Yellow Pen, the problem with the deal which Woodley negotiated with Walsh was that it was not negotiated with the very people it affected. With hindsight Woodley should not have been so quick to shake hands, (but then retirement and the opportunity of ennoblement was at stake), on the deal but should have reported back first. This involves my employment and earnings, I believe I have a small say in what to accept and what not accept.
Forgetting the over-confident argument, (because these days it is), 'it will never happen to me because...' would you be accepting of a third party to make your financial arrangements, and bind you to them. Would you be happy for an estate agent to accept a lower price for the sale of your assets with consultation. Woodley was/is my agent and my assests in this case are my contract and benefits of employment.
The deal itself wasn't bad, and overall was most probably the best we could accept, but the small print, as ever was flawed. Walsh expected cabin crew to relinquish some fundamental rights, such as the right to take my employer to court over matters of legal abuse. He also wanted dictatorial rights to remove my earnings and benefits at will, which combined with my loss of rights to legally challenge him/BA amounted to a positively Victorian way of managing business. For better or worse we have evolved the managment of business and workers rights in western society. This includes the rights you enjoy, but may feel you will never need to call upon.
If this dispute has now become centred upon the right to staff travel, as many will claim, then it could be solved at the stroke of a pen/push off a button. I have my staff travel - I didn't strike, and I see no need to continue along this brands self-destructive path if the instant restoration of full staff travel will alter the ballot results and bring matters to a halt. My opinion is that Walsh may have also missed that boat, the arguments have moved on.
I am a moderate person and I canvass many opinions. My view from many open minded conversations is that resolve many actually be growing and apathy declining in favour of the unions. And with a proportion of moderates leaving Bassa, returning results and actions may actually be stronger. It strikes me that Walsh and Francis should actually encourage moderates to remain with the unions to at least have an influential vote on the direction of events, and ultimately water down actions and opinions.
I am no supporter of Walsh and his regime, despite not striking. The quote Flaps 40 reproduced was a perfect appraisal of the current malaise at BA. I've read many times that this business is about the numbers, but it shouldn't be. It is about people, we are a people business. KPMG is about numbers, and while we are at it BAA is about airports not bloody shopping malls. The balance has all gone.