BA - STRIKE UPDATE
UNITE REPORT: T5 is a ghost town. Walsh’s plans a disaster for the company. One of Britian’s most important companies brought low by incompetent leadership hell bent on union busting. He is told by Unite assistant secretary Len McCluskey, “This is Britain not Burma.”
With 80 percent of cabin crew standing strong on the first day of the BA stoppage, Unite has issued an update of how the strike is biting so far, which reveals that BA’s much-vaunted contingencies plans are failing:
- BA has managed to fly only one third of its normal scheduled departures;
- BA’s flagship terminal T5 is a ghost town as passengers stay away;
- The first long haul BA flight out (10am) was to Abu Dhabi and crewed by 6 pilots and 2 international cabin crew;
- From 12.20pm until 2.30pm only 10 flights departed from Heathrow, normally there would be 50 during the same period; of the 10 which left, 8 flights were chartered and only 2 were BA flights;
- By lunchtime today, 85 BA planes were parked at Heathrow - consuming the maximum parking space allowed for BA aircraft;
- 20 more planes had been moved to Cardiff to be parked, and a further 20 flown to Shannon, in western Ireland, to sit out the strike;
- By 2pm, only one flight to JFK airport had departed - normally there are five;
- At Gatwick, one third of flights have failed to take off;
- BA planes are taking off empty, save for cargo, as BA stretches efforts to make it seem it is functioning;
- On average only 14 passengers are travelling on those flights which are taking off, far short of capacity;
- 2 strike-breaking chartered flights did not depart because of technical problems;
- That by mid-morning around 113 BA passengers had complained about the poor quality of food on-board the flights; and
- That there are reports of no food on in-bound flights from Germany and Italy.
from the Communist Party
It is very important for us to get the message out that the strike is hurting the bosses. If you read the mainstream press you get the impression that the strike is hardly supported and that BA has thousands of scabs.
Solidarity with this strike is essential, the scathing attacks on the BA workers represent a campaign to attack the very right to strike.
Comment by George W — 21 March, 2010 @ 11:41 am
Stand strong. Fight for everything you deserve. We in the US are by your side.
Comment by Chris — 21 March, 2010 @ 11:58 am
Please see the Sunday Telegraph Article below.
When the Torygraph and the scum bag hack Andrew Gilligan have to stoop to red baiting and smear you know they are really scared of McCluskey becoming General Secretary and of a strong and organised Unite.
It is clearly obvious that now is no time for sectarianism and a split left vote as the stakes are to high and that the establishment would much rather have the right wing Bayliss. It is time for Hicks to do the right thing and pull out from being a candidate as a vote for Hicks (who can not and will not win) will only help Bayliss.
I was also at the BA rally yesterday and the Cabin Crew were in good spirits and dispite Willie Walsh’s best effort to use scab pilots only one BA plane flew out of Heathrow yesterday and they had to rely on charter companies to operate any of their service. There was plane after BA plane parked up and going no where.
It is clear that Walsh just wants to smash BASSA/UNITE and would rather cost BA hundreds of millions in doing this and damage the reputation of the company than negotiate a settlement.
British Airways strike: The rise of ‘Red’ Len McCluskey
When Len McCluskey, assistant general secretary of the Unite trade union in charge of the British Airways dispute, announced 12 days of Christmas strikes last year, he told reporters that he did so with a “heavy heart”.
By Andrew Gilligan
Published: 7:15AM GMT 20 Mar 2010
Len McCluskey: He appears, on the surface, an almost perfect throwback, with a tub-thumping vocabulary of class-war rhetoric and Seventies industrial relations clichés. Photo: GETTY An hour beforehand, in a private rally of union members, he had not, to be blunt, looked all that sorrowful.
Leaked YouTube footage of the meeting, at the Sandown Park racecourse, shows a whooping and cheering hall of activists, on their feet to applaud an exultant Mr McCluskey.
Related Articles
British Airways claims victory on first day of strike
Unite and BA at ‘war’ as strike disrupts flights
British Airways strike inflicts travel misery
Christmas post will be delivered as workers call off strike
British Airways talks with unions break down
BA strike threat increases”That is an incredible response for strike action, one of the highest I’ve ever been involved in,” he beamed. “And believe you me, I’ve been involved in lots of strikes!”
Thanks to the courts, that particular strike never flew – but Mr McCluskey’s boast is quite true. He may, indeed, have been involved in more disputes than any other serving union leader in Britain.
And yesterday, as he finally led the BA cabin crew on to the picket lines, Mr McCluskey’s latest walkout seemed certain to bring this fascinating, but almost unknown, firebrand to a wholly new level of public attention.
He appears, on the surface, an almost perfect throwback, with a tub-thumping vocabulary of class-war rhetoric and Seventies industrial relations clichés.
Recently, he even accused one set of managers of behaving like “Pontius Pilate”.
“His speeches should qualify for a grant from the Heritage Lottery Foundation,” snipes one Blairite MP.
“Capitalism has failed,” said Mr McCluskey last year. The state, he said, should “intervene where necessary through industry control and ownership”.
