BA is like a super tanker, any change will never happen overnight, even though its obvious that change needs to happen.
So many of our T&C's a based on legacy and out of date reasoning that simply do not match the current reality.
For example:
Why is LH pay more that SH, Why do LH get larger potions of food, Why do LH get pre-departure sandwiches when SH crew are the ones running around between aircrafts all day. Why do widebody fleets get duvets on LH flights when the equivalent narrow body LH flights doesn't, why is a 4-5 day trip on SH, flying every day, worth less credit than a LH trip with several days off down route, how come a LCA day trip is worth the same credit as 2 full days at work and 6 sectors, why is it okay for a SH 2 man-crew to fly 4 sectors, on a 11h duty day, which sometimes can be very challenging, if the weather is bad, or even a 2 sector night DME, yet on LH we need 3 crew to do one sector... I could continue. Our T&C's are totally out of date and most definitely favor LH. (Some of the above are obviously trivial, yet the duvets on LH was recently improved, which was proudly announced by the chief pilot... I challenge anybody to highlight an area where SH trumps LH? Apart from ones desire to sleep in your own bed. (This requires you do be very senior though), and perhaps the increased work satisfaction.
It can never be the individual that needs to turn down an opportunity, for things to change. That is simply crazy to suggest. It is BALPA's job to argue that certain parts of the work force has fallen behind the market rate. And yes this may mean that certain groups are rewarded more than others in a pay review, (btw I have no skin in the game, as I have passed the point on the pay scale where it matters) however nobody is stealing from anybody. The reality is that, certain work groups have been hit disproportionately compared to others, for a long period of time. Doesn't this require correction? This combined with NAPS is the reason for SH commands being so junior.
It's madness to have a workplace where employees taking on a large responsibility, i.e the legal responsibility of jet, yet someone on LH can just enjoy the lifestyle on more money, as it financially unattractive to go to SH.
I take my hat of to the junior colleagues who chose to challenge and better themselves careers wise, even though the pay isn't what it should be. Its a great achievement to get a jet command. And had the pay and T&C's been better, well then maybe the opportunity wouldn't be there, but then at least these individuals could have enjoyed some seniority on LH as the naturally progression would have worked like in the old days.
BALPA need to review every work group individually and compare them to the market rate. An RPI+ payrise is relevant across all the fleets, but other T&C's need to reviewed based on individual fleets. Just like maternity pay needs to be reviewed, as its well below what should be expected from a big employer like BA. And yes, that may mean that BA will be unwilling to increase the package for some of our more privileged colleagues, but looking at it from the top of the tree and say I am not giving anything up, even though others are paid too little etc, seems to be detrimental to a unified work force.
As mentioned above. I do not have skin in the game as such, as I have passed the point where it really matters if the deal is improved further down on the list. So the above is really just my observation. It my be naive to suggest that some work groups can be rewarded whilst still maintaining the market rate for others, but that should really be the mission of BALPA. Sure lets give the TSC on LH pay point 24 a 10pct pay rise if we can, but other areas may need some attention first, especially if his or hers T&C's are market rate already...
Anyway, I will get my coat.