![]() |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 8183596)
It's misleading and one sided when most of the coverage is already one sided.
Misleading because it quotes senior pay - which a lot of people will focus on - and average pay. Most of those involved will earn less than average pay just like most people in the UK earn considerably less than average UK pay. The dispute was triggered by the imposition in November by BA of new working practices, which would see between one and three crew members taken off flights, in the process hitting the customer service standards for which the airline is known. BA's imposition also dismantles long-standing collective agreements which govern working arrangements and payment structures. With 75 per cent of crew earning £20,000 after many years service, allowances make up a considerable portion of their earnings. |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by The Aviator
(Post 8183882)
Maybe you should be more shocked by this http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/d...00/2512469.stm
Nice diversionary tactic for some uncomfortable revelations.:rofl: So if I find a report of a crooked pilot I can portray your profession in a bad light? Hang on....there have been a couple of cases in the last few months of pilots being over alcohol limits while on duty. Absolutely disgraceful. You should be ashamed. :rofl::rofl::rofl: |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 8183902)
Nice diversionary tactic for some uncomfortable revelations.
So if I find a report of a crooked pilot I can portray your profession in a bad light? Hang on....there have been a couple of cases in the last few months of pilots being over alcohol limits while on duty. Absolutely disgraceful. You should be ashamed. |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by The Aviator
(Post 8183944)
So I take it you don't have a problem with this then? No diversionary tactics, it happened, they did it because the passenger in the car wanted to go to work and did not agree with the strikers.
It does and I would report them myself. As there have been police officers, government officials, truck drivers and countless others. It is disgraceful, but someone with an alcohol problem is no comparison dropping a lump of concrete off of an overpass onto a car intending to deliberately hurt or kill someone. |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by The Aviator
(Post 8183944)
Their actions were no part of their job or profession, they were just thugs.
To discredit striking miners? And what does it have to do with my comments about the media telling everyone how well paid miners were when it wasn't true...just like they create the impression that cabin crew are on £56k and £35k when 75% are on far less? |
Re: BA Strike
Media articles are rarely written without an agenda, and newspapers like the Daily Mail cater to one section of the public whilst The Sun is aimed at an entirely different kind of readership. Rarely do the two ever meet.
The agenda in the story in post 51 seems to me to be an attempt to get sympathy away from people losing there jobs or yaking a cut in pay and trying to gain sympathy for a company which may be doing the right thing legally and justifiably but not necessarily morally. If I was running a company that had to either cut job, find a way of cutting cost, a combination of both, or going bust, I'd want to do as much as possible to keep the company going so would choose the third option. BA appear to have done the same, the only visible difference being that instead of a single owner, BA are beholden to a number of owners (shareholders). |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 8183889)
From Unite's website.
Bit different to the £56k and £35K suggested in the Mail's misleading article. :frown: Here. If the claims of racism are true then action should have been taken against the offending party, but it appears that an investigation found against the complainant. The strike action seems to be because Union members didn't agree with that decision. One part of the story that gets me annoyed is that the strike ballot has been translated into Urdu and Punjabi. It's obviously too much effort for their members to read English working in England. I wonder if the Health and Safety signs are translated too. I used to work in a Tesco in an area high in Polish immigrants, resulting in a large number of Poles working there. Very few spoke English and all of the signs were translated into Polish too and we were all encoraged to learn some Polish. I wonder if we'd get the same consideration working in non-English-speaking countries. |
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by BristolUK
(Post 8183889)
Bit different to the £56k and £35K suggested in the Mail's misleading article. :frown:
|
Re: BA Strike
Originally Posted by MarkG
(Post 8185713)
Why do you trust a union that's trying to justify screwing up thousands of people's holidays more than the Civil Aviation Authority, who are the source of those figures?
Are you after a job at the Mail? :rofl::rofl: The accuracy of the figures has not been denied. The focus of the figures used is what distorts the issue...by reference to the highest paid staff and the average pay as opposed to the pay that MOST of the employees receive. |
| All times are GMT -12. The time now is 10:42 pm. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.