Unite leaders scared of anti-union laws

British Airways cabin crew should not only be angry at the partisan decision of the courts to declare their planned strike illegal – they should also direct their rage at the way the leaders of the Unite union have conducted themselves.

Unite’s leaders spent months in negotiations with BA management only to stand by when contractual changes were suddenly introduced without agreement. BA then went ahead and reduced crew numbers on flights and imposed a pay freeze while new entrants begin on far worse conditions.

Any self-respecting union leadership would have called the 12,700 cabin crew out on strike there and then in response to BA’s provocation. But oh no, Unite’s leaders dillied and dallied out of sheer fear, not just at what BA’s response might be but at the consequences of defying the anti-trade union laws.

These laws, introduced by the Tories in the early 1990s, make it illegal to have a strike without a ballot. This is not aimed at enhancing democracy but at defusing workers’ anger while weeks are spent on an expensive ballot operation in place of the traditional show of hands at a mass meeting.

Even then, Unite’s officials couldn’t get it right. They opened the door to a BA challenge by balloting a small group of cabin crew who had taken voluntary redundancy. Of course, the 92% vote in favour of a strike on an 80% turnout easily outweighed those balloted in error. But with the media engaged in a ferocious witch-hunt, Mrs Justice Cox ruled that the ballot did not conform to the 1992 Trade Union Act.

As an official from Bassa, the branch of Unite that covers the cabin crew, is reported to have said: “"The decision questions your faith in the whole system. It makes you wonder if you have the right to strike any more.”

Precisely. The right to strike has long since disappeared in Britain and the union leadership has, by and large, gone along with this. After yesterday’s court ruling, the leaders of Unite declared it “a bad day for democracy”. Well, if they are so concerned about democracy, why didn’t just they simply defy the court and go ahead with the strike instead or planning another ballot? If they had done that, it would have been a blow for democracy against undemocratic laws.

At one time, union leaders were bold enough to defy the state and fight for their members. In 1972, the predecessors of Unite in the Transport and General Workers Union ignored anti-union laws brought in by the Heath Tory government. As a result, five dockers were jailed for contempt of court. This sparked moves towards a one-day General Strike and the ruling class quickly found a legal loophole to free the dockers within days. Within a few years, the unions compelled a Labour government to abolish the anti-union laws.

How things have changed! New Labour has retained virtually all the anti-union legislation passed by Thatcher. Former prime minister Tony Blair congratulated himself for declaring that Britain had the most draconian anti-union laws in Europe. And the union leaders have done nothing in 12 years of New Labour to change the position. Yet rank and file trade unionists like those who staged “unofficial” walkouts at the Lindsey oil refinery have demonstrated that the anti-union laws quickly disintegrate in the face of mass defiance.

The moral of this tale is that in order to defend jobs, wages and conditions in the midst of a capitalist slump, serious, dedicated, principled leaders, who are not frightened of the state, are absolutely essential. Hot air and bluster are well past their use-by date.

Paul Feldman
Communications editor

A way forward for BA cabin staff

The overwhelming vote for strike action by British Airways cabin staff, scheduled to start next week, has predictably drawn outrage from the media. Accusations range from “madness” (Daily Mail), to “suicidal” (Daily Telegraph) to workers “cheering the destruction of their own livelihoods (The Sun).

What has got the right-wing press so angry is that a well-organised group of workers is determined to protect jobs and decent wages built up over decades against unilateral changes to their contacts imposed by BA management. These cut staff numbers on flights, freeze pay and bring in even worse conditions for new entrants. No wonder that on an 80% turnout, the 13,500 cabin staff voted by more than nine to one for strike action.

But that is not what is supposed to happen at a time of economic recession and when your employer is in serious financial difficulties. Workers are supposed to identify their interests with those of the boss in a bid to keep the company going. As the Torygraph puts it: “This recession has seen many industries and workforces respond with great maturity – pay cuts, extended production breaks, part-time working – to keep companies going and protect jobs. Yet here we have BA cabin crew seemingly prepared to send their company to the wall in defence of their privileges.”

Privileges? What, an average wage of £29,000 and a job? Hardly “privileges” compared to say bankers who are back to massive bonus payouts courtesy of the taxpayer who has funded massive bailouts . Or compared, say, to BA chief executive Willie Walsh, who is on a “basic” salary of £735,000 a year. Let’s hope he can get by on that modest sum without having to scrimp and scrape.

BA lost £401m in the last financial year, and is set to lose even more in the current year. Its losses are thought to be around £1,000 per minute. BA announced earlier in the day that its pension fund deficit had increased by 75% in the past three years to £3.7bn.

The airline is in a financial crisis partly because of the recession and partly as a result of low-cost airlines taking its business. In other words, it’s a classic case of capitalist over-supply and ruthless competition that’s the cause of BA’s plight and a few workers taking a pay cut or working harder won’t affect that situation one jot.

Management is talking about a “fight to the finish” with cabin staff, who are in the Unite union and there is a sense of provocation in how the contract changes were introduced without agreement. Whether the union leaders are up to more than using the strike vote as a bargaining chip to reach a rotten compromise is another question.

BA is a prime example of the bankruptcy of the capitalist business model. The airline industry in particular is unsustainable, economically as well as ecologically. Now it has to drastically reduce capacity at the expense of the workforce in order to survive before it can find a way to “return to growth” and inflict further damage on the environment.

Britain’s transport infrastructure cannot be left in the hands of profit-obsessed shareholders and executives. BA workers should make a leap from defensive trade union action to reach out to other sections of workers hit by the crisis. They should seek to unite with those in other airlines and transport industries and draw up plans for the democratic ownership and control of the global travel infrastructure.

If they did that, BA workers would kick-start a movement that would be the basis for creating a sustainable, integrated transport system rather than one where competition prevails at the expense of jobs, passengers and the environment.

Paul Feldman
Communications editor