europe as well.
Aren't we being a little hysterical here ?
a) this is not an attack on trade unionism. The GMB settled as did the other Unite branches, so clearly BA is not out to 'crush the unions'
b) In the greater order of things, BASSA and CC89 represent less than 1% of Unite's members. The notion that Unite could be brought down by a dispute involving these two branches is a flight of fancy worthy of BASSA's tomato grower.
c) The actions of 5,000 (I'm feeling generous on the figures) cabin crew are inconsequential to the trade union movement in the UK let alone in Europe. This does sound rather like you ascribe an overinflated sense of importance to this whole dispute. Unlike the miners, who were largely successful in getting their members out on strike, BASSA and CC89 have consumately failed to get a groundswell of support from their membership in this dispute. Around 45% actually walked out and 600 of those soon became disenchanted and reported for work.
The ball is with Unite, not BA. BA know what they want. The management are well on the way to recruiting lots of new staff. The strikers who sought to intimidate crew who wanted to work normally are reaping what the sowed. I was in the Arora hotel during the strike. There were crew who wished to work who were fearful of walking up to the car park in uniform, because they didn't want to be recognised as crew by the busload of strikers that was doing a circuit around the perimeter road. This same busload hurled abuse at anyone they saw in a BA uniform. That is bullying and intimidation.
BA have people ready to operate as cabin crew in the event that Unite are successful in getting a positive vote for strike action. The company has a flight schedule that it is operating. The empty threats from Unite are having less impact on the passengers as evidenced by the upturnin yields. The longer Unite leaves calling for action, the fewer people are likely to respond. The commuters who hitherto relied on staff travel will find it increasingly expensive to get to work and in all probability will wind up resigning. Sad really, they have been badly let down by a union who gave them garbage advice and then didn't follow through with any meaningful support.
From where I stand I'd say that BA has got pretty much what it wants out of this dispute. It hasn't even got to worry about that pay rise for the union members as 67% of them turned it down, so noneof them will get it. Bit of a cost saving I'd say.
No, BASSA has succeeded in shafting its members. It has cost some of them the best part of a month's pay, loss of travel perks and for what ? The members have gained precisely nothing. Not a penny piece. But then the members really should have looked at what they were striking for, because as I recall, the basis of the dispute had nothing to do with improvng the lot of cabin crew..