Standing Up to the Plans of BAA/Ferrovial

Workers' Daily Internet Edition: Article Index :

Standing Up to the Plans of BAA/Ferrovial

Interview with Woman Worker at Heathrow Airport

For Your Information:
Ferrovial

The airport owner BAA is planning to cut up to 2,000 jobs after its takeover by Spanish infrastructure and construction firm Ferrovial it was announced at the end of August. BAA owns seven British airports including Heathrow, Edinburgh and Glasgow. It is understood that the monopoly has ordered each of its seven British airports to conduct a thorough review of costs and staffing levels. So how will this affect the airport workers? The current cost cutting drive will cut jobs and is also having an effect on pay and conditions.

            The Times quoted a source from BAA as saying, “Ferrovial have a huge debt burden, and they can't sustain that. They are really drilling down costs, and there is going to be a complete restructuring of the business, with a couple of thousand of jobs going. It cannot be the security staff, but every other element of the business is up for review.” So it is clear that BAA under the ownership of Ferrovial is going to unleash its debt crisis on the workers instead of cutting their profits.

            The monopoly capitalist company Ferrovial has its interests which are to make huge profits, and these interests are directly conflicting with the airport workers’ interests. Workers are simply dispensable to them and therefore they do not uphold the safeguarding of the workers’ jobs, pay and conditions. Monopoly capitalism has no interest in the rights of workers; it is simply there to serve itself running an economy driven by profit for the few. Paying the rich has a direct impact on the workers who create the national social product. In this case, Ferrovial is said to be taking an “aggressive” stand to using the airports to siphon off huge amounts of money from the social economy into its coffers. It is set to make “windfall” profits from the rise in value of its airports. And it is inextricably linked with finance capital in the way it raised loans to buy BAA and is part of the trend of what has been described as “private equity”, whereby concerns which are vital to the social economy are made the target by private capital in order to break them up so that the holders of equity can make fabulous sums. It can be asked, how is it that concerns like airports which are so integral to the functioning of the economy are made the private playthings and milch-cows of individuals.

            There can be no illusions about the intentions of Ferrovial. The security of the workers and their capacity to safeguard their jobs, pay and conditions will lie in their fight against the plans of big business and in their fight to uphold their rights. The workforce cannot accept that decisions are made behind closed doors and excluding them. It is their livelihoods which are at stake, and they are the ones who are taking day-to-day responsibility to ensure that the airports serve the needs of the people who use them. How dare Ferrovial treat them as less than human, as instruments to boost its profits and expendable! They should be involved in decision-making, just as working people in society as a whole should be able to have a decisive say in the direction of the economy and be in control of their own future. Nothing less is acceptable.

            Since its take over BAA have also tried to take out injunction on the people’s right to protest at Heathrow Airport, signifying its stand in terms of the big business agenda to criminalise dissent on the issues the world faces at this time, like that of global warming. The airport workers and the climate camp protests against this corporation are both confronting the entity that is acting irresponsibility towards them, the workers’ livelihoods and the environment which is precious to everyone. The common factor is the fight to end monopoly control and the monopolies’ exclusive prerogative to make the decisions which affect people’s lives.

            So the airport workers must face the crisis of society and big business control head on in standing in opposition to these attacks. The airport workers have already voted 98% in favour of industrial action, but are now awaiting another ballot .The airport workers must be represented by their unions who have the task of standing up to BAA/Ferrovial. The attacks are part of the whole attacks being unleashed on the workers at this time, and so any opposition should be fully supported by the working class as a whole. There is a need to make the struggle of each workforce a common struggle and so organise a mass movement against big business control and for a society where the workers control the economy and are the decision makers and so solve the problems of society. WDIE wishes the airport workers every success in their actions!

 

WDIE: What are the concerns of the BAA workers at this time after the take-over by Ferrovial?

Answer: I think that the main issue which concerns the workforce is that of job security. It is being said that 1,000-2,000 workers could lose their jobs at the airports which Ferrovial took over last year. In fact, some jobs have already gone, for example at the call centre, but we are being kept in the dark. There is talk about airside security being contracted out to some other company. Airside security is that which is not in the airport buildings, screening passengers, but in the restricted areas, on buses, and so on. However, they are saying they are bringing airside security into the buildings, so mystifying that they are going to contract part of it out. This is an example of the way that the rumours that their work could be contracted out to private companies is looming over people’s heads. Look at Ferrovial’s history; they are well-known for that practice.

            There is also the issue of the pension scheme, that it is at present based on final salary. It was announced last week that it was shutting down this scheme for new employees. Now people working alongside each other will have different pension deals if we do not take action so that the company reverses its decision. One can ask if this is not done, how long will it be before Ferrovial says that it will do the same for existing staff also. So you can see the way the company is going and what the concerns of BAA workers are at its agenda which harms their interests.

