Sorry Skylion, but your post is disingenuous at best. Other companies have made significantly greater strides to covering their pensions deficit and this "proposal" remains totally unacceptable both to the Pilots AND all other groups of staff, notwithstanding the fact that it is skewed against flightcrew by seeking TEN more years work for a pension that will be significantly reduced as against two more years for groundstaff.
The reduction in inflation protection and capping any future payrises forevermore at RPI will allow inflation to erode the true value of any pension benefit to a negligable level within a very short period, such that the pension will become all but worthless. We ALL know this, AND we know that WW and a handful of acolytes will enrich themselves in the process of our losing any hope of retirement. Other companies have admitted that pensions are quite simply deferred pay - not one of us will accept the circa 30% to 40 % pay cut that this represents, and it would be organisational suicide for BALPA to do so.
This may well be the opening shot in a long campaign, however BA had better make a substantial improvement in its offer to the flightcrew, if not the whole company, and it knows it.
Interesting research note from a city banking house suggesting Ry@nair may have to park new aircraft due to a lack of experienced pilots, particularly Captains. Having been on the receiving end of numerous "initiatives" to save costs whilst the rest of BA merrily quaff capuccinos at Waterside I think you will find pilots unlikely to offer yet more concessions. Equally, if BA "melts down" I dont think the outcome will be as bleak for many as you paint (good propaganda job though - sure you are'nt a manager?). Pilots are needed and there is a growing shortage of [I][B]experienced[B][I] people. Not a time to quietly accept the end of our financial futures in order to enrich Mr W@lsh and a few cronies who will soon leave BA anyway.