He says: “We are seeing a mood among workers to fight, and the leadership of our movement must give them the confidence to resist.
“This is not the time to cower and batten down the hatches. Organised labour must be strong to fight back against the ruling elite.”
In a speech at the Durham Miners’ Gala last summer, he said: “We cannot secure our demands through the present system, based on the dominance of private ownership … Let me leave you with the words of Ché Guevara.
“When asked how long must the struggle continue, he replied: ‘Hasta la victoria siempre’ – until the final victory.”
Continuing the Ché theme, he recently questioned why the “achievements” of Cuba and Venezuela were not more widely publicised. “The answer of course is the fear of the good example,” he said.
“If socialism can be seen to be delivering for the peoples of Cuba and Venezuela, where does that leave neoliberalism? Dead in the water!”
But the real significance of Mr McCluskey is that in three months’ time, he will stand for the top job in Unite.
He is already the favourite. If the BA dispute goes well for him, it will almost certainly propel Len McCluskey into the most powerful post in British trade unionism.
And that has implications not just for British Airways, but perhaps also for Britain. Unite is the Labour Party’s biggest donor, giving a quarter of its income, saving it from bankruptcy, and claiming half the Parliamentary Labour Party as members of its parliamentary group.
Whether Labour wins or loses the election, Unite will have great influence on its direction and leadership. In his manifesto for the top job, Mr McCluskey has made it clear how that influence will be exercised.
“I will set out a clear strategy designed to reconstruct the Labour Party so that it speaks with our voice and is committed to our values,” he says.
He has spoken of “reclaiming the Labour Party for our class”, and told the Morning Star that he would, in the paper’s words, “finance Unite members to take over constituency Labour Parties”.
The union grouping Mr McCluskey represents, United Left, says its purpose is the “achievement of a socialist economic, social and political system, by means of both parliamentary and extra-parliamentary approaches”.
Of course, the power of the unions in general has probably never been less – and Unite, moreover, is a notoriously disunited union, currently run by the Jack Lemmon- Walther Matthau double act of two “joint general secretaries”, Derek Simpson and Tony Woodley, who are barely on speaking terms.
But Mr McCluskey, if he wins, will be Unite’s first sole general secretary, in charge of the whole union.
Unite – a recent merger of five already-large unions – exercises a block vote in Labour of historically-unprecedented proportions.
And the particular circumstances after May could end up giving Mr McCluskey and his colleagues real power to “reconstruct” Labour.
If the party is defeated – or even if it loses its Commons majority – there will probably be a leadership contest. Individual MPs will count far more than they do at present.
And Unite has been organising furiously to place its candidates in Labour seats.
At a United Left meeting last weekend, Graham Stephenson, a senior member of Mr McCluskey’s campaign team, said: “The [Unite] General Secretary election may well prove more important [for the future direction of the labour movement] than the general election itself.”
Mr McCluskey has said that the Unite election “will shape the future of the British labour movement for many years”.
Mr McCluskey himself was shaped by his formative years in Liverpool. Born in 1950 and a union activist since 1968, he worked from his teens for the Mersey Docks and Harbour Company.
“I was very much a child of the 60s, revolution was in the air. I led lots of strikes,” he recalled fondly.
“A full-time official of Unite’s predecessor, the Transport & General Worker’s Union, since 1979, he became a leading ally of the far-Left Militant Tendency which took over Liverpool in the early Eighties.
“I certainly supported Militant, and [Militant leaders] Derek [Hatton] and Tony [Mulhearn] were close friends,” he told the Liverpool Echo last year.
“I would never ever deny that or condemn them, but I was never a member. I believe on the chief issues they were right.”
Moving down to London as a national official, he was arrested as part of a police inquiry into T&G ballot rigging, but released without charge.
In 1994, he hit the tabloids after being granted a cut-rate £90,000 T&G loan to set up with his mistress after he walked out on his wife and son.
In the BA cabin crew dispute, some have drawn a contrast between Liverpool’s “Red Len” and his blazered, chino-wearing, quintessentially Middle English shock troops.
Actually, compared with the BA staff, it is Mr McCluskey who may be the moderate. But it is they who hold his fate, perhaps Labour’s fate, and perhaps even more than that, in their hands.
Because this week’s strike is about far more than one airline.
It is a preview of battles ahead. BA is merely the first of many big British institutions caught between the need for economies in a cash-strapped world – and the resistance of workforces that, quite understandably, want to keep things much the way they are.
What’s happening at Heathrow now will almost certainly be repeated often in the next few years – especially in the public sector, with ministers in the BA role, demanding pay and job cuts, and the workers out on strike.
And on the other side of the picket line, more often than not, will be Len McCluskey.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 12:20 pm
Vote Jerry Hicks!
Comment by Derek Wall — 21 March, 2010 @ 12:27 pm
The full force of the right-wing media, especially the BBC are being brought to bear against the strike. Ignoring the just and modest case of the BA staff, the employers represented by the reactionary Willie Walsh and their political and media backers are resurecting red “scares”, vilifying UNITE and the trade unions in general. This is not surprising because they recognise the organised union movement as the greatest threat to their profit grabbing policies. Support UNITE and the BA workers, call upon the TUC to give the BA staff 100% backing, and to demand the government pressures BA into giving a just settlement to BA cabin crews.
