Needless to say, some are less that happy with these actions. The reactionary press can be counted on to attack rebel workers. The one thing they hate is uppity wage slaves. But what of the "progressive" media? The Guardian opined that the "action was not only illegal but counterproductive." It could harm BA's competitive position against "cut-price airlines that have a far less sympathetic attitude to the role of unions than BA." In other words, workers should put up with management actions because BA could be replaced by other, nastier, bosses. The sophistry of the "lesser evil" is often invoked to justify the tolerance of injustice. It usually ends up with the "lesser evil" being as bad as those subject to it do not rebel against it!
But rest assured, poor worker, there is hope at hand. There are "proper procedures to deal with" bad management actions. Yes, tolerate them and complain later. And "if the complaints are serious, unions can ballot for a strike and let everyone vote on it." That this will allow BA to make other arrangements and intimidate the workforce is ignored. As is the fact that the injustice will have been implemented, making the struggle against it that bit harder. Moreover, while the paper states that "unions have a fundamental right to strike," they fail to mention workers not in a union or those in one which does not respond to their concerns. And they fail to ask the question of what is the point of striking when you are in a weaker position?
The Guardian, of course, presents itself as the defender of "the consumer" who "have rights as well as employees." Obviously for passengers, this was an inconvenience. Our hearts do go out for them, but we can only hope that they, like us, support the action. Indeed, the paper suggests that "many of [the passengers] were trade unionists themselves." If they were, then they should know that solidarity is strength and have supported the walkout. Most of the passengers affected will be workers, unionised or not. They too will be subject to management impositions and hopefully they will learn the lesson: direct action, standing up for yourself, is the only way to change things.
The effects of "staying in the law" in terms of wages and conditions are obvious. The rich have been getting richer, more workers are working longer hours, having higher stress levels and rising debt. The "customer" is also a worker, whose conditions and wages are adversely affected when bosses thing they can get away with anything without protest. By standing up for themselves, the BA strikers are helping improve the conditions of the "consumer" during the 40 plus hours a week they submit to a boss during the year. It always seems strange that under capitalism the time we spend in work is considered as less important than our "free" time, in spite the fact that the former takes a bigger chunk of our lives that the latter and has a much more serious impact on our lives in terms of health (physical and mental), our relations with others outside work, our attitude to authority as well as living conditions and quality of life.
But then again, the wage slavery at the heart of capitalism is considered as either not an issue or a necessary evil, usually by those not subjected to it.
It argues that "walking out in the manner of the wildcat strikes of the 1960s and 1970s and causing disproportionate damage to innocent people is a course that can only be defended when a serious injustice has occurred. In this case it patently had not." Yet the alternative of "putting up with it" and complaining later has simply not worked.
The real issue is: Do we want a society of moaners who do what they are told or a society of free individuals who stand up for their liberty and dignity?
Put that way, the conclusion is obvious. The BA wildcatters were right and should not only be supported but also imitated!
One last thing. The clocking-on system has been implemented with union approval elsewhere in BA. It is clear that relying on the trade union bureaucracy to defend your interests is not a good idea. A union should be run by its members, from the bottom up. The spirit of the wildcat should infuse the union membership and its struggle. This is not the case today. It is up to every libertarian worker to ensure that this changes.