There are many ways to commit suicide. The suicide I’m talking about here is of two particular flavours, industrial and economic, though they are, of course, connected.
The dinosaurs who run the Unite union have called a strike that they cannot win and the effects of which can only damage the company that employs the workers they have fooled into withdrawing their labour. BA is no more exempt from the pressures placed on businesses by the current economic conditions than any other business. Workers in all business sectors are faced with cutbacks in the companies they work for as they struggle to keep afloat, whether it be short time working, unpaid holiday – temporary lay-offs, or outright job losses. BA is no different – and it seems to have entirely escaped the notice of the union bureaucrats that there are 90 -odd other airlines flying out of Heathrow and that travellers who might have flown BA are taking their custom elsewhere, my daughter being a case in point. The only effect the strike will have is to further reduce the circumstances of the union members, and the other workers who will suffer the knock-on effects.
Meanwhile, we have David Cameron and Zanulabour lite signing up to the suicide of what remains of British industry with their talk of huge investments in inefficient, expensive wind-power, (every watt of which, it should be pointed out, needs to be backed by conventionally-generated power kept at ‘spinning reserve,’ the most inefficient running mode of all,) which will lead to higher energy costs and further reduce the competitiveness of British industry compared with Chinese and Indian industries.
It is not inapt to point out that, according to government figures, in the last quarter for which numbers are available, 60 -odd K jobs were lost in the private, that is, productive sector of the economy, and 20 – odd K generated in the public, that is, the leech sector. It does not take an Andrew Wiles to work out that this kind of economy is not sustainable.
Suicide, there are many different kinds.
Boadicea's Chariot 
It’s definitely a case of depression.
If only we could. 😦
Bearsy, just as I thought I saw green shoot in the forex markets, some prat at the BoE mentioned a double dip. The only hope for the pensions now is a Tory victory. Gawd luv us.
Yeah – I am praying daily to the God that I don’t believe in … 😥
Yeah. I’ve tried sex, booze and videotape. that leaves religion, I reckon. :8
See what other BA crew think here:
http://www.pprune.org/cabin-crew/404353-british-airways-cc-industrial-relations-mk-vi-103.html
I really don’t know too much about this. It would certainly seem suicidal for any union to push for anything too much in the present economic situation in Britain – there are, as you say Bravo, sufficient other airlines to satisfy public demand. I’m glad we have bought our tickets to the Uk before they take advantage of the situation and put their prices up…
I believe that the railway workers are on a collision course too. That is more worrisome since there is no similar alternative transport system.
The only bright light is that the general public link Labour and Unions together and if there is a backlash (how could there not be) it will redound on the Labour party.
My comment elsewhere was quite simply due to the fact that I find that particularly mob screaming for ‘blood’ just as distasteful as unintelligent union leaders and their members making shrill unrealistic demands.
Thanks for your post and the link, Bravo. There was a comparison I saw the other week between the number of hours flown by BA and other state airlines compared to Easyjet. The maximum number of pilot flying hours permitted is 900 per year. Easyjet pilots fly on average 880 hours, BA pilots were on about 650, still well ahead of Air France, Lufthansa (which surprised me) and others. So there looks as if there’s room for better productivity with BA.
And here’s the guy how, if I say ‘black,’ knee-jerks into ‘white.’ No, Brendano, he did no such thing. (Amongst other things he quoted a case about a factory in Wales, which had installed ‘alternate power,’ which, when I did a little research, showed that the installation had never delivered on it’s supposed capacity and showed no signs, acording to engineering assessments, of ever doing so. If you check some facts, instead of just jumping in blindly to land your usual ill-informed powder-puff cheap shots on Bravo, you will find that there is no, repeat, no wind-installation that delivers anything like the powere supplies that it is supposed to. Check, particulalry, the performance of the installed capacity in Holland over this last winter. Come back when you have some substantive argument to make. If you have none, stick to MyT. This is a more civilised place.
Boadicea, I haven’t seen much about the railway workers’ case, but I think I read that they seem to have mor substantial complaints than th BA cabin crew.
If there is anything behind the reports that he government has been shovelling taxpayers’ cash into the Unite coffers, then trousering some of it as donations to the labour party…
Sheona, interesting numbers. There is some more detail of restrictive practices – shades of the 70’s again – on that link.
… point of order … this is Bravo’s post; he can do whatever he likes within Site Policy and the ToS. I’m off to bed, it’s 11:30 in Queensland. Play nicely, boys. 🙄
>The way you tell it is not the way I remember it…..I won’t be dictated to.< Oh yes you will. If we were in a bar, I could walk away, here, it's my blog and I'm not going to let you usual whingeing screw it up.
PS. >I know nothing about the technical side of windpower…< but I'm going to argue with you anyway.
Roger’s views on windpower are here:
http://my.telegraph.co.uk/clothcap/blog/2010/01/09/unlimited_capacity_to_deceive_-_wind_energy__climate_scam
He says, very sensibly I think: ‘The danger in this is that we become partisan, and simply take sides-“wind power for liberal leftie tree huggers” and “nuclear for the conservative realists”. Let’s look at the arguments dispassionately and thoroughly.’
Brendano. He also agrees with my asessment of wind power, he’s talking about back-yard installations. Argument ends. (Unless you have somethign substantive to say on the topic of the blog. As I said, this is a more civilised place.)
PS. What could be more dispassionate than actual numbers? See CC’s comments.
I deleted it. I decided to shpow you that your, >I will not be dictated to< was, in fact, like a lot of the crap you post, not in fact the case. I don't have to put up with your nonsense here, on my blogs, at least. Say something substantive or it's Byeeeee!
You gotta larf!
Hee, hee, hee.
Bravo
I’m larfing with Sipu.
We love it when your lot keep telling us how to run our affairs, and then this or the trains, or the civil servants.
Yep. Plenty of advice for everyone else – Gordon Brown has saved the world, didn’t you know? Aren’t you grateful?
And here are the numbers confirming what was blindingly obvious from the start:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article7069938.ece
>THE first detailed study of Britain’s onshore wind farms suggests some treasured landscapes may have been blighted for only small gains in green energy. Siddick wind farm in Cumbria, now operated by Eon, achieved only 15.8% of capacity, the figures suggest. The two turbines at High Volts 2, Co Durham, the largest and most powerful wind farm in Britain when it was commissioned in 2004, achieved 18.7%. <
And these are official.