Courts back BA – but are doing it no favours

British Airways might not be having much luck with Icelandic volcanoes of late, but its track record in the British courts is beginning to look supernatural. Last week saw the collapse of an embarrassing trial into price-fixing allegations after an apparent cock-up by prosecutors over disclosure of email evidence. On Monday, BA won a victory over its cabin crew that halted their strike on a "legal technicality" and brought new meaning to the phrase and an utterly disproportionate response from the judge. Last night, judges were considering whether to allow the union to appeal against the resulting injunction, but all the signs were that Unite's failure to inform its members of 11 spoilt ballot papers (using every possible means of communication) would force them to hold yet another vote on a matter which already has the clear backing of an overwhelming majority. My own view is that this strike is ultimately self-defeating, but the merits of the dispute matter far less than the abuse of a law intended to make sure the majority of union members have their voices heard. If anyone was left in any doubt that employment law is being interpreted in a way that makes democratic strike action all but illegal, the National Union of Journalists lost a similar court fight with Johnston Press today because it failed to individually notify all the newspaper group's subsidiary companies of the action. In BA's case, this farce does the company no favours The airline is hoping calmer voices will now prevail, but it's just as likely that such a gross injustice will harden union opinion. In the meantime, BA customers continue to face months of uncertainty and both sides are that bit further from the negotiations (or capitulation) that can be the only lasting result.