End ban on hiring strike breakers
Share
Following British Airways workers’ ‘yes’ vote on strike action, think tank Progressive Vision has called for an end to a ban on hiring replacement agency workers during industrial action.
Yesterday 80.7% of Unite union members, who returned their ballot forms, voted yes to industrial action on a 78.7% turnout.
Shane Frith, director of Progressive Vision, says the action by BA staff further demonstrates the need for radical amendments to labour relations laws to stop trade unions from holding the nation’s economy hostage.
Frith says: “Such an amendment does nothing to restrict the rights of workers to withdraw their labour. However, if workers exercise this right, why should employers have their rights restricted by preventing them from hiring willing workers?
“Britain’s economy and competitiveness is in tatters. They only way the nation can return to true prosperity is to improve productivity and this will not be achieved with trade unions resisting much needed reforms and crippling vital businesses.”
Most popular
Most commented
Readers' comments (5)
JOHN HILL | Tue, 23 Feb 2010 11:55 am
UNITE MEMBERS WILL NOT BE HAPPY UNTIL BRITISH AIRWAYS HAS FOLDED. CABIN STAFF ARE WELL PAID. CONDITIONS AND PERKS ARE AMONG THE BEST OF ANY AIRLINE. THIS IS JUST GREED ON THEIR BEHALF AND WILL ONLY COME TO THEIR SENSES WHEN THEY ARE UNEMPLOYED. I HOPE B.A PASSENGERS VOICE THEIR OPINION WHEN FLYING WITH THEM.
JOHN HILL
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Chris Platts | Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:21 pm
I fully agree. Before we know it we won't have a country that is worth investing in. The damage caused by the workers strikes puts the business at far greater risk of failure and thus the actual workers jobs!!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
David Beechey-Whelan | Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:24 pm
This would be a very bad idea indeed, as it takes away the strength and power of those going on strike for good legitimate reasons.
Once you allow companies to do this, what is to stop very bad companies from mistreating employees, in the full knowledge that they can simply get temps elsewhere.
And remember this, what can happen to others today can happen to you tomorrow.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Dan | Tue, 23 Feb 2010 12:38 pm
It is exactly this kind of modern-thinking that the UK needs if it is to maintain one of the world's most flexible labout markets.
I am all for workers rights - indeed, I have championed them - but unions have a tendency to be over-zealous, and often have too much leeway when it comes to dictating the course of events where employers are concerned.
How can a representative body be pro-rights regarding workers but so often anti-rights where employers are concerned?
All too often, the campaigns supported - and sometimes initiated by - unions result in massive disruption to businesses, obstructing employers from providing whatever service they may offer their customers.
Where this situation is perpetuated by opposition from unions (even when the opposition is well-meaning), it can cause businesses to lose custom. In some ciscumstance, this causes irrecoverable financial damage. Where there is irrecoverable financial damage, redundancies are sure to follow, thereby rendering all actions by the union involved utterly futile and counterproductive.
Shane Frith and the Progressive Vision think tank are, refreshingly, suggesting a viable alternative to an outmoded union regime which has proved time and again to be damaging not only to employers but also to the economy as a whole.
I for one wish them success in realising their vision!
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment
Charlie D | Tue, 2 Mar 2010 3:14 pm
It's quite Darwinian when workers strike - ultimately they destroy their firm and everything they depend on.
With BA staff earning double the salary of their nearest rivals and the company struggling to make profit in any period the power of the cabin staff is clearly too high. The company could be bust in five years, and then the cabin staff will be too old get jobs (and unwanted) by rivals such as Virgin.
Whilst union membership is in permanent decline for this reason, they shouldn't be allowed to destroy the country on their way out. A law to strengthen the hand of business should be welcomed.
Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment