Sid - If you watch the BALPA DVD, they tell you again and again that this is about BARP too - they want a good pension for you guys as well - as indeed do I and all our colleagues.
When it came to voting about a strike, there wasn't much we could do realistically. Most big companies have closed their final salary schemes and striking would have made more trouble than it solved. We were quite horribly short of pilots even if the management don't agree. We were at risk of losing slots if things got any worse.
That's not to say I don't support you - BA lied when they employed you by saying that you would get an "industry leading pension". THAT is worth striking over, but the fact that the pension changed is an unfortunate product of the current climate.
In the same respect, the fact that NAPS will change too, is a product of the current environment. We will have to do <something> to change NAPS to get rid of the shortfall. In fact we will be forced to by the pensions regulator. A strike would be valuable to make those changes fair, reversible and sensible. If BA's solution was those things, there would be no need to strike, as in the situation above. If BA's solution is unfair (career average, money purchase etc) then striking is a fair and reasonable thing to do.
I think that is what this is really all about. Comparing us to doctors, lawyers etc is moot. Making a descision about NAPS that is fair and realistic and reversible is important and if it takes a strike, that is what it takes. Hopefully it won't come to that. Watch this space.