Comment by Alfie — 21 March, 2010 @ 12:36 pm
It does seem as if the strike started well, which is good news for us all. Has anyone here managed to get down to a picket line as yet?
Comment by KrisS — 21 March, 2010 @ 12:36 pm
I suspect Byers and Hewitt might be converting to Islam shortly. Stop the Dispatches witch hunt against these brave comrades!
Comment by Avocado Da Vinci — 21 March, 2010 @ 12:43 pm
#4 Yes Derek vote Jerry Hicks and help Bayliss!
If only Derek for once in his life could stretch his limited intellect and go beyond his usual infantile one liners. Being a sectarian Derek, only damages the cause of the organised working class but i suppose when you are a member of the bourgeois green party then it is probably a good idea to try and split the organised working class.
Hicks should really do the right thing and pull out of the race.
Victory to the BA Cabin Crew !
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 1:08 pm
Why is it assumed Hicks should pull out in favour of McCluskey?
Hicks did well in the previous Gen Sec election while McCluskey has the backing of United Left. McCluskey clearly has serious backing within the activists of the union while Hicks has proven he can win high support from the membership. I can’t see why either candidate should automatically withdraw in favour of the other.
Didn’t the Amicus side of the United Left back a right-wing candidate against Hicks? and don’t they have an appalling record on the NEC? isn’t their internal regime a stalinist joke?
Comment by Ian Croft — 21 March, 2010 @ 1:59 pm
last time the lie was that Jerry Hicks would let in the right, the Brownite offical Unite will pull out all the stops to stop a socialist.
Any lie will do to stop the left….no change!
Comment by Derek Wall — 21 March, 2010 @ 2:02 pm
#8 Vote Hicks get Coyne
Vote Hicks get Bayliss!
Vote Hicks get a plague of locusts and a dose of the clap!!
Errr Dohhh!!!
Comment by Anonymous — 21 March, 2010 @ 2:03 pm
Hooray …let’s hope the Cabin Crew win and bring down BA - that’ll be a further 40000 on the dole and half the wages of UK based cabin crew ( ie Virgin, Easyjet, Rtanair, BMI etc ) overnight - power to the people !
Comment by Bill — 21 March, 2010 @ 2:05 pm
The agressive attitude of some supporters of McCluskey on this blog is unlikely to convince wavering members to back him. Typical tankie politics!
Comment by ECOLEFTY — 21 March, 2010 @ 3:06 pm
Where is the agressive attitude you talk about?
On the contrary, if supporters of Hicks can only come up with the same red-scare smears (tankie, Stalinist….etc)that bosses regularly use against trade unionists, wavering members will get the impression that you are meerly playing a game of posture politics.
Union members want a figure who has a proven record of standing up for its members, Len McCluskey is the perfect person for the job. It is interesting, however, that while the mainstream press are demonising McCluskey with McCarthyite language-’red’..etc-The same callow smears are being reproduced by supposed leftists.
Comment by George W — 21 March, 2010 @ 3:45 pm
@Derek
No one wants a split vote. Thats what happens when jerry stands.
he might have done well last year but last year 700′000 TGWU members didnt take part. Jerry will get the same vote as last year, but he wont win.
Comment by A Marxist Socialist — 21 March, 2010 @ 4:08 pm
Im not agressive to Jerry
On the contrary I quite like the guy.
But I will though be campaigning for Len.
The Telegaraph article, pasted by Doh, in my view gives a flavour why the left have to support Len
Comment by A Marxist Socialist — 21 March, 2010 @ 4:11 pm
How is Jerry standing splitting the vote but Len standing isn’t splitting the vote?
Comment by Ian Croft — 21 March, 2010 @ 4:41 pm
#17 Ian what you conveniently forget is that Len McCluskey won the nomination from the only organised left organisation in Unite - The United Left.
Jerry Hicks put himself forward as a United Left candidate and then did an infantile runner at the hustings when he realised he couldn’t win and wouldn’t be held to the principled and non sectarian position of not standing against the candidate that did win.
What left organisation in Unite norminated Jerry Hicks? As he merry little band of ultra left supporters never get around to answering any of the questions put to them i’ll take the liberty to answer it for you - None!
Unite doesn’t need a sectarian to split the left vote and its membership doesn’t need a leader who does a runner when the heat is on. I know who BA Cabin Crew would rather have as their leader and that is Len McCluskey.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:02 pm
Much as it pains me to admit it NIck Cohen makes some good points in his column today on Unite’s spectacular mishandling of the BA Cabin crews dispute.
See http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/mar/21/nick-cohen-unite-labour
Get Woodley, Simpson, McLuskey and outer Unite officials out of the TV and radio studios. Put the hapless Whelan out the picture too.
Get the air stewardesses and the cabin stewards fronting ALL interviews. Its hard to imagine a more middle-Englandler workforce. It would be frankly impossible for any media outlet to picture them as trade union militants. World renowned for their quality of service this intensely loyal group of professionals have voted for industrial action by a massive margin, completely alienated by a union-busting obsessed management.