 

WDIE: What are the conditions of work like at present?

Answer: Slowly over the years any concern of BAA for its workforce and their wellbeing seems to have been done away with. There is a huge shortage of women, female security officers. This is putting immense pressure and stress on the existing women staff. The company is saying, bring your friends and relatives. We will give you £250 for every person. But what are they offering to attract women workers? For example, when I first joined, BAA used to attract a lot of women, with young families; a “mom’s roster” was organised where they could take kids to school and pick them up. Today this is non-existent. This is one example of the way that workers have been increasingly expected to comply with what the company dictates, while their conditions of work have deteriorated and their lives have been turned upside down.

            It is frustrating that when the union meets with the BAA management, the seriousness of the way the workforce is being treated in a modern society does not seem to be taken into account. The fact that nothing has been organised so far in taking a stand against the job cuts and disdain for the workers' conditions is indicative of the situation. Instead, BAA have expected the union to damp down any discontent and threatened action in return for commitments which any company which is concerned with its workforce as people, not as mere instruments of generating profits, should be providing as a matter of course. For example, a recent joint statement of the management and union reported near the top of its list of improving working relations that good progress has been made in providing water for the workforce, as if this would conciliate the workers from taking industrial action.

            This water issue is indicative, that in modern society the lack of provision of water should even be an issue! It gives you an insight into the working conditions for the workers at Heathrow. There are many other examples in which BAA seems to have the attitude that it is granting the workers a favour in ensuring, for example, that toilets should be cleaned or that if an application for annual leave is refused the company will provide an explanation!

            On the management structure, they have said they will streamline and help the business and improve things. But in fact it has destroyed whatever working relationship was in place between workers and local management. Now you do not know who your manager is; you just know a name you have read in the BAA materials, but you have to ask who is this person? This does not help to build any relationship between workers and managers and clearly this is a component of BAA’s outlook, especially since Ferrovial’s takeover. Workers are to be expected to jump to the company’s tune.

            We even advise them, that it is fundamental in having a successful business that there should be good relations between workers and managers. From what it seems, they are missing the point as to what managing people actually means! In my opinion, it means to know your workforce, as a team and as individuals, so you look after their interests and equip them with skills which are required to fulfil their potential and whatever they are asked to do. Managers should bring out the best in people, not just issue orders via some emails! But in today’s world where the private monopolies such as Ferrovial are in control, the rights of the workers and their dignity seem to count for nothing. This is what is arousing the anger of the workforce who are ready to take a stand in defence of their interests.

 

WDIE: What actions do the workers or their unions plan?

Answer: From what I can see, workers are frustrated and they want answers and clarification what is happening. They know what they should do, but they need somebody to guide them, to explain what the company is actually up to. In this respect, unions are failing in being open and providing information. Also they do not involve the workers in the discussions they are having with management.

 

WDIE: What is the mood of the workers right now?

Answer: Morale is really very low; people are genuinely worried about what is going to happen. The announcement of job cuts, although management has told them that it is not going to affect frontline staff, actually affects everyone. It also has a profound affect on their families, and on everyone’s livelihood.

            The workers are angry and frustrated as well, which you can see when you talk to people. They are asking: what should we do to challenge these things which are thrown at us?

 

WDIE: What is the distinction between “frontline” staff and “back office” positions?

Answer: “Frontline staff” are the workers in security and information desk people, who are dealing with members of the public. But one way or another, the other staff support you, so it will affect everyone, not just “back office”.

 

WDIE: Are there contacts with workers at other airports?

Answer: There is certainly a desire that there should be such contacts. But it should be the union which is organising this, getting the workers involved from every airport. Don’t forget that the workers have limitations on what can be done on an individual basis. When we hear that at Gatwick they are planning to contract out the information desk work, we contact them just for clarification, but we hope that the union will be very active in informing people what is happening and taking up the issue we should be supporting each other. This does not just mean that we commiserate with each other how bad things are, but that we should be organising as fellow workers struggling against the same attacks.

 

WDIE: Can you say anything about Ferrovial’s attitude to the workers' unions?

They are not very union friendly. There is also the attitude of the unions to Ferrovial, which perhaps should be less friendly than it is!

 

WDIE: Do you have any other comments about what the future holds?

Answer: The future from the way things are going does not look very promising from the point of view of what the company is planning. At the same time, if the union played their role, and were responsible, informing the workers, guiding them, involving them, the future could be promising, for then the workers would be actively involved in resisting what the company is doing and arming themselves with guidelines for action.

            In my view, there is a need for a space where discussion can take place. We are all shift workers. It is very difficult to organise, but it is not impossible. Also, working conditions are such that even when you are at work, it is difficult to have a discussion, say what you think, share what your views are. As far as BAA goes, although you are told “we are listening”, when it comes to decision-mking, it is never taken into consideration. The effect is just the opposite. There is nothing to see or to show that workers’ opinions or views are taken into consideration.

