Business | Aviation
Sponsored By
On the picket line
Apart from the pre-flight safety routine, the one predictable bet in aviation is labour difficulties at airlines. At British Airways, the challenge is particularly acute because of the heavily-unionised workforce and an urgent corporate drive to reduce employee costs.
- Financial Times
- Published: 00:00 January 22, 2007
Apart from the pre-flight safety routine, the one predictable bet in aviation is labour difficulties at airlines. At British Airways, the challenge is particularly acute because of the heavily-unionised workforce and an urgent corporate drive to reduce employee costs.
Moreover, BA operates in a sector that is peculiarly vulnerable to industrial action: the profit lost in every flight cancelled can never be regained.
Yet the recent vote by cabin crew in favour of taking strike action is in a different class from the unofficial disruptions that can turn Heathrow into a summer nightmare.
Finding a way through will be a critical test of the management's ability to introduce the changes the company desperately needs.
The vote points to an industrial relations malaise at BA in two ways. In order to reach this point, the normal run of processes for settling staff issues must have failed, either because of heavy-handed management or longstanding local union intransigence or both.
Certainly, the scale of support for action was overwhelming. Turnout in the postal ballot was 80 per cent, and the majority of those in favour of strike action was 96.1 per cent. Such disaffection among staff who represent the public face of the airline for passengers is a warning shot to management.
Of all the grievances cited by cabin crew, the one where there seems most scope for a sensible agreement is the arrangement for sickness absences. A new policy, introduced for cabin staff from October 2005 and accompanied by a one-off payment of £1000, has been enforced so strictly that some staff have said they are afraid to call in sick even when they are ill. On the other hand, BA rightly argues that attendance levels were unacceptably low.
BA cannot, therefore, be reasonably asked to unpick the deal. To do so would threaten any working practice reforms already implemented. It would also undermine talks underway about changing working practices of ground staff when BA moves into Terminal 5 at Heathrow in 2008. The company is wise to hold out the promise to review how the sick leave policy has been interpreted. A draconian approach may bring higher savings in the short term, but will cost more in damaged morale and greater staff turnover.
The other elements in the dispute, from pensions reforms to pay grades, would also probably have benefited from more adroit handling, but only up to a point. The underlying need to plug the company's pensions deficit and to cut costs further is indisputable. The longer it takes to resolve them, the worse BA's position becomes.
Willie Walsh, who became BA chief executive in September 2005, arrived with a reputation from his time at Aer Lingus for being able to execute tough cost-cutting plans. At BA, he must combine the right to manage with the ability to convince all employees of the need for reform. Otherwise, the airline is entering turbulent times.
Share this article
More from Aviation
More from Business
Popular in Business
Business Editor's choice
-
Credit swaps... a fair trade
Would you swap an unbuilt unit at the Lagoons for an apartment at JBR?
-
New face of safety
Volvo reveals a sleeker S60, ready to hit the roads early next year
-
When the Web lives worldwide
Cutting-edge firms are building massive data facilities all over the globe
-
Budget travel
Airlines in the region
Take a pictorial look at some of the budget airlines in GCC
