The day the the BA pilots decided that it was OK to shaft the new hires in terms of Pension the writing was on the wall. Once the stone was allowed to start that roll downhill you could not stop it.
During pension negotiations the BACC told us (the members) that we could not strike over the issue of new joiners being excluded from the FSS until BA recruited a pilot on that scheme. This happened two years later. So a ballot of 3,500 pilots asking will you go on strike to force BA to put new joiners on the closed FSS would have been a foregone conclusion? The scheme was closed to all other new BA employees too so another can of worms there.
Presumably new joiners read their offered contracts? So we would have been asked to go on strike to force BA to put new joiners into the FSS scheme when they were happily signing up to the BARP scheme. I know from the way BALPA now collects research data from the members the whole issue was, unfortunately, a non-starter. Many were vociferous in their calls for a ballot and, long term, they may well be proved right.
In the end if BALPA did not have the funds to fight the action, why did the BA pilots not reach into those deep pockets and put up the funds ? Why blame Balpa, its your union and if its not doing what you want change it !
There is more confidence in the current BACC than in many years after the 'old guard' were thrown out a few years ago. BALPA did not run out of funds and had we been asked to put up more funds I have little doubt the money would have been forthcoming.
We, the members, are currently waiting for the full explanation of events which cannot be made until after BA either drops or completes its current legal manouevres aimed at bankrupting the union. BALPA is being sued for the damage caused to BA's reputation and business by the strike ballot.
BA's reputation is of course at an all time high!