If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Skiving BA strike ringleader sacked
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
Sacked BA worker gets squillions in damages for wrongful dismissal. :rolleyes:
The whole Gate Gourmet thing was a total disgrace. The Gate Gourmet staff were justified but misguided in their striking- their union lied to them, and it played right into GG's agenda anyway. But the BA staff do not have a single justification for their despicable actions, and to claim otherwise is ludicrous.
Wildcat strikers should have the book thrown at them. I don't give a fig about BA's profits, but I do give a fog about tens of thousands of people being screwed over for no good reason, and with no good warning.
Wildcat strikers are vermin who deserve to be punished. Shame he wasn't made liable for all the losses, including the losses of the man who missed his daughter's wedding because of the shameful wildcat action.
you really have a hatred for working class people don't you?
HANG THE CUNTS!!!
Chicken vote santa? I dont understand.
judging by your vitriol everytime the subject of workers standing up for their rights comes up, I'd say that actually, you do really think this.
Its like turkeys voting for Xmas
Wildcat strikes are a disgrace.
Striking for hypothetical points-scoring is a scandal.
"Solidarity" is a load of nonsense.
What connection did the BA staff have to Gate Gourmet? None.
What connection did BA have to Gate Gourmet? None.
Why the fuck were BA staff on wildcat strike then? They didn't go on strike when First bus drivers rightly did, or when the firemen rightly did. Funny that. If they went on strike every time someone else was on strike, they'd never be at work.
I'm sure the fact it was the summer holidays had nothing to do with it at all, oh no.
I wonder if the scum who organised that wildcat strike ever did get round to apologising to the man who was forced to miss his daughter's wedding because of their shameful behaviour? I doubt it, don't you?
Oh, ok, far too clever for me.
I rest my case Kermit.
That I don't like people who screw other people over for no good reason? Company or employee, the same ethics apply. And the trade union should have been made liable for every penny any BA customer lost as a result of the action.
Do you think its OK to drop everything, leave people stranded tens of thousands of miles from home, and expect to get away with it? Even if they'd balloted and given warning I would have had sympathy with the man who got sacked, but they just dropped everyone in it for purely selfish gain.
You don't get it obviously. I rest my case.
how do you think employees got the few rights we have now? by smiling sweetly? :rolleyes:
actually BA were gate gourmets main customers, as BA outsourced to them, and well the strikers by doing the strike and keeping BA from operating, were doing a boycott of GG
Yeah... you can bet he'll sue.
As Blagsta has said, whichever rights, benefits and perks we workers have are thanks to action or threat of action by the workforce as a pressure group.
Seeing as the workers of GateGourmet themselves had little or no power of their own it is only right that the workers of BA, a company that like it or not can have massive influence over GateGourmet, should spring to help.
I can't really believe that some of you will see nothing wrong with greedy subhuman scumbags such as the owners of GateGourmet treating employees like cattle and trying to dispose of as many of them as possible in order to employ slave-wage temps and cream ever more profit.
Let's hope none of you ever find yourselves in that position. In the meantime some of you need perhaps to look up the meaning of the word 'solidarity'. Because, believe it or not, there are many people out there who like their jobs, are responsible, but also want to make sure other people's jobs are safe and they're not messed with. Even if they don't personally know any of those people.
Almost unheard-of concept of selflessness, I know...
But frankly, next time, say, Tube employees threaten to strike on a safety-related issue (because believe it or not, in the immense majority of cases Tube workers strike they do it for OUR safety and nothing else) I'm going to write to them and say ''Don't bother mate- most people think you just want the day off so let the trains run unsafely and eventually crash and kill three dozen commuters. Perhaps that will open a few eyes''.
No they wouldn't.
Least of all because no money = no customers = no profit.
They did. They went on strike, causing huge problems for on-board catering.
careful you don't fall foul of libel there.
GG was going bust, and was hopelessly in debt. A far cry from the "creaming of profit" the lying trade union tried to claim.
Workers were not "replaced", they were dismissed for going on wildcat strike. The hire of seasonal staff for the peak season was, apparently, common practice- even the trade union admitted that much, in amongst their diet of lies and fabrications.
And yeah, the next time tube drivers go on strike complaining about "privatisation", they should be invited to find new jobs.
Not everybody works in factories. The rich naturally look after their own, and also after middle class folk. We're not talking white collar workers here.
There were such severe problems for the company that they sacked the lot of them.
Yep, I can see what dire straits the company was really in...
Er... Gate Gourmet itself has said so. They actually blamed BA for the affair, saying that BA has always put too much pressure on Gate Gourmet to lower its prices and that eventually that caused the company to run into trouble and blah blah...
Never mind that the company that owns Gate Gourmet, Texas Pacific, is massively wealthy eh...
If you really believe that's all there was to it you're hopelessly naive... or simply willing to believe whichever corporate greed-driven fairy tales are thrown at you.
So you do hate ordinary workers and don't give a toss about the consumer either then.
Nice to see you have such contempt for people who are sticking up for you.
Read this article carefully Kermit
Really? I suggest you look at the history of some quaker companies; Cadbury's perhaps being the best example. Also what about the John Lewis partnership? John Lewis gave the company to the staff and it's an employer...There are plenty of other big companies with a reputation for treating their staff well. And while industrial action has secured many rights, benefits and perks we have it hasn't got them all and it's a complete lie to suggest that. Those actions have also produced a framework in which we have greater protections; workers cannot be sacked for no reason, etc. The role of unions is very limited now compared to what it was. And unions have had such a negative impact, just look at British Leyland/Rover which was destroyed due to the greediness of unions.
Yep, that's exactly what I said. Hang the fuckers. :rolleyes:
Having trouble understanding English today? Your literacy is normally so much better.
How are they, exactly?
By making people miss their daughter's weddings? I'm sure the victims will look back and go "ah, never mind I missed the most important day of my daughter's life, at least they were sticking up for me by skiving off on a hot summer's day!"
More tosh by everyone's second-favourite cretin (behind Scargill) written in a sanctimonious and rather poor newspaper.
Companies like John Lewis are, unfortunately, a very very small minority.
And incidentally it was pisspoor management not "union greed" that sends companies like Rover under.
What other explanation could there be?
I reckon if you claim the strikers just wanted a day off in the sun 10,000 times more, it will magically become true.
It's what you want to believe anyway, seemly due to your appalling prejudice and dislike of unions and strike action regardless of the circumstances...
Rubbish.
Go and look at British Leyland in the 1970s. Rover went under because of what happened then, not now.
Although not selling to Honda was the worst decision a board of directors has ever made.
So you think that bosses should hold employees to ransom. What a crock of shite
That's exactly what he said :rolleyes:
It isn't as black-and-white as "if you disagree with a strike you hate poor people!!11one1!eleven!".
Yes, workers should have the right to maintain their working conditions, and protect fellow employees from managerial harrassment.
But with that right comes responsibilities, to not strike illegally, and to not strike for matters which have nothing to do with you or your company.
If you strike against "privatisation" then you should be severely reprimanded. You are not protecting rights, you are holding a democratically elected Government to ransom because you don't like a decision it has made.
We had a vote and you lost. Now we are going to take away your livelihood but because we had a vote (and you lost) you have to take it with a smile. :eek2: