The summary sacking of 670 Gate Gourmet workers in August 2005 triggered a historic dispute and the creation of a new agenda for protecting workers, says Brendan Gold

Summer 2005 will go down as one of the most memorable in UK industrial memory. An otherwise unremarkable peak period at the world’s busiest airport, Heathrow, came to a sudden, cataclysmic end on 10 August when caterer Gate Gourmet summarily dismissed around one third of its workforce – 700 food and distribution employees.

It was a move that was to bring chaos to the airport, would cost British Airways millions and would spark a two-month dispute between the employer and the workforce. It would make headlines globally, dominate the TUC and Labour Party conferences and prompt condemnation of the bosses’ behaviour from the highest levels of the Labour government. And it united the trade union movement in demonstrating that, whatever advances had been made for workers under a Labour administration, UK labour laws remained inadequate and reform was needed.

The Heathrow family

Gate Gourmet was formed when British Airways (BA) sold off its in-house catering arm to Swissair in 1997 in order to concentrate on the `core business’ of flying passengers. When Swissair got into difficulties, corporate raiders Texas Pacific Group swooped and picked up the catering company. BA remained dependent on Gate Gourmet for the majority of its cooked meals on long haul and bagged lunches on short haul, but it wanted them at a cheap rate. The caterer was left choking on a slashed contract from its chief client. It needed to cut costs – fast.

Documents leaked to the Daily Mirror show that senior managers had been planning to shed workers by orchestrating an unofficial dispute. On 10 August, unknown to the workforce, it seemed that this plan was being implemented.

Workers, concerned that temporary migrant labour was being brought in while others were under threat of redundancy, gathered in the canteen, demanding an explanation from managers. Instead they were locked in by security guards, kept under watch by the local police and prevented from meeting with their union reps. Too fearful to leave, the workers, including a pregnant woman and man with diabetes, were held there for nearly four hours. Then they were ushered out into the car park and sacked by megaphone.

The workers, deemed in law to have taken unofficial action, were left without legal recourse and without financial compensation. But in lashing out in this way the company had seriously under-estimated its workforce, their union and the Heathrow “family”.

As word spread about the treatment of the workers, colleagues in British Airways walked out in sympathy, outraged at the way a weak, largely female workforce had been bullied into losing their jobs. Very quickly operations were hit and flight after flight was cancelled. One thousand BA crew and almost 100,000 BA passengers found themselves in the wrong place at the wrong time. It took almost one week for BA to resume normal operations. Gate Gourmet’s managers coldly looked on and said it was nothing to do with them.

As more emerged about the manner of the dismissals, stunned disbelief moved to outrage. The workers resolved to fight for their jobs and their reputation – and their union would be with them every step of the way.

Daily protest on “T&G Hill”

The sacked workers took up position on a grass verge near the factory gates. Beacon Hill on the airport’s perimeter soon became known as “T&G Hill”. Tents to serve the protesters food supplied by the local community were pitched and chants were struck up. Calls of “T&G – Zinderbad” (`long live the T&G’) challenged the thrum of the traffic. Through the dog days of summer and the downpours of September the workers made their way to the mound. From morning to darkness, hundreds of them daily made their protest and there they were going to stay until this dispute was resolved.

The protesters’ presence on the mound symbolised the dispute. Thrown out of their workplace, the drivers and catering staff workers stood together. Because of this a nondescript grass verge in the world’s busiest airport became the focus for the politicians, community leaders and trade unionists who made their way there to support the sari-clad Asian women and middle-aged Asian men fighting for their jobs. With the media in constant attendance, the world watched on.

Gate Gourmet was now a household name, but for all the wrong reasons – and it was contaminating British Airways in the process. As Polly Toynbee wrote in the Guardian, “The spectacle of the Gate Gourmet picket line will linger on in public memory. The sight of low-paid, middle-aged Asian women in unaccustomed revolt will stay indelibly linked to BA, which so cavalierly contracted out its reputation along with its lowest-paid workers.”

The T&G made it clear that British Airways could not wash its hands of this dispute. It may have contracted out its service but it could not hive-off its responsibilities. It could not allow its principle catering supplier to treat its workforce so disgracefully.

By the end of August, the receivers were hovering around the ailing caterer.

Directing the pressure at BA, Gate Gourmet issued a self-imposed deadline for going into administration. What it was seeking was an injection of cash from the company without which it would collapse – and with it a substantial tranche of BA’s system for feeding passengers.

But the T&G stood firm: new monies for the caterer had to be contingent on the settlement of the dispute to the satisfaction of the workforce. BA agreed – it would pay more for their meals but only if Gate Gourmet settled the dispute with the union and workers. No deal with the union, no new contract with BA.

An issue for every worker

Hopes were raised then of an end to the dispute. The intervention from BA had given the company reason to return to the negotiating table and the impetus to seek a settlement. Yet miraculously and even with the threat of receivership looming Gate Gourmet was reluctant to agree the “honourable compromise” on offer.

In a packed mass meeting of the workers at the local Sikh temple, T&G general secretary Tony Woodley rounded on the management. “They always planned to go into administration to put more pressure on BA so they could fulfil their cynical and well-thought-out plan. There was no consideration whatsoever for the effect on you, your families and the communities you live in.”

According to Tony, the behaviour of Gate Gourmet had wider ramifications. “This is an issue for the whole country. Can a company walk into Britain and plan the cynical sacking of innocent men and women simply to cut costs and be allowed to get away with it? I say no.”

Among those at the temple was Matilda, 45 years of age and a worker at the factory for nine years. She was finding the loss of a regular income devastating. “I am really depressed. We have no money and things are very hard.”

Her MP Anne Keen was appalled that the workers found themselves in this situation: “I never thought our community and my constituents would be treated this way by an employer in 2005.”

Talks were foundering on the insistence of the caterer’s US bosses that they would not return so called “militants” to work. For those who had seen the workforce the claim was ludicrous – never had a workforce looked less militant. The figures themselves were not even credible – sometimes Gate Gourmet claimed 40 in this category, other times up to 200.

Desperate to maintain even a skeleton service for BA, Gate Gourmet bosses reputedly offered drivers bonuses of £500 to carry on working through the dispute. With only one main customer, BA, accounting for 80 percent of their business and losses of £23m the previous year, the caterer should have been looking to deal.

Progress made over the last few days was suddenly reversed. The notion that there were 200 “militants” or “trouble makers” in the workforce of largely middle-aged Asian women was absurd. For the company to insist that there were demonstrated that they were not interested in settling the dispute.

Still talks dragged on into September; still the workers maintained their protest on the mound. But they stayed hopeful. “I think things are going our way. This protest is playing its part. It has been brilliant,” one told me.

Fight for decency

With Gate Gourmet attempting to wriggle out of a settlement, the T&G upped the pressure politically. “The Gate Gourmet workers’ case now goes beyond just an industrial dispute. They are the focus for the union movement and the fight for decency and justice in the workplace. We do not forget that our people were sacked with three minutes’ notice over a public address system and with 20 minutes notice by a megaphone,” said Tony Woodley.

September’s TUC Congress voted unanimously to back the workers in their struggle. They condemned the Gate Gourmet management and endorsed the T&G view that unless the law was changed this would not be a one-off abuse of a vulnerable workforce.

Next stop, the Labour Party conference. The T&G was determined to win backing for the law to be changed to permit solidarity action in cases where there was a clear contractual relationship. The union also sought to press the government to progress the EU directive on temporary agency labour, which would remove any financial gain from employing cheaper workers from overseas.

A standing ovation was given for the Gate Gourmet workers in the conference hall. In an impassioned speech Tony Woodley argued that it must be a case of “never again” for this movement. With the majority of trade unions and a high proportion of constituencies backing the T&G, the union won the day.

This gave a tremendous boost to the workers, and a renewed focus on settling the dispute. Through patient work by the union and the TUC, a framework for agreement was finally put in place. We had come a long way since the dispute began on August 10th.

At the end of September the negotiated agreement was unanimously accepted by the sacked workers. For the vast majority of them, the outcome has been a hugely successful one. Around 400 will be able to return to work. Another 170 or so do not want to go back and will take redundancy, money that was not on offer previously. For the remaining 144 workers, redundancy will be compulsory but this will come with compensation and the option of appeal if this still fails to satisfy.

The workers are now reflecting on where next, but they know that without their union and the support they received from fellow workers in the Heathrow family, they would never have come this far. Now they can consider either a future with the company or taking compensation, which will help them to start anew.

For the T&G there are other matters to resolve – chiefly how to make sure that this episode is not repeated, that other vulnerable, low-paid workers do not suffer. We are determined that the lessons of this historic dispute are not forgotten by our government, employers or by workers themselves.

But for now, with an end finally in sight for this most bitter of disputes, the men and women of Gate Gourmet can come down from T&G Hill.

Brendan Gold is national secretary for civil aviation, TGWU, Great Britain.

Atlantic allies The fight between airline caterer Gate Gourmet at London Heathrow Airport and the Transport and General Workers Union captivated media attention in Europe as American venture capitalism showed its teeth. More>>