found this on the bbc.co.uk/news web site http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8102862.stm

'British Airways is asking thousands of staff to work for nothing, for up to one month, to help the airline survive'

Ok, fair enough asking staff to work a few days a month but asking staff to work for nothing for upto a month is a piss take while you read the other bit to it...

'BA's chief executive Willie Walsh has already agreed to work unpaid in July, forgoing his month's salary of £61,000.'

He has agreed to work unpaid for 1 month, he guy earns £60,000 a month (£60,000 POUNDS).  He has more than enough and he can live with what he earned so far.  For the normal workers losing paid is a very big deal indeed, all have rent, mortages, bills, food etc to paid for.  Losing a months wages can break a household.  Im sure Mr Walsh can live on his pass earning the rest of the workers can't.

Its a outrage if you ask me......

Hey, if enough workers don't take up the offer the alternative is to fire a bunch of them. Also, anyone with any form of decent savings should easily be able to survive without 1 months worth of pay.

Now, it would be an outrage if he asked them to not get paid, but he didn't do it too. However, I think if they really want to get the employees to do it, all the staff that makes 200k/year should take 1 month of no pay.

I don't think that attacking the CEO is really going to help the situation. If the regular employees were managing their money correctly, taking one month unpaid shouldn't hurt them. Of course, we live in a day and age that 'emergency savings' means nothing.

The company I work for is asking us to take unpaid leave for 6 weeks this year, just so it can survive as well. We all agreed obviously, because like nordlead said, the alternative is worse. And at least the CEO is leading by example.

My cousin will not enjoy this, he's a middle manager at the company. They will be asking him to do A LOT of work and get paid a month too late.

Fixed that sentence.

I'm glad the CEO has the stones to take a pay cut himself, but wouldn't it be better to ask staff to take a pay cut? I know I'd rather lose 10% off my future paycheques than lose a paycheque altogether. Especially if there's a risk that I might work for nothing for a month, then watch my employer go down the tubes anyway.

yup. This is real evidence the economy is strong!

Who's got saving these days, most people in UK earn less than £16,000 a year, in the UK prices are just to high.  Petrol (Gas as you call it in the states) is over £1 a litre, household bills are up, council tax is way to high, food always on the rise.  The banks/councils/loan people don't want to know if your getting paid or not, all they want is you to paid them.

But I remember years ago BA staff striking over some cost cutting stuff going on at BA.  At that time no-one was being sacked but the unions were up in arm about it and were fighting these measures.  I think BA backed down in the end but not so sure.

End of the day BA flights cost just to much,  I just look.. Manchester to Rome is nearly £300 return and then you gota chance planes, but at ryanair it cost less than £150 return for a direct flight thats were the problem is.

Unpaided leave is one thing, but asking staff to work for nothing is another........

anyone with half a brain should have savings no matter what the income level. Most people live well above their means via credit cards and cheap loans. That is why the econmy went south. In the end it all came down to everyone borrowing more than they can ever pay off (people and companies). I have 0 debt, and only intend to incur debt on my house. If I don't have the money, then I don't buy the item, as not owing your life to another person/company is worth a lot more than the temporary joys of having expensive gadgets, TV, the internet, or video games, or fancy clothes and cars. There has already been studies done that show that you can actually live on minimum wage without incurring debt. The lifestyle absolutely sucks by todays standards, but if that is all you can make, then that is all you can afford.

The Per Capita income for someone in the UK is like $44,000 American dollars...

Which is about 27,000 Pounds.  Not 16,000.

Though to be fair there is PPP and the fact that everything is so damn expensive in the UK due to socialism.... and taxes.

Though taking PPP into account they still make I$36,000  which is International dollars vs the US I$46,000.

So really.... I guess it's the taxes then due to all the socialist saftey net programs?  I don't know.  We're supposed to spend more of our GDP on healthcare though... so i don't know where all that UK money is going.