Are you a rock-dweller, dear reader? No? I ask because one would surely need to be living beneath the shady confines of a rock to have missed the recent, prickly proposition made by British Airways to it’s staff. It seems that BA has asked that some 30,000 of their employees work for free for up to one month, or to take (up to) one month’s unpaid leave. A most peculiar offer, I think you’ll agree, but a tactic that does see some action from time to time.
Many rather gargantuan US companies have filed Chapter 11 in recent months - laying waste to literally tens of thousands of jobs. British Airways, however, is trying (it would seem) to avoid such draconian measures. If indeed this is a decision motivated (at least in part) by an effort to avoid the wholesale firing of employees, I must applaud them for their effort. Perhaps, by at least giving staff that option, BA can avoid the same fate as General Motors and Chrysler.
There has been, as there often is, an outspoken public response to this rather bold proposition - responses both supportive and critical. It is heartening, however, to see that whichever side people fall on, the great majority are keeping their commentaries civil in response to BA’s request. It seems that, whilst some see it as a perfectly justifiable means for BA to avoid sinking further into the financial red, others believe that employees should not be the first asked to sacrifice their salaries - that, in fact, it ought to be shareholders who shoulder the short-term burden. Either way the choice is not easy, but this blogger feels that the mass laying off of employees is a fate worth avoiding - even if it does result in some pretty hairy, high-maintenance juggling acts.
Another shiny tidbit that caught my eye, dear reader, and of a similar vein, was the announcement out of the US by President Barack Obama concerning his new proposed financial regulatory measures. This is a much more complex system than the last, but one that inspires at least a little optimism in this humble writer. Overall the reaction has been a very mixed one (isn’t it always?), but there does seem to be a generally positive consensus. I don’t think that anyone, however, expects this to be an easy sector to regulate effectively at this point - no matter what the course taken.
It occurs to me that British Airway’s rather desperate proposal to it’s staff, and the new regulation system to be (one hopes) launched in the US soon, are in a sense, not wholly dissimilar. Both (at least ostensibly) concern themselves with the people involved, and not just the figures. BA doesn’t want to see it’s staff lose their jobs, and are trying to avoid that outcome. Likewise, Obama’s government has developed these new regulations with an eye to protecting customers, and not allowing them to be left out in the cold as they were last time. There is absolutely no question that the current economic situation is going to take a great deal of time to fully overcome - and while big business like British Airways needs to resort to such measures, there’s proof - but I’m hoping that such steps will serve to foster a new sense of global financial responsibility, both at home and abroad.
I remain, with a wary eye on the grumpy stewardess,
Morgan D.