Once again a trade union has followed old tactics that no longer work. Get the stewardesses and steards in the picture and BA would be rapidly isolated. And if they threaten victimisation we’ve got ‘em bang to rights on the free speech argument.
Its so obvious, why on earth hasn’t it occurred to Unite? Answers on the back of a postcard to the union’s political director, the hapless Whelan.
Mark P
Comment by Mark P — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:06 pm
Doh!- at last some positive arguments for Len instead of the sectarian negative stuff against Jerry and his supporters.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:07 pm
#18 Doh! You couldn’t keep it up long enough for me to make my comment #20
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:10 pm
Doh! Which left organisation in Unite nominated Jerry?
What does it matter?
Explain where “left organisations” fit into the democratic constitutional structures of Unite or any other union.
What matters are branches, workplaces and individual members.
This is absolutely bizarre.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:14 pm
Yo to all 6 of the South West Massive,
Let’s make it clear Hicks after using the Queens over lord to force a pointless election and waste 1 million pounds of Unite members money didn’t do well - he lost and Derek Simpson retained the position of joint GS for another year.
Also the T&G Section of UNITE who were against this election did not vote in it and this years election for a single GS for the whole of Unite will mean that Hicks can’t win and won’t win.
I am not saying vote Hicks and get Bayliss what i am saying is a vote for Hicks means splitting the left vote and helping Bayliss.
If you took the time to get over your delusion and for once in your life didn’t take a sectarian position you would see that Hicks needs to pull out of the race for GS of UNITE.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:17 pm
#23 Doh! Do you find in your life generally that abusing people and making smart arse insults when they don’t do what you want is a good way of engaging with them?
Maybe I’m peculiar but my experience is rather different.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:26 pm
#19 Mark P
When you start quoting and say that Nick Cohen is right you know you are of the right and more to the point usually wrong.
You obviously know nothing about the dispute and how well organised the Bassa membership is and how strong the shop stewards are and how they lead and direct the Unite leadership.
You also don’t know that Willie Walsh doesn’t want to resolve the dispute and would rather waste millions of pounds trying to destroy BASSA.
Charlie Whelan has got nothing to do with the BA dispute, you are just being sucked in to the conservative party propoganda you fool.
And as for BA members speaking to the press most will only do so if they are in disquise because BA have prohibited any employee without the expressed permission of BA speaking to the media. They know they will be sacked if they do so and you obviously know nothing about employment law and using the the freedom of speech angle just makes you look like a cretin.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:30 pm
#20 It is absolutely bizarre that you think that organised groups/factions that involve members, branches and across regions have no place in trade unions.
Most trade unions have a broad left organisation operating in their union and you are frankly being designious to try to suggest overwise.
If the United Left was of no consequence and wasn’t seen as having a legitmate and democratic mandate why did Hicks put himself forward as a United Left candidate?
I know this is a bit inconvenient to Hicks and his ultra left supporters but you appear unable and unwilling to answer this question.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:39 pm
“the only organised left organisation in Unite - The United Left”
Whose Amicus side nominated a right-wing candidate in the last Gen Sec election. Hicks came a good second without their support.
Why does a rather dubious United Left mean more than the actual votes of members. Hicks can prove he can get them. McLuskley hasn’t.
So if anyone is splitting the vote it is Len and the UL.
Comment by Ian Croft — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:44 pm
25. Doh! by name, and nature by the look of it.
Why don’t to actually read what I wrote. A union-busting operation at BA is set on smashing Unite. I both want the BA Cabin Crews to win and believe they can win.
But whether by design or accident Unite are making Woodley, McLuskey, the hapless Whelan and other full-time officials the face of the strike. This is allowing it to be represented as a cabal of hard left union militants. Cabin Crews are nothing of the sort, they are united in defending the high quality service they provide thats al. Get the stewardesses and stewards in the TV and radio studios and Willie Walsh will be revealed as the vindictive bustard he clearly is.
Of course there is the threat of victimisatoon but BAs will pursue this in any case. Get the stewardesses and stewards to ‘go public’, let BA fall into the trap of victimising them and being revealed not only as vindictive union busters but enemies of free speech.
Pursue it as simply Unite vs BA and the cabin crews will lose. I want them to win, if they lose it will unleash a wave of similar union busting operations. Put forward the air stewardesses and stewards as the face of the dispute and BA will be marginalised and defeated.
Of course if you’re not interested in public opinion or believe it can never be influenced none of this matters and certain defeat beckons.
Simple choice Unite, Woodley et al front the dispute lose, air stewardesses and stewards do with Unite in support win.
Mark P
Comment by Mark P — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:53 pm
# 27
I know the ultra left Hicks supporters in UNITE love to live in some kind of sureal la la land where the truth should never get in the way of a good bed time story.
For the record:
The United Left of Unite didn’t support a right wing candidate or any candidate in the last UNITE general sectary election and this was due to one blindly obvious reason.
