British Airways wants its staff to work for free, but would you?
By Jason Buckland, Sympatico / MSN Finance
The white flag has officially been raised.
In a move that essentially shouts, “Hey, we’re sorry, we’ve tried everything else!” British Airways has done the unexpected and asked its 40,000 staff to honour their loyalty to the company and work for free as the airline struggles to make it through the recession.
Reeling from a near $750-million loss in 2008, BA’s chief exec Willie Walsh said he will work without pay next month and hopes the airline’s employees might follow suit and volunteer for up to four weeks of unpaid shifts in July.
On its surface, of course, this is ridiculous. Walsh, who makes an unknown yet God-knows-how-many-pounds salary, can afford to take the hit and could probably use a bit of good press as BA’s board of directors decides the fate of a man who – bad economy and all – led the company into a record deficit.
Obviously the rest of BA’s staff, while earning a respectable average salary of about $55,000, cannot.
Yet the proposition, no matter how arrogant, does raise an interesting hypothetical. If you knew your company was struggling, would you be willing to sacrifice a few weeks pay if it meant a better shot of holding onto your job down the road?
I think a good number of us, after the initial recoil, would swallow hard and volunteer our time. See, that’s the thing about people; for the most part, we’re genuinely loyal to those who treat us right and – if it’s the difference between a shot at maintaining a well-paying job or not – many of us would probably make the sacrifice with a smile.
But here’s where BA’s idea fails. While Walsh is smart (he realizes no one can do with income stopping cold for a month and has offered to deduct the salary over a period of half a year), his hands might be tied with the whole loyalty thing.
The airline is thought to be seeking as many as 4,000 upcoming job cuts, so you’d think it’d be a fair compromise to allow staff to work for free in order to better position themselves in the company come lay-off time. That seems like the logical play, right?
Well, BA has vehemently denied this is the case, refusing to give preference to those who volunteer their services for the good of the company should the airline be forced to cut back staff.
So if I’m a young BA worker, then, what exactly is my motivation to bust my ass without pay to help secure the future of the company if it’s likely seniority will rule when staff is ultimately trimmed?
I know there are union factors at play and I don’t mean to turn this into a union vs. non-union debate, but this sure seems like an area where it would be in BA’s best interests to intervene and reward those willing to show their outright loyalty to the company.
And I suppose it’s under that premise that the BA request to its staff might not be all that ludicrous, after all. You’re telling me that, if their prospects of survival weren’t terminated from the beginning, thousands of auto workers or newspaper staff wouldn’t have jumped at the chance to take a cut in pay last year if they thought it might leave their company better suited to keep them employed in the future?
Is it that absurd to suggest, in the right setting, this strategy might have been able to save a few jobs somewhere along the line?
Posted by: Fave Esmail | Jun 17, 2021 8:21:12 AM
BA should sell shares to the employees in order to get the required capital. Why should the lower levels work for free. What about their long term security? Employee ownership is the way of the future. Private capitalists have exploited people enough now the employees are going to be in charge and this has very many intangible benefits too
Posted by: Gerry Mitchell | Jun 17, 2021 12:04:23 PM
These are difficult times for many different types of businesses. One of the real causes with most of the companies that are in a dire financial situation started at the top. We've had CEO's that really weren't qualified & had no idea what was really going on. My question to the management at British Airways would be, what happened to the profits from prior years.
Right, you gave it all back to the shareholders as that's who you really care about. Now you're in financial trouble and you expect the front line workers to step up to the plate and make the ultimate sacrifice of working for free.
How about this, lets have all of the executives at BA return all of the millions of dollars that they have received over the last ten years & then ask all of the shareholders to give back 5% of the dividends that the've all received over the past 5 years. Maybe now you'll have all the money that you need to keep the company viable.
The next step would be to fire & replace the CEO, CFO, and all of the other top executives and all of the useless people that sit as the board of director's.
If the company needs the capital that they're saying they need, then offer some new shares & raise the money.
Please do not ask the front line workers' to make sacrifices for your incompetences. Remember, it's the front line workers who are the ones that really made the financial gains for the company.
Posted by: LS | Jun 18, 2021 8:43:18 PM
Absolutlely Ridiculous!!!
The price of the airfares are to low to begin with...why should the employees have to subsidize the travelling public!
Posted by: axiom | Jun 24, 2021 4:21:50 PM
It's called Slavery.
One only has to look at the scam-laden Craigslist job boards and see most of the job postings that they want you to work for FREE, or better yet, YOU pay them, so you can work for free, that way, when a paying job does become available, they'll choose you first. But hey! They'll provide you with food and a screen credit! Wow!
Nice huh?
So, If BA is asking this of it's employee's, are the 40,000 employee's going to ask their landlords for free rent? How about getting free goceries at the local supermarket? Free hydro? It's not so bad. It's only for one month... I'd go along with it, only if my landlord, utility companies, grocery stores, health clinics etc. all agree to the one month of free services.
Yeah, we all want job security in this global depression, but that's not happening, but suggesting that people work for free just to keep a company afloat and maybe possibly your job might be still there when the dust settles? Is that wise in the long term?
People have value and worth. Unfortunately corporations and companies are designed to away your dignity. One only has to look at overseas manufacturing in Asia and India to see that, at least they're paying their employees $1 - $2 a day, but no, not some British corporation, they want you to work for FREE!
Posted by: deltor | Jun 25, 2021 3:19:25 AM
not a chance.
and immediately i'd be looking for another job.