This is an issue that has been ongoing for a while now, and to be frank, it’s getting boring.

British Airways (BA) cabin crews are members of the Unite union, who keep balloting.  These are the issues that were balloted on this time:

1. Restoration of staff travel concessions
2. Settle all disciplinary cases related to the original strike
3. Recruitment and deployment of cabin crew on lower levels of pay, without agreement of the union

Let’s face it, the Unite union has done no favours to BA’s cabin crew – in fact, you can see from the above list that it has dug itself into a bigger hole with the addition of two items (1 & 2)!

The initial strike was called regarding cabin crew’s level of pay (lack of).  Frankly, I really can’t understand where they’re coming from.  All the statistics I’ve seen places BA’s cabin crew higher paid than the majority of others!  These people must understand that BA is a business and that it need to run at least break even – which BA currently isn’t doing, so offering more money really isn’t feasible.

The public is getting fed up of these strikes, and I’m sure so are BA.   These strikes have many consequences:

Cancellation of flights:

The cancellation of flights causes great disruption to paying passengers – they can’t get to where they need to, some people even missed family funerals due to this debacle.  The cancellation of flights also costs BA, in more ways than one.

Loss of earnings:

The strikes hurt BA in terms of income – if the flight isn’t running, they cannot charge passengers.  In fact, if BA isn’t running a flight, they often have to rebook passengers onto other carriers – often their competitors.

The last ‘round’ of strikes caused BA to ask available Flight Crew (pilots) to operate as cabin crew, at a reduced service.  This allowed BA to operate the flights, but not quite at the same level of service as usual.

Damage to brand:

These strikes also damaged BA’s brand image.   The stories were all over national news – people unable to make weddings, business meetings, funerals, etc.  Some people say “All publicity is good publicity”, but in this case it firmly isn’t good publicity!

All these things cost BA money, which really isn’t helping the union’s cause!  In fact, it’s doing the exact opposite – just imagine if the union was reasonable, perhaps the loss of this money could have been used for a pay-rise for BA staff?

I believe that Cabin Crew are now seeing this, with each further round of strikes, less cabin crew are turning out to vote.  I also believe that Unite union has misled its members badly.

For the sake of passengers – and BA’s brand – please get this issue resolved soon.  Both parties should get together, discuss their differences and reach a resolution.  Both parties need to be reasonable throughout this process (pointing firmly at Unite)!

I look at events regarding economics avidly, and so I’m posting my opinion based on common sense and general observations.

Over the last few weeks, the issue of Bankers’ bonuses has hit the headlines yet again.  Headline figures were banded about “£5bn Barclay’s bonuses”, “£1bn RBS bonus bonanza”, “£2bn bonus for Lloyds chief”.  These headlines put words into the mouths of the greater public, generating anger and frustration and causing general upset.

It is understandable that the public is upset by these bonuses, after HM Treasury (i.e. UK Taxpayers) ‘bailed out’ both RBS and Lloyds Banking.  The Government purchased shares in both companies as a way of cash injection (‘bail out’), which amounted to billions of pounds.

I feel that it is rather unfair to bring Barclay’s into this argument, although they are in the banking sector, as they did not require a government bailout.  I felt rather embarrassed when Bob Diamond, Chief Executive of Barclays was brought in front of a House of Commons select committee, to be asked, “Will you accept your bonus” by a Labour MP.  Frankly, Barclays is a private institution – so what they pay their employees is irrelevant (as long as above minimum-wage).  Mr Diamond answered pragmatically “I’ll take this decision with my family”.  He turned down bonuses in the two years previous to this, so it is only right that he accepts this, as he is legally entitled.

There has been a lot said about bankers’ bonuses by this government, but little done.  Vince Cable called for “restraint” (bearing in mind that during his campaign he said he would “limit cash bonuses to £2,500) with regard to bonuses, whilst also calling on banks to lend to small businesses.  I do agree with Cable when he calls for lending to increase to small businesses, but I feel that it hypocrisy on behalf of the government – given the stick that banks’ got for irresponsible lending.  I hear you say that lending to small businesses is not irresponsible – but in the eyes of the banks, it is: there is often very little collateral that these businesses can offer against such loans.

David Cameron also let off a bit of steam regarding bankers’ bonuses, but nowhere near as heavy-handed as what he suggested in previous speeches before taking office.  David Cameron and co. have most probably seen a bit sense.

It would be naive (I believe) to suggest that bankers’ bonuses should be limited to (as the Liberals suggest) £2,500.

Limiting bonuses to this level would completely disinterest bankers.  I hear you shout at me “GOOD”!  However, it really isn’t.