The United Left was not in existence at the time when Hicks used Queen Elizabeth’s trade union over lord to force an election on the amicus section.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 5:55 pm
# Baldrick has a cunning plan.
What’s that get Unite to force loads of Cabin Crew to go openly in front of the camera and then as BA have expressly forbidden them to do so we can all watch as BA first suspend them and then legal dismiss them all.
Thats a great one Baldrick dozens legally sacked and a glorious defeat. Well then at least the ultra left can then cry even more of the evil bureaucrats selling out the members and leaving them hanging out to dry.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:04 pm
in response to #27
Sorry i need to add a correction to my #29 post
There were two reasons……..
The United Left of Unite didn’t support a right wing candidate or any candidate in the last UNITE general sectary election and this was due to two blindly obvious reasons.
1. The United Left was not in existence at the time when Hicks used Queen Elizabeth’s trade union over lord to force an election on the amicus section.
2. It was not a Unite General Secretary election but a amicus section GS election so Len McCluskey could not stand and he certainly wouldn’t have supported wasting 1 million of members money on some ego fuelled sectarian folly.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:10 pm
@28
Do you understand Trade Disputes and Strikes?
Are you a syndicalist?
Comment by A Marxist Socialist — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:11 pm
If only the left organizations inside the unions did actually represent the membership rather than the full time officers. I suspect Doh! has a vested interest here.
The United left nominations meeting that Doh! talks about was rigged. There were known to be over 100 full time officers at the meeting (most of whom were previously not members of the United Left), there was a new membership policy that included phoning members to tell them not ot bother coming as they would not be allowd in, there were goons on the door and then Hicks and his supporters were not allowed to speak or vote in the debate by ruling of the chair.
Anyone who has been in a broad left in a union will recognize these ‘hustings’ for what they are - an attempt to stitch up the slate in favour of the full timer’s choice.
The saving grace of this is that most of the members including the TGWU that Doh! places such faith in, have never heard of the United Left because it is a slate machine for union elections that doesn’t even attempt to organize among members.
Mark P is right that the cabin crews should be arguing their case on TV and radio rather than the stuffed shirts. Another reason to back Jerry.
Comment by Nadia Chern — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:20 pm
@33
‘The United left nominations meeting that Doh! talks about was rigged. There were known to be over 100 full time officers at the meeting (most of whom were previously not members of the United Left), there was a new membership policy that included phoning members to tell them not ot bother coming as they would not be allowd in, there were goons on the door and then Hicks and his supporters were not allowed to speak or vote in the debate by ruling of the chair.’
That is shocking if it was indeed true.
Comment by A Marxist Socialist — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:26 pm
Doh! You continue to confirm your screen name is a half-decent decscription too,
Ilm not making a political criricism of either Woodley or McCluskey. For what its worth I reckon they’ve led this dispute very well. Tho’ why any self-respecting trade union would be stupid enough to employ the hapless Whelan as ‘political director’ goodness only knows.
Its about tactics. Make the air stewardesses and stewards the public face of the dispute, reveal Walsh as only interested in union-busting, not in retaining a world-class service. OF COURSE he will seek to victimise those who become this public face, but if theres one thing the British public hate is a bully who seeks to attack free speech. If Walsh makes that mistake he’ll lose.
But if the dispute remains couched as Unite vs BA , the cabin crews will lose.
Can you at least try to recognise the difference between tactics and strategy. The guy who has single handedly destroyed BA, and presided over the disastrous T5 opening cannot believe his luck, instead of Walsh vs the best cabin crews in the world, hugely popular with BA customers, its Walsh vs Woodley, McLuskey et al and day by day he’s winning the battle for public support. A terrible defeat looms when a magnificent victory is in the cabin crews’ grasp.
Mark P
Comment by Mark P — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:45 pm
The main task is to support the BA cabin crew and the Union. A victory would be a nail in the coffin of the reactionary Willie Walsh. It would also encourage other trade unionists to stand up to the employers and government. The trade unions need to show the utmost solidarity with all workers defending their jobs and conditions.
Stupid, silly and diversionary claptrap contained in some ultra-leftist comments above show how juvenile some of these elements are. They serve no purpose except to fudge and confuse a straight forward issue of defending workers and their livelhoods.
Comment by Alfie — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:45 pm
@35
Thats better put than your previous comment.
I actually agree with what you say.
Comment by A Marxist Socialist — 21 March, 2010 @ 6:51 pm
I’d be a little bit more clever than any of you have suggested so far re: Hicks/McClusky…
Yeah, McClusky has been able to use the beaucracy, his position, the BA dispute and the media attention to put himself into the position of being favourite to win. Hicks will get a good vote and personally, I’d say he was the best candidate politically, unless Rob Williams stood… the trade unions would learn a lot by taking a leaf out of the RMT/SP’s book over the last year or so.
However, simply asking Hicks or any other left to stand aside to stop the left vote being split is ridiculous.
