Miss M
I am struggling to understand your attitude in this whole saga as you seem to contradict yourself a lot as evidenced by the following statements posted by yourself on this thread and on the other pprune threads.
Quote from Chuchinchow to Miss M:
If I was in your situation I would ask the leadership of that union why, after more than a year and a half of dealing with my employer, it had not managed to reach any sort of equable solution to its original grievance.
Answer from Miss M: Blame it on the union (sarcastic). Surely our management could never be responsible for not reaching an agreement with us.
However, on 18th June 2010 you posted this response in another thread:
.Eddy, if you are referring to the deal last year, yes. I wish we could turn back time. I would have happily accepted it as it meant that future crew would work on existing WW and EF fleets. It would have included the guarantee which I need over my job.
</B>
So you know fully well that BA has tried to put in a reasonable proposal at least once by your standard, but your union chose to say no without consulting members, so don't say that BA is responsible for not reaching an agreement with you. You also recently said on 7th Oct. 2010:
.ChicoG, I will never feel embarrased over my actions or claim that they were pointless. I still believe going on strike was the right decision and I won't hestitate a second to go on another strike should we vote for it...
Snas, I'm finding it very difficult to be saying that BA employees who either crossed the picket line or trained to break our strike are my colleagues. I find their behaviour to be despicable...
</B>
and on 9th October you said:
.The Flying Nunn, Do you really have to ask this question again? I was asked it only a couple of days ago. Why did I go on strike? Because of imposition! Not due to the practical fact that crewing levels were changed but because they were changed without any negotiation.
But again, in earlier threads you admitted this:
.Eddy, The strikes were not needed. They were never needed. They never should have taken place
Why then do you find it so difficult to understand that other crew chose not to strike with you when you yourself realised long ago that the strikes were not needed, never been needed and should never have taken place? Why do you despise them so much for arriving at the same conclusion as you had? Was it because you chose the wrong decision, i.e. back your union thinking that it will win the argument anyway by striking and when it didn't produce the result you were expecting, you begrudge those who didn't support the strike for getting it right? Do you really hate your non-striking colleagues so much for not being in the same hopeless situation as you are?
You keep saying that those who signed the last BA offer sold themselves down the river. You seem to forget that those lucky enough to sign the last BA offer are on a win-win situation as not only did they made sure that their contract will no longer deteriorate (at least for the time stated in the contract) but also, in the unlikely event that Bassa secure a better contract than the recent BA offer, they (the 1000 who signed) will also be entitled to the same better contract. So indeed, there is no reason imho, why non-strikers should now join you in your hopeless and ill-thought-of fight, although I can understand why you would want some company.
And now, I would like to echo the following question directed to you ages ago by Bridchen on the other thread, in reaction to your admission that the strike was never necessary.
Quote from Bridchen on 18 June 2010:
.MissM, I'm almost lost for words. The same proposal that BASSA, according to your logic, rejected as they found it lacking, is now on reflection, a proposal you would wish to accept, if your ST was reinstated with DOJ. Your ST would have been intact with DOJ at the time of the proposal, before you went on strike, so then why aren't you asking what the union found so lacking about it? And to outright turn it down, instead of ironing out the details.
Yes, indeed, the strikes never needed to take place, therefore, why are you so willing to ride the open-top bus?
I, however would like to rephrase the last sentence: Yes, indeed, the strikes never needed to take place therefore why are you so willing to do it again and entice your colleagues to join you in your doomed plight?