As a non-mainline person, but with the purse strings to my Final Salary BACX scheme, (now also closed to new members) now firmly held by BA, what is the opinion of the contributors in terms of 'the big picture'?
Do mainline NAPS people feel there is any useful linkage? Not in actual fiscal scheme blending, but in the domino theory, and therefore the potential for BA to close
or maybe more likely to change the member contributions / scheme benefits to the BACX scheme as a pre-cursor to doing the same to NAPS. Perhaps to try and hugely increase member contributions against a vastly reduced benefits for those who chose not to, (arguably) throw good money after bad. Having said all that, would we rather have an increased cost than no scheme at all?
As people have demonstrated by their contributions on this and other threads, if they're not in a scheme, they are not going to stand up and be counted, far less die in a ditch over it. Just as in mainline, BACX currently has many staff not fortunate enough to be part of a DB scheme. What will be the attitude of mainline when the BACX scheme is seriously threatened? Remember it was ours which was first closed to new members, and also remember it was mainline who closed the Brymon scheme overnight - JUST BECAUSE THEY COULD - back in the early 90's as a cost saver.
I don't want to open the BA / BACX bickering box again, but this really does seem to be an issue where the same principle applies to both of us, and BALPA perhaps could and should remember the old 'United we stand' formula.