            There is still a ballot going on. There was an earlier ballot of 98% for industrial action, and the unions were invited back to the table to talk to management. Now we are having another ballot, but in between nothing has changed, except perhaps that now we have drinking water!!

 

WDIE: Finally, would you like to say anything about the recent protests at the Heathrow Climate Camp and also the way the police dealt with it?

Answer: This company does not represent anyone’s interest but its own. So I think there is some sympathy when the protesters challenge it on its stands towards the environment. Equally there was a mood to oppose the police interference and clamp down. It is clear that this is not just an issue that this is our workplace and our livelihoods are at stake. Those concerned about the damage to the environment have a right to protest, and there is also the issue of protesting about communities being bulldozed where people have been living for generations.

            On the police, it was quite a nasty experience, seeing the police on horses, and so on. It is also difficult to come to terms with heightened security, have the police walking around with big guns. You certainly don’t feel safer. For example, I told my son when he took a temporary job at the airport not to run, because you don’t know when they are going to shoot. This is the environment you are working in. Guns don’t make you feel safe.

 

WDIE: Thank you very much.

Grupo Ferrovial, S.A. is a multinational Spanish company involved in construction, infrastructure, real estate, and related services. It is publicly traded and is part of the IBEX 35 [the Iberia Index, the Spanish equivalent of the FTSE 100] market value-weighted stock market index.

            Sixty percent of the company is owned by the Del Pino family, founders of its original construction company begun by Rafael del Pino in 1952 as a railroad construction company called Ferrovial (Spanish for "railway").

            In April 2000 the Ferrovial Group bought more than 50 percent of the top Polish construction company Budimex Dromex S.A., which led to further strengthening position of Budimex in the Polish market. Thanks to that Ferrovial has extended further into the east Europe with its range, and Budimex Dromex became the biggest constructing company (roads, buildings and pipe systems) in Poland. […]

            On June 5, 2006, a Ferrovial-led consortium purchased the London-based British company BAA Limited, valuing the company at £10 billion. BAA owns and operates seven British airports, including London Heathrow Airport, and operates or carries out retail management in several others. Grupo Ferrovial also owns, through its subsidiary Amey, a share of Tube Lines, one of the two public-private partnership companies responsible for the maintenance of London Underground's lines and rolling stock.

[From Wikipedia, the free encyclopaedia]

           

            Spanish infrastructure investor Ferrovial could be in line for a large windfall if the Competition Commission forces the break-up of BAA's South-East airports.

            Ferrovial, which bought BAA last year for £10.3bn, could see Heathrow, Gatwick and Stansted valued in excess of a combined £15.4bn in the event of a forced sale.

            One industry source said Heathrow's value alone could rise by £3bn-£4bn against its RAB [regulated asset base] value of £7.3bn, making it worth as much as £11.3bn – £1bn more than Ferrovial paid for the airports group.

            In reality, the Competition Commission decision would be more likely to lead to the sale of Gatwick and/or Stansted. Gatwick's RAB is £1.6bn, and this could increase by up to £1bn if it were sold, while Stansted's RAB of £1bn could rise by more than £500m.

[Financial Times]

                       

            Spanish infrastructure giant Ferrovial is preparing to replace Metronet amid an escalating cash crisis at the consortium which is currently upgrading two thirds of the London Underground network.

            Rafael del Pino, chairman of Ferrovial, said his company had held talks with Transport for London (TfL) about taking over key Metronet projects. Ferrovial owns Amey, one of the two shareholders that make up the Tube Lines consortium, a rival to Metronet carrying out work on the Northern, Piccadilly and Jubilee lines. Mr del Pino said: "I think we would do a better job than they are doing now."

[Independent on Sunday]

           

            Ferrovial […] closed 2005 with revenues of 8.989 billion euro, up 24% from the previous year. 43% of these revenues came from abroad, which represents an increase in foreign revenues of 45%. Net profits were 415 million euros, 21% less than the previous year due to the absence of extraordinary items (the previous year’s figures included profits from the entry to the stock market of Cintra, its infrastructure subsidiary).

            The reason for this balanced cash position is that the company does not include the debts associated with many projects in its accounts. Instead, these debts, which are over 8 billion euro, are taken on by the different consortiums that it creates for bidding for contracts. The debt figure would be astronomical if it bought the BAA airports. However, as professor García Canal points out, “the operation would convert Ferrovial into a highly leveraged company, which should not pose a problem given the composition of its project portfolio”.

            Ferrovial has allied itself with the Caisse de Depot et Placement du Québec and with GIC, the investment fund of the Government of Singapore, in order to bid for the British company. Together they have created the consortium Bidco, of which the Spanish company holds 60%.

[www.wharton.universia.net]