Instead, you need to consider the similar position the (awful) Libdems are in re: a hung parliment. If Hicks were to volunteer to stand aside he should do so with conditions. Those conditions should include any or some of the following:
All officals and union staff positions should be elected annually, right of recall for all elected positions, that the gen sec and all positions receive only the average wage of the people they represent, an immediate membership debabte and subseqent ballot on affiliation to the Labour Party or any other party, a proper/active campaign to abolish the anti-trade union laws, an active campaign to link up with other unions in Britain (not just abroad as Unite has only done so far) to campaign against all cuts to jobs and public services, and any other good working class union demands you can care to think of…
By putting forward these conditions for withdrawing from the Unite gen sec election to McClusky the ball would firmly be placed in McClusky’s court. If he failed to agree to these conditions, Hicks will be vindicated to stand as the only candidate to carry out these democratic demands and will reveal to all the politcally flaky figure McClusky can appear to many to be.
If McClusky agrees to these/or similar conditions, I think the left will most certainly have done its job most effectively.
Think comrades, think.
Comment by Pete — 21 March, 2010 @ 8:28 pm
“38. All officals and union staff positions should be elected annually, right of recall for all elected positions…”
This is not a serious consideration. What you call for, Pete, is a trade union in an almost continuous state of elections. Neither officials nor reps would be able to properly learn their trade; union members would have no continuity of leadership; and, such discontinuity would serve only the bosses.
Comment by Irenic — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:02 pm
Reps and Exec members are elected yearly Irenic.
Comment by Ian Croft — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:14 pm
#33 Nadia Chem is back for more infantile bed time stories.
1. The vote was not rigged and was done by a show of hands and tellers counted and re counted the vote.
2. The goons at the door included a woman in her 50’s and man in a wheel chair.
I know Hicks is vertically challenged but he managed to get in and do a stage managed walk out twice. I am not sure you where there, as your version of events is clearly different to every one elses, but maybe the scary goons put you off.
3. There was no membership policy and there is no new membership policy. All that was agreed is that supporters were on submitted regional activists lists from both ex amicus and ex T&G broad lefts and from the newly set up Unite United Left group six weeks before the hustings date. This was done as ex amicus broad left had warned it need to be done to stop the right wing busing people in. It is now clear the ultra left tried to use the same tactics as the right and abuse the democratic process.
3. Name the 100 full time officials? Opps! I bet you can’t because there weren’t 100 there. Also there is no rule against full officers(and neither should there be as they are members of the union) being supporters and activists in the United Left.
4. Hicks and his supporters were allowed to speak (well Hicks would have done if he hadn’t have done a stage managed panto walk out) and vote. The AWL were in attendance and if i remember rightly distributed a leaflet backing Hicks. After his sectarian infantile antics one of its leading members Jim Denham has decided to support Len McCluskey instead. The Socialist Party who were also considering supporting Hicks have decided not to after being disgusted by his antics.
5. Regarding your jibe about stuffed shirts. At the United Left hustings Len McCluskey and Rob Williams were both casually dressed. The only stuffed shirt was Jerry Hicks along with a tie and an ill fitting suit.
After it clearly being explained on here that BA Cabin Crew are not making public statements in the media because they would be suspended and then legally dismissed because BA have prohibited anyone from speaking to the media with out express permission you still state, “that the cabin crews should be arguing their case on TV and radio.”
This just exposes your infantile ultra leftism, lack of any understanding of trade unionism, any concern about members jobs and the nature of capitalism. It shows that this is more than enough reasons to not vote Jerry Hicks, in fact he should pull out of the election of GS.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:17 pm
The idea that anyone could call Mark P ultra-left is absurd and gives an idea where you people are coming from.
#39 Irenc- the CWU seem to manage, and I would respectfully suggest that they (my old union of 15 years) have a rather more impressive record in defending their members recently than Unite, my more recent union.
Albeit I think in spite of the big guns aimed at us we may be close to winning the BA dispute, and we should all be united in welcoming that.
To me the most important issue is the millions we give to a party whose leaders have ganged up with the employer and the right wing press against the union and the BA staff, while maintaining the oppressive anti-union laws.
But then I’m hopelessly ultra-left.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:20 pm
Doh! “I know Hicks is vertically challenged” -You really are one of the most obnoxious offensive people who I have ever come accross in the left/workers movement. You and Jim Denham are well suited.
The sad thing is that you are obviously proud of it.
It’s got nothing to do with Len v Jerry. I suspect that there are a fair few of Len’s supporters who read your shite and feel thoroughly embarrassed to be associated with you.
All I can say is f*** off, and when you get back, f*** off again!
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:30 pm
#38 This is beginning to become like some ultra leftist ground hog day!
Going around and around with infantile populist rhethoric that has nothing to do with organising members and everything to do with servicing and managing decline.
I do like Pete ultra left transitional demands that no one in their right mind would agree to except the ultra left and Hicks. Very clever - not!
Irenic is right yearly elections will only serve the bosses and create, corruption, weakness, no strategy and chaos, but the more I see from the Ultra Left who support Hicks the more I feel that either by design or by accident they end up doing just that, serving the bosses and their cause.
Ripping up contracts of employment is what the worst kind of bosses do and we can say good to the proud equalities agenda that the ex T&G had. Don’t be a woman, BME or gay if Hicks was to become GS because as a lot of members would not vote you in to become a full time official.