1. Bankers will flee to countries not suppressing bankers’ bonuses – the UK relies on the Financial Services sector far too much to allow this to happen.  There is no real obligation for the major banks to have their head office in London/Edinburgh.
2. The government collects tax on such bonuses.  You could say to stop/limit a bonus so much is robbing Peter to pay Paul – many of these bankers’ bonuses will be filtered down into the local economy.
3. HM Treasury own very large stakes in two of the world’s biggest banks – Royal Bank of Scotland (~80%) and Lloyds Banking Group  (~40%).  To impose such rules on the banks could see the share prices drop in fear of the best bankers leaving.  This would cost the Government big time.

It was interesting the other day to hear the Chairman of RBS publicly state, “star bonuses were filtering down to non-star employees”.  This just added more ammo to the public to be angry about and also politicians too.  I guess it’s his job to make sure this doesn’t happen.  Lets face it, I’m sure there are a lot of applicants up for such a job (and pay packet)!

I’m of the firm belief that if a banker (or a salesman for that matter) performs well in his job they should get a bonus – in proportion to their performance.

Turns out that Mark Zuckerberg has been nominated by the Editors for this year’s award.  Interestingly, in a public poll that Time run, Julian Assange (Wikileaks founder) came first with Zuckerberg in tenth place.

I think the Editors’ decision is a good one, given that I believe that Assange was totally irresponsible when he released the USA’s list of sites across the world that are vital to their needs.  He stepped over the line on this matter – the rest were all pretty much harmless, I believe some of these things should be in the public domain anyway.

Interestingly at the end of the article it says:

Both Hitler and Stalin have won in the past.

In recent years, the title has gone to less controversial figures. In 2009 US Federal Reserve chairman Ben Bernanke won it, while US President Barack Obama won it the year before.

Made me laugh.  ‘Less controversal’: perhaps the understatement of the year?

Everyone who has experienced the snowfall this winter so far, they will know that the amount that lay, in such a short period of time was unseen – certainly in my lifetime (that I can remember).  I did overhear a lady in the street saying that she hadn’t seen it ‘so bad since 1962′!

The snow lay at least 15cm deep in places (falling over a short period), causing mayhem for just about everyone who had to leave their home.   People couldn’t make it to work, schools and further/higher education institutions were closed, and public transportation was brought to a stand-still – literally.

All of these closures and problems regarding transportation caused logistical nightmares for citizens.  Children were stuck at school, parents were stuck at work, the elderly was housebound and people were forced to sleep in their motor vehicles overnight!  The latter is quite bizarre, I know!

So the question is: how did all this happen and how prepared was the UK?

I suppose the simple answer is that it happened due to snowfall, and the UK wasn’t prepared.  Lets delve into the issue further.

Cold and snowy winters seem to be an increasing  occurrence over the last few years.  Global warming?  You’ve got to be kidding – it’s getting colder, I hear you say!

Last year, the UK had a cold and long winter which questioned the country’s readiness to deal with such an occurrence.  Again, we had people stuck in cars on motorways due to snow, we had people home-bound due to snow and we had insufficient grit, which did not aid the matter!

Fortunately, this year the UK governments, and local councils, ordered larger reserves of grit in a measure to avoid the embarrassment of running out again.  Fine and well – until the snow comes!

The snow arrives, and in abundance it does too.  People get taken by complete surprise (council planners also), and we are in the same situation as the year before.  One of mayhem.

People leave for work in the morning, see the snow falling at 10am, leave work at noon for home.  They then get home to find that their street is completely untreated – so what do they do?  You guessed, abandon their car – and others follow suit, thinking it is OK because Jim next door has.  Put simply, these people aren’t helping themselves.

They are blocking gritters and snowploughs from clearing the snow.  It simply causes greater frustration for them, and other road users in the long run: uncleared side-streets, but clear main streets really doesn’t help your average person get the car out of their street!

Airports in the UK come to a complete standstill when snow falls.  It begs the question, why do places that get much more snowfall than us cope with only minor delays?  Simple.  Planning and equipment.

The UK simply isn’t planning effectively for this snowfall.  We get the infamous weather warning from the MET office and the bombardment on National News of ‘SNOW’, but what help does this give us if we weren’t prepared in the first place.

Snow tyres

People in places that expect major snowfall every year mitigate the problem by having the correct equipment.  In some states in the USA and Canada, it is illigal to drive without snow chains, or indeed snow tyres.  These things help cars get through snow, although at extra cost to the citizen.

Governments can also be more effective by purchasing equipment and supplies such as snowploughs, grit, and manpower to distribute the equipment and supplies.  Again this comes at a cost.

There has been a figure in the region of £7bn bounced around to ‘winter proof’ the UK, which would entail purchasing all this equipment plus more.  I believe this is a small price to pay, since the cost of each day of snow disruption is estimated to be in the region of £1bn+.  We can see this such an investment would very quickly have paid itself off, even just this winter.

