Skip to content or view screen version

Massive support nationwide for sacked Gate Gourmet workers

nfn | 20.09.2005 22:33 | Workers' Movements | Liverpool

UPDATE - Sacked workers are still on the picket line outside Gate Gourmet after the Transport and General Workers Union struck a deal with the management on 27th September. According to the deal, 144 strikers were forcibly made redundant and 7 were to remain sacked with no compensation. At the same time 3 baggage handlers at Heathrow Airport who had taken part in a 1000-strong one-day sympathy strike are still suspended. According to the Gate Gourmet workers 'it is not over yet!'

Solidarity meetings this week:

Sacked Gate Gourmet Workers Website including:
Latest news | Events | Donate to the Hardship Fund

On Indymedia: Liverpool Blue Arrow demo | Manchester Blue Arrow demo | The secret casualisation plan | GG no stranger to industrial dispute | Angry Gate Gourmet workers lobby TUC

Also:Schnews report | Corporate Watch: A view from inside the Gate Gourmet dispute

Sacked Gate Gourmet workers demonstrate at Heathrow Airport
Sacked Gate Gourmet workers demonstrate at Heathrow Airport


Background



What happened

On Wednesday, August 10th, 2005, Gate Gourmet sacked 670 workers employed at Heathrow. Fellow workers reporting for duty on Thursday 11th August were faced with the ultimatum of signing a new contract which would slash pay and conditions or face the sack. Workers were sacked by megaphone on the spot, and it became clear that people on holiday or even in hospital on sick leave had also been sacked.

It was later revealed that management had planned to provoke a confrontation and sack workers for almost a year. A plan costing £2.5 million was expected to save the company £6.5 million a year. Gate Gourmet deliberately provoked a confrontation to attack pay and conditions.

The workers' response

The Gate Gourmet workers themselves immediately began picketing both Heathrow airport and Gate Gourmet and called for solidarity from other workers. Around a thousand British Airways staff answered and went on unofficial strike at Heathrow airport. Gate Gourmet was forced back to the negotiating table, but is still stalling and issuing threats.

Why?

Gate Gourmet claim that the company must cut costs to survive, they claim that the sacked workers are endangering all jobs by 'making trouble' and refusing to cooperate. Their own behaviour proves this is rubbish. They provoked the confrontation, they refused to negotiate - only solidarity action from other workers forced them back to the table. The confrontation was provoked by bringing in workers from temp agencies, on lower pay, with fewer rights and with no protection against arbitrary sackings.

The factory is now being run by temporary workers, who are far easier for management to exploit and intimidate. The sacked workers earned between £12,000 and £16,000 a year, and this in London, one of the most expensive cities in the world, and yet even this was not low enough for Gate Gourmet who seek to use casual workers as an excuse to pay poverty wages and avoid any responsibility for pensions or sick pay.

Why Blue Arrow?

Blue Arrow are providing many of the temps who are being used to attack pay and conditions at Gate Gourmet. These are people on very low pay, with very few rights who are being put in a situation where simply by trying to survive they are complicit in an attack on other workers. It's not their fault, it's the fault of the cynical companies that manipulate and exploit people for their own profit.

nfn

Comments

Hide the following 9 comments

Thank you kindly Editors!

21.09.2005 14:13

Delighted to see this made a Feature - many thanks - Up The Workers!

Mr Spoon


Alternative View

21.09.2005 15:11

I have to say I group airline workers in the same basket with those employed by car companies and arms providers. The world doesn't need anywhere near the amount of airline travel it currently has and those who work for airlines are contributing to the damage done by massive amounts of aircraft pollution.

These people live in a prosperous part of the UK with jobs readily available, they should seek emloyment in a more environmentaly friendly industry.

Prefers to walk


whatever, girlfriend

22.09.2005 09:41

Hm yeah well thanks for those words of wisdom from your morally-pure higher dimension!