Look forward to pale male and stale - just like Hicks.
Think Pete, Think.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:34 pm
Doh! Still revealing the name and the nature are co-existent.
This has NOTHING to do with McLuskey vs Hicks, put that to one side its a distraction.
The BA Cabin Crews are now the target of a vicious union-busting operation.
BA management have already initiated a wave of victimisations of trade union organisers on the airline.
And BA is certainly winning the crucial battle for public opinion, hands down.
Of course those air stewardesses and stewards who became the public face of the dispute would be liable to victimisation, nobody is disputing that. But such victimisation shpuld be challenged not used as an excuse for inaction. Leave Woodley, McClusley, or for that matter Jerry Hicks, as the public face of the dispute and defeat I’m afraid beckons.
Put the air stewardesses and stewards, a hugely popular workforce with anyone who uses BA forward as the dispute’s public face, if BA attack them it is management who become the bullies, the enemies of free speech, the prospect of victory opens up.Of course these brave individuals will need defending, forgive me I thought that was trade unionism, not ultra leftism, was all about?
Any other route leaves BA Management laughing all the way to victory, sooner or later. Quite how this is ultra leftist goodness only knows, Its about tactics that can win, there is no doubt the cabin crews can win, isolate BA management and one of the most unpopular bosses in the country, Willie Walsh of T5 infamy but allowing it to become Woodley vs Walsh is serving victory to BA on a plate. Madness.
Mark P
Comment by Mark P — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:37 pm
#44 That’s right the rank and file members can’t be trusted because they’re all reactionary racist sexist homophopes. But they can keep on giving millions of pounds of their money to the Labour Party so that Gordon Brown can condemn them and side with the employer.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:39 pm
Doh! If McLuskey wants to get a proper hearing on this blog he really needs to ditch you as his spin doctor because you are doing his cause no favours whatsoever.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:42 pm
# 43
Tut tut Armchair no need for vulgarity!
Is vile abuse all you can come up with?
You can take things completely out of context if you want but the amount of abuse, rubbish and down right lies that are posted on here by Hicks supporters is self evident and if you can’t take some light humour being posted back then i suggest you get of your armchair and get a life.
Also i don’t see anything constructive from you about building an effective and organised UNITE from you, just vulgar insults and rhetoric.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:43 pm
“40. Reps and Exec members are elected yearly Irenic.”
Reps and Exec members are elected every two years in Unite, as they were in the T&G.
Comment by Irenic — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:43 pm
“Is vile abuse all you can come up with?” Doh! Do you read what you write??
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:45 pm
Light humour -Doh! aka Chubby Brown
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:51 pm
“42. the CWU seem to manage, and I would respectfully suggest that they (my old union of 15 years) have a rather more impressive record in defending their members recently than Unite, my more recent union.”
Armchair, have any idea how crass and offensive your ‘my-union-is-better-than-your-union’ argument is?
Defending members isn’t just about going on strike; it isn’t always measured in newspaper column inches; nor, how militant you appear. The overwhelming majority of trade union representation is carried out quietly in scores of thousands of workplaces on a daily basis up and down the country.
Thousands of our members are defended successfully every week, for the most part far from the prying eyes of the press.
To say one union defends its members better than another is an insult to those tens of thousands of reps who go about their duty unassumingly; they’re not looking for kudos or fame. However, a bit of respect would probably be appreciated.
Comment by Irenic — 21 March, 2010 @ 9:56 pm
“Reps and Exec members are elected every two years in Unite, as they were in the T&G”
I wasn’t aware of that but don’t most unions have yearly elections?
Comment by Ian Croft — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:08 pm
#52 EC members are elected every *three* years. And Jerry is going for the only Unite election he’s eligible to stand for.
Comment by KevinM — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:21 pm
#53 Yes Irenc I’ve looked at what I wrote and I have to concede that it was over the top and as you say unfair to many Unite reps and officials.
More to the point it didn’t relate to the point I was making which was to support election of full-time officials.
I await any apology to Jerry Hicks from your mate Doh! with baited breath.
Comment by Armchair — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:30 pm
80% of BA cabin crew are on strike and this blog gets bogged down by sectarian wranglings about trade union elections… no wonder the left is so fucked.
Comment by Imatrot — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:42 pm
#45 Mark P
BASSA members are one of the most highly organised group of workers in the country, let alone in Unite. They have there own floor at Unite’s Heathrow office and through their subs employ their own secretary and produce their own magazine and website. There reps are amongst the most experienced.
Bassa members organise meeeting where thousands turn up and it the BASSA lay leadership through their membership who call the shots and direct the Unite leadership. It is they who do not want to rightly put themselves and their members infront of the camera and give BA bosses the pleasure of sacking them.
What is of concern that just as the strike is beginning the ultra left is already playing the blame game and the same old boring script is being dusted down ready to blame the evil bureaucracy for not doing this and that whilst safely sitting in their armchairs.
BASSA members are up against a boss who is hell bent on smashing them and is using all his friends in avaition, (including Ryanair) the political establishment and most of the media to help attack cabin crew.
