Of course the whole AMP programme may have been established in order to ensure that those who are sick also are provided with support through management to allow their quicker return to fitness...whoever devised it in an a business whose reputation depends upon safety has therefore failed to bill and sell it to the workforce as such, which in my opinion is inherently dangerous.
I disagree that such management action is new in BA - divide and rule is far from in favour (as they may have discovered if they employed a management counsultant) - but a continuation of the gigatic state-owned monster that it has always been. Think what could be achieved if the workforces acted together?
Existing Flightcrew with their very expensive, (after years of BA's 'pension's holiday' from contributing to it) Defined Benefit Scheme represent the "hidden value" waiting to be "unlocked" within BA, to use Management Consultant Speak.
You cannot unwind a DB scheme except upon liquidation of the sponsoring company, or where every last pensioner has expired. The obligation still exists to make up the defecit on BA. The cost to transfer all to a DC from DB at any date would be the same, as (apart from the reduced cont'n rate on the new DC scheme) no savings would be made, as the obligation to make up the defecit on the DB scheme to those who had already paid into it would still exist.
BA's attempts to (illegally as ruled in High Court) claim the excess on APS is however a different matter - if they manage to arrange this somehow, then they would be in for a winner. In reality they won't be getting the excess until the last one who is a member of that scheme dies. Not any time soon then.