Next in Line,
By "they" I am refering to Balpa.
Regarding EOG: No doubt BA management would have wanted to start that operation at minimal cost and their opening gambit would have been to propose a separate company. However do you realy consider it a victory to have colleauges on different T&Cs from the word go? I'm sure those reps have worked hard to improve conditions at EOG but I feel that Balpa should have led and co-ordinated resistance to those proposals in the first place.
Regarding Atlas: if our national airline has a requirement for cargo aircraft then why is it not investing in its own fleet. Atlas is a US company that primarily employs pilots with pensions from other employers (I read that in the log). As I understand it the DTI gave BA temporary permission to use a non-EU carrier, what does Balpa propose? I would come up with a proposal if the Union was paying me %1.
I am relatively new to the industry and joined Balpa primarily because I believe in the principal of Trade Unionism. I wholeheartedly agree with you that a union is only as strong as its members. However it is up to the leadership of that Union to dare I say it LEAD.
At present in the US Comair, a regional owned by Delta, are entering their second month on strike. I was on the flight deck of a Delta aircraft and they were discussing the possibility of a strike fund for their colleagues. I wondered at the time if a BA Captain would be happy to do the same for a CityFlyer colleague.
Comair may go down but would that be such a tragedy when they have a $1 billion turnover and their pilots average $30k?
Going back to my original point, compared to the attitude and ability of ALPA to defend, maintain and fight for its members pay and conditions do you think Balpa is value for money?
SLJ
I agree that it would be preferable to be in a specialised union and Balpa provide a great deal of information and guidance on professional issues. However I still feel they fall short of the mark when it comes to defending pilots interests.