It would be a good idea to keep quite when you are not involved in the dispute and know nothing about it as all you do is create is a diversion and spread negativity.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:56 pm
#56
Spot on!
Short but sweet it just about sums it all up.
Comment by doh! — 21 March, 2010 @ 10:58 pm
Doh,hows it going me old china.I see you are still obnoxiously belligerent to those who hold opposing views to your liberal union politics.You constantly refer to Jerry Hicks alledgedly costing the union 1 million on sectrarian folly,better than 11 million on political betrayal.
Comment by howard — 21 March, 2010 @ 11:23 pm
#59 I’m a liberal now?
Well Howard, it is not me who is being sucked in to the Conservative Party line about Unite’s Labour Party funding. You go ahead though and fill your boots.
When i last read my history books it was the trade unions that set up the Labour Party and most trade unions are still affiliated to it.
Tory legislation makes trade union members vote on the political levy every 7 years. Members can opt out of it as did lots of BASSA members last week after Brown’s stupid comments. The lay membership decides on affilation to the labour party or not and quite clearly they want to.
I am not setimental towards Labour or under any illusions but what i do know is that the reality is that the Tories are going to be much much worse and are itching to do in the unions with more restrictive legislation.
If there was a party that had any hope of delivering for the working class and also a ground swell of trade unions and the working class calling for a new party id have no problem with it. That time may come but clearly not at the moment and if you want to go off into the wilderness with a SA type mark 5/6/7 then that is up to you.
However Howard lets not get caught up in another diversion.
BA Cabin Crew need our support and the establishment are clearly scared of Len McCluskey.
Comment by Anonymous — 21 March, 2010 @ 11:52 pm
So can it be taken that you will now address the issue,and desist from smearing Jerry Hicks.
Comment by howard — 22 March, 2010 @ 12:51 am
“61. So can it be taken that you will now address the issue,and desist from smearing Jerry Hicks.”
Yes.
But, who’s this Terry Higgs?
Comment by Irenic — 22 March, 2010 @ 1:07 am
62# Terry Higgs?
Your always telling fibs,
But as for MacDuskey,
He’s a bureaucratic flunkey,
You Fawn n’ love ‘em,
but you know where you can shove ‘em!
Comment by Anonymous — 22 March, 2010 @ 1:59 am
Anon, I’d walk away from that bottle now mate; the next dip could prove fatal.
Comment by Irenic — 22 March, 2010 @ 2:04 am
“60. BA Cabin Crew need our support and the establishment are clearly scared of Len McCluskey.”
BA cabin crew is getting our support. Last week I sent emails and text messages out to hundreds of people keeping them informed of events - my information coming stright from the mouth of BASSA’s top lay negotiator.
On Saturday morning I was supporting a BASSA Motion at Unite’s National Political Committee. This week I’ll be available to put out any message my BASSA Comrades wish across our UL and beyond.
Comment by Irenic — 22 March, 2010 @ 2:12 am
On the political levy:
1)
The tories say that the Labour Government is being influenced to sympathise with strikes because of all the money it is getting from the unions.
Many socialists and trade unionists say that it is wrong to be giving large ammounts of undirected money to the Labour Party when a “Labour” government consistently sides with specific employers (such as BA) and employers generally (by maintaining the anti-union laws.
Yes, clearly the same argument?!
2) The political levy and the question of money going to the Labour Party are connected but separate issues, and it is simply wrong to portray those who want to curtail the latter as enemies of the former.
Many of those who agree with the above arguments have nothing to do with what I would describe as ultra-leftism.
Comment by Armchair — 22 March, 2010 @ 1:07 pm
Good luck to all BA cabin crew in this very important dispute.
The scab airlines must be in a dilemma. Should they assist BA to break the strike and impose slave conditions in which case they will be looking at a huge competitor who could put them all out of business, a business they could only make profitable by undercutting BA’s staffing costs in the first place, or do they let the unions win and face the prospect of their own workforces demanding union conditions? Of course every class conscious worker knows which side they are on in this noble dispute.
Comment by David Ellis — 22 March, 2010 @ 2:37 pm
Quote
“…20 more planes had been moved to Cardiff to be parked, and a further 20 flown to Shannon, in western Ireland, to sit out the strike;”
total BA aircraft in Cardiff on 21st March was 8, 2 in hanger, 2 in maintenance bay and 2 in long term storage
that means 2 aircraft had been re-positioned for parking during the industrial action period
I am a Unite union member, and factually incorrect statements like this do not help our cause
Comment by Tony Peters — 22 March, 2010 @ 2:59 pm
Sack them all
Comment by John Jo — 1 April, 2010 @ 4:23 pm
#53
“I wasn’t aware of that but don’t most unions have yearly elections?”
Nearly all elections in GMB are on a four year cycle.
Comment by Andy Newman — 1 April, 2010 @ 4:34 pm
Surely this cant be helping with the financial situation, you’ll end up with no job and it’ll be your own fault. Put up and shut up.
Comment by Stu — 27 May, 2010 @ 1:18 am