BALPA Fear and the GS Elections(PART 2)
PART2........
Yes but is the General Secretary to Blame ?
Many people have stated that one cannot blame Chris Darke(CD) personally for the degradation of UK Pilots pay and conditions over the past 10years(the fact that degradation has occurred is generally not in any doubt) and why should we need to elect someone else. I agree it is not desired or credible to try to appropriate blame to any one individual in BALPA to our degrading T&C's, but as established in the role of GS, surely he is the person "ultimately responsible". The only thing possibly questionable is how he has managed to secure a 45% pay rise between 96-00 whilst the pilots T&C's he is enrolled to protect continue to lose ground whilst increasing productivity. Blame for blames sake is not constructive, but weeding out weakness is. With the coincidental timing of the G.S.'s re-election it is wholly appropriate to examine the past 10years of his leadership and examine whether we are happy with his results or whether other suitable candidates should be considered.
Why a GS Election is not a BA BALPA Member plot and ways to avoid division.
Many non-BA members will question the fact that the only other candidate for GS(JF) comes from within the BA fold(despite his only goal is to remain in office only until such time as a suitable replacement can be found). It is important to state categorically that BA members are not trying to put a BA minded individual at the head of BALPA. Many companies recently brought into BALPA will be happy with the progress to date of having BALPA recognised in their firm(aided by recent changes to UK union law)and will have many unpleasant fresh memories of not having a union. However it is important in the upcoming election process to set aside pre-conceived notions of BA pilots and realise it just might not be a case of "spoilt BA pilots expessing sour grapes" but in fact be rooted in the extended time and history that we have experienced under present BALPA leadership. The elections will affect us all over the next 5years.
There is no reason for the GS election to cause a split as some scare mongers will have you believe and it this is the very type of BALPA Conservatism that has thwarted all our recent pay negotiations and is the root of the problem. This is the reason things must change if we ever expect an improvement to our current situation.
Saying that, there are ways to avoid the mistrust by non-BA members of BA members intentions:
In the run-up to the GS elections, JF could name a professional head-hunter organisation which he agrees to hire immediately on his election to provide BALPA with 2-3 possible candidates for the GS position, final selection to be decided by balloting ALL BALPA members. After this one and only act, JF will then immediately stand down and an interim board consisting of ALL local council reps will act as Gen Sec should any action be required. Professional Head-hunters would have an extensive list of major players and extremely qualified candidates to put forth immediately and the balloting of BALPA members to chose between them could happen with a week of JF's election. Using a professional head-hunter org.would remove any justified suspicions from Non-BA members and conspiracy theorists as to any GS appointments as well as provide us with the best people on the market.
The election does not have to be divisive, the question is, is an election/change necessary at the top of BALPA.......unless you're satisfied with the last 10years the answer is YES. Don't try to read too much into what might or most likely not happen after we have decided an election is necessary, especially from scare mongers. If a simple election can break apart BALPA(stunned that anyone within BALPA org would even profess to this) then we should be asking how we have let it get into this shape in the first place and what can be done to strengthen it NOW. The time of Conservative insecure inaction needs to be put solidly behind us. We have muttered under our breaths for long enough.
At the end of the day we donate 1% of our career earnings to BALPA to carry out the wishes of it's members, if BALPA is unable to deliver on the wishes of the majority of it's members(i.e. 95%)then what good is it really and why am I donating my 1%? We don't keep the union running just because we need a union, we keep the union running because it supposed to be effective. If it ceases to be effective then we seriously need to consider alternatives. Legal coverage and insurance we can get elsewhere at a fraction of the cost, strong collective bargaining and leadership is what the extra we pay is supposed to cover.
As for the idea that having a General Secretary election might cause angst amongst BA and non-BA Balpa members, and that division could break apart BALPA(given the success of recent recruitment of non-BA members becoming a much large part of our union), I would like to know if this is in fact the case, what the purpose of focusing on increasing BALPA membership over the past few years if it has in fact weakened our collective bargaining position. So that we could have a bigger union, and our union leaders could have more street cred down at the pub and help propel them into greater positions when they eventually leave BALPA? So we could stuff our coffers to afford more staff to admin the greater number of members, even though we are now less effective? To collect more revenue to cover up BALPA's poor Financial Situation? These are serious questions we should all consider. What strategy was there for increasing membership if our union leaders now tell us we risk breaking it apart by having a simple election for the top position in our union, whilst still officially following a policy of increasing membership?
The whole point of this letter is to ask whether we exist to support the union or whether the union exists to support us. Lets not let BALPA become a living breathing monster that requires massive attention to survive yet fails on it's purpose for being. The union as an organisation cannot be allowed to become more important than the purpose for what it was set up in the first place.
I'll pre-empt the..."but we are BALPA, and it is up to us". Yes this is very true, and this is why we have elected people to represent our wishes, not to make deals or compromises without our consultation. My point being that recently those representing us have not shown the leadership or direction some of us have hoped for(at least not in securing the pay we all feel we deserve). This reinforces the need for new leadership from the top down and in doing so, perhaps a new guiding principle of operations for BALPA, a guiding Principle based on strong leadership for securing it's members desires through collective bargaining. We are BALPA, BALPA is us. 95% of pilots in BALPA voted for either a pay rise or we would go on strike a few years back. If we are indeed BALPA then why did a strike not occur when the pay rise didn't appear. Unless the remaining 5% were in fact our reps.
If BALPA is up to us afterall, then let the elections decide
If BALPA as an entity has become more important than it's members desires and proves ineffective in delivering on those desires then I for one will be looking elsewhere for effective support and leadership in the very near future(TGWU?), and the recent UK union recognition laws(50%+ employee vote equals mandatory union recognition by the firm)so helpful in aiding BALPA's growth over the past couple of years, could possibly prove just as effective in it's subsequent downsizing.
I for one do not want to read the moaning on pprune 5years from now about how could things have gotten so bad, especially from those who fail to objectively review the alternatives available without a preconceived bias.
Good Luck, and remember it's All of our futures(not prejudices)that is at stake !!!!!!