Wiggy judging from the last two posts my High Treason charge is not misplaced
Yes it is...
From what I've heard the problem was supposedly "off the record" conversation of the type referred to in other posts such as hec7or's and Shaman's. It can just as easily described as the reality of negotiation.
The only way this can be resolved is for the NEC to dissolve the BACC and take charge themselves.
You are having a laugh aren't you?
Trust me, given the way the NEC
appear to have handled this many of the BALPA members at BA are in absolutely no mood this AM to have the NEC come stomping in and take charge.....
Instead there is a widespread feeling that
some of the ex-BACC Reps who were elevated to the NEC in the last year or two have seen an opportunity to settle old scores.
Once they had lodged a complaint it seems the NEC felt obliged by the rulebook to suspend two/three of the BACCs most effective, knowledgable and highly regarded reps...just at the time there might be another S188 letter coming down the tracks.
As a result I'm sure you'll now understand that any attempt at "Direct Rule" by the NEC (if such a thing were possible) would finish BALPA at BA stone dead, in minutes..and there go a lot of membership subscriptions...and there goes BALPA..or at least it's shiny offices.
BA management, who obviously don't hold the rule book in as high regard as the NEC,must be loving this.