Back here on Planet Earth we'll get on with organising solidarity for low-paid exploited workers taking on a ruthless union-busting big business:

 http://www.sackedbygategourmet.org.uk

 http://www.tgwu.org.uk

Mr Spoon


I agree

22.09.2005 11:54

"Prefers to Walk" does have a point - I didn't see a lot of support for Caterkiller workers during their recent industrial support for the reason most of us thought they could fuck off !

The same for those who work for BAe, Lockheed Martin etc. Airlines fly because the staff agree to work there, if nobody worked for them they wouldn't fly. Don't think it doesn't work, Marlboro and other big fag companies have enourmous problems getting workers these days because people see it as unacceptable to work there.

HH


A worker is a worker !

22.09.2005 12:59

What a worker does is not important, they are all victimes of the Capitalist plan to keep them down and poor. Where they work doesn't matter, we must always support them and seek to help them gain control of their companies from the bosses.

In the short term we campaign against arms companies like BAE Systems because they are operated for profit but once we have control and they are run for the benefit of the workers there is no reason why they shouldn't keep on making arms, the world will always need arms. It's the same with those working for airlines, although we would wish to see restrictions on airline travel and stop people using them for holidays etc. there will always be a requirement for Brothers and Sisters to visit other countries.

The issue here is not what the company does just the profit motive that drives them

Socialist


come down from your ivory towers

22.09.2005 13:02

.... and by the same reasoning we shouldn't have any solidarity with anyone who has recently used a plane, smoked a fag, consumed dairy products etc etc Just how comfortable are we in these little do-gooding, holier-than-thou ghettoes?

I think showing soldarity with workers in the fossil-fuel industry, apart from being a commendable thing in itself, would be a great opportunity to forge links with workers in a fossil-fuel intensive industry rather than the endless and fruitless rounds of preaching to the converted, if you were to be strategically addressing the social change that needs to occur in order to deal with climate change.

And any social justice perspective of climate change has to acknowledge that many marginalised sections of society are forced into crappy, degrading jobs within the fossil-fuel indutsry through lack of opportunity. The line about "peopel should just go find less-environmentally harmful jobs" comes across as the perspective of someone who is in the materially and opportunistically priveleged position of being able to do so, and lacks a great deal of empathy as to the reality of people's day to day lives and situations.

kevvy-k


The problem is capitalism

23.09.2005 19:12

If more of BAe's revenue goes to meeting labour costs, there will less available to fuel the environment destroying expansion of the airline industry. If the airline industry contracts of the capital will be invested in a better place. But nothing is served by defending the interests of the bosses.

Prefers to Cycle


Support the sacked workers!

24.09.2005 22:31

Anarchists and socialists should discard the liberal 'boycott' notion whereby the only response to a job in a shit industry is to leave. Quitting certainly wouldn't be wrong, but we have to acknowledge that most people aren't sufficiently politicised, knowledgeable or convinced of their own power to make a difference for this sort of rhetoric to mean anything.

The only way to solve climate change is to build a grassroots/rank and file movement strong enough to threated capitalism. This *cannot* be done without the workers - who occupy a structural location in capitalism which is particularly powerful. For evidence of this, look what happened when the BA workers walked out.

At the same time, we should be prepared to be honest with those we show solidarity with about our concerns. Not pushy, patronising or pre-emptive, but honest. We should seek to build social struggles which break down the boundaries between workers, particularly those taking industrial action, and activists working on broader issues. For instance, it seems to me that climate change activists and gate gourmet workers have a few short-term strategic interests in common right now... think about it.

elegiac


Incredible !

27.09.2005 12:08

It's remarkable to think that in 2005 there are still people making statements like,

"... most people aren't sufficiently politicised or knowledgeable.."

Has it occured to you that the reason the political Left finds it so hard to gain widespread support in this country is because, in part because of statements like that ?

My experience of working class people is that they are well aware of politics and are very knowledgable about the wider world, although perhaps they don't feel the need you do to try and proclaim their knowledge to the world.

Stop patronizing people and start working with them

Old fashioned Socialist