It begs the question as to why the government hasn’t pushed ahead and implemented this.  The answer is that the weather in the UK during winter time is very unpredictable – imagine if the government bought all this equipment and no snow arrived for the next few years?  They would be dead in the water!  There is also the matter of maintaining the equipment, which will cost £billions per year also.

Here’s hoping to the next round of snow is handled better than the last!  Happy sledging!

I’ve had this issue on my chest for a while now. It is about time I rid it.

In October 2009, you may remember that I received an iPhone 3GS, well it proved to be a short-lived phone.  Before I had the iPhone 3GS, I had its predecessor, the iPhone 3G; both were great phones, the 3G more than the 3GS – more on this upcoming!

So, you’ll be busting a gut to here that I now have  a Blackberry Bold 9700.  Now, you may be wondering, why I changed and how I changed so early.

First and foremost the reason I changed was because I pure and simple was bored of the iPhone.  After having the 3G for 1 year, and the 3GS for 3 months, I was getting fed up of a touch-screen phone.  However bored I was of the touch-screen, I wouldn’t have gotten rid of it until the screen smashed whilst on holiday at the end of December.  By the way, in NO WAY (no joke here) did I mean to smash the phone’s screen: it fell out the pocket of my shorts when I jumped, landed on its bottom and cracked.

Fair play to Apple, however, as the phone did work with a smashed screen – which I was surprised at – however it was a health hazard!  I could have sent it away for mending, by the insurance company, but luckily I was due a phone from O2 anyway.

I hear you say “how the hell can he be due a new phone only 3 months after receiving one”, well you are right.  I’m lucky in that when I got the 3GS, it was a new contract that was taken out for my sister – but she got my old 3G and I manage to wangle to get the 3GS!  It is all pretty messy…

Anyhow, I chose the Blackberry Bold 9700 to get away from the iPhone, and I have to say: I don’t miss the iPhone one bit.

The email client on the Blackberry is so much better.  I never used to be able to get my Microsoft Exchange emails directly to my iPhone (had to log into Webmail every time), but now the phone alerts me when I have an email.

I also much prefer the physical keyboard on the Blackberry compared to the on-screen one of the iPhone.

As for Apps for each phone, I grant the iPhone has a better (much better) app collection, but I never really used them – apart from the Twitter app.  Now that Blackberry has its own Twitter app, I’m as happy as Larry (who is Larry anyway?)

The thing I most miss from my iPhone is iTunes.  I used to love how well it integrated into iTunes – but the Blackberry does the job – and it copies Playlists.

Overall, I’m happy with my choice.

I’m sorry for not updating in so long, being totally honest, I forgot. Simply forgot.  I have been really busy over the last few months since I updated, and so I’m going to update this blog retrospectively.  Although most blogs are filled retrospectively (how many people can see into the future?), some are filled in more retrospectively than others – i.e. mine – in it’s current state!

So, here goes; how long will I last filing out a blog this time? Keep tuned for some new posts!

Basically, my gripe is nowadays when you want to enter a public building (a shopping center for example) you walk in with a headache, choking for breath, all the side effects of inhaling the smoke from others cigarettes – otherwise known as ‘passive smoking’.  Throw into the equation the putrid smell of cigarette smoke, it’s horrible.

Obviously it is the smokers choice of whether to smoke or not, this doesn’t bother me.  I’d rather people never smoked, but I guess someone has to prop up the public purse.  However, what really bothers me is that some people who choose to partake are so ignorant.

What I ask the smokers is that they refrain from standing at entrances/exits of public places; for the non-smokers it is horrible – for reasons defined above.

There are the people who stand at doorways smoking, but then there are the intensely ignorant people who think it is OK to blow the smoke into your face, or the people who don’t at least try to exhale the smoke in a direction which is clear; which at the front of busy shopping centers cannot be done!

Basically what I ask people to do is smoke in the designated smoking areas.  By the way, I do not want to tar all smokers with the same brush, some already do this.

Also, the Government could do with bringing in legislation in which states something akin to  “Smoking 30-meters from a public building is not permitted”; this is if they haven’t already – I had a look through the law, but nothing stood out at a quick glance.

Scottish legislation: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/legislation/scotland/acts2005/asp_20050013_en_2#pt1.

Sorry for the very unstructured rant!  This has been a pet-hate of mine for a while, however it was only aggravated today by a terribly ignorant individual.

Please follow me (@marc_fraser): https://twitter.com/marc_fraser.

Thanks

Marc

I was so impressed with the iPhone 3G, that I’ve decided to get the latest version – the iPhone 3GS. It should arrive on Wednesday; how it is getting here I don’t yet know. If its Royal Mail, I’ll be lucky to see it before Christmas!

I’ll post my initial impressions when I receive it.