Worse than ridiculous

I really can't sympathize with strikers. Unofficial strikers are even higher up my list of annoyances. Strikes disrupt our lives, but that's not what annoys me. What annoys me, is that these guys don't get it. They don't get the big picture.

A strike incurs costs to the company, that's a given. That's why workers strike, to hit companies where it hurts the most: their profits. A drop in profits will also affect investors' perceptions of the company. BA, for example, saw it's shares slip after the wildcat strikes were held. Before those strikers start cheering at this, they ought to consider what this means in the long run... job losses. Reduced profits, especially if sustained, can only be met my reduced costs. Planes go, pilots go, crewmembers go... and that means ground staff go too. It's not as if BA was doing tremendously well before... it had just recovered from a string of losses through strict cost reduction.

What's worse, ex-Gate Gourmet staff actually think the strike will help them get their jobs back. Earth to ex-Gate Gourmet staff: the company's about to go bust. Your actions have not helped. If it goes into administration, expect MORE job losses, not reinstatement.

So there we go, my two cents on industrial action. To summarize: strikes are a pain in the arse. Only use if your cause is truly justified. In this case, it isn't.