Absolutely Hotel Mode (got my bid in for the RHS 744 BTW - can't stand another summer at LGW like the one we've just had - see you next year!), I was going to post with exactly the same comment WRT 411A's lack of courtesy in posting without even bothering to try and research the issue by simply reading the thread.
I thought it might all get deleted by a R&N mod for being not relevant to the thread though.
Having decided now to make my own contribution then, I'd better say something relevant... So for those too lazy to read the history of how we got to where we are now, here is a concise version...
1) BA jump on the bandwagon caused by Labour's new pensions policy and put out a load of propaganda saying how much trouble the pension fund is in.
2) BA 'consult' with the workforce (yeah right!).
3) BA mooted their initial ideas (informally), one of which was the Career Average replacement for FSS.
4) BALPA consulted its BA membership and made it quite clear to BA that any attempt to impose a Career Average scheme would be met with the fiercest resistance.
5) Following the triennial actuarial review, BA made a set of proposals eventually on 23 March. Career Average off the table, thank goodness (well done BALPA! And well done BA for taking heed of the writing on the wall).
6) There was much waiting to be done whilst BALPA (and other TUs) considered the formal proposals and BALPA commissioned research from top accountants into BA's ability to pay. NAPS trustees independently did the same.
7) Last week at the GMMs, BALPA announced it's amended position that, due to the amount of the deficit and the advice from PWC about BA's ability to pay, coupled with the complicated relationship between the Pension Regulator, The Trustees, The Company and the Workers/Pensioners; "No Change" is no longer a viable rallying cry. BALPA proposed an entirely reasonable compromise that should be acceptable to the majority of interested parties (especially the City Institutions). If a negotiated settlement is not reached, the Trustees and/or Regulator will almost certainly impose something much worse on us and that has always been seen by BALPA as "Not an option".
8) More meetings are being held with the company and the trustees. BALPA have stated that if the company won't move we could be balloted for IA in as little as a month. A ballot would run for at least three weeks and then the company has to be given at least seven days notice of any IA by law.
Apologies if that isn't wholly correct (it was off the top of my head), but it does give the gist of what's been going on and where we are now. Rather apt that my home made brazier will be finished just in time for the festive conker roasting season!
Last edited by beaver eager; 12th Nov 2006 at 19:55.
Reason: Typos, grammar, clarification and personal message to Hotel Mode :)