As far as the BA LH CC resigning I believe it is because the reps wanted to have a financial penalty in place if BA did not implement their promises of the agreed 777 final-stage rest facility in place by a certain date. The BA rep's refused to budge on this issue as they know historically BA promises mean nothing unless a fianancial motive exists for them to do so(Penalty).
CD signed the agreement against the wishes of the reps. Result: The 777 has now been in BA about 6-7years and Boeing has yet to receive the go-ahead to begin production of the final-stage rest facility agreed which would take over a year to get onboard the first aircraft. HHMMMM......you decide.
The general Secretary Elections are not and have not ever been about a BA plot, anyone who has read the past posts in full will realise this(see my lengthy post on page3). It is important that we pilots stay together as a group and try not to descend into a anti-BA rant and figure out whats best going forward.
If you re-read my posts you will find that I do not post anti-Darke messages, in fact my first post stated;
"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."
So I am not anti-Darke but I do express extreme discomfort with BALPA's head Office attempts to avert our unions Democratic processes;
1. First by attempting to not notify all members properly that his position was due for re-election. What is the justification for not sending out a letter, cost ?.........then how can they not discipline Merv Granshaw for then sending out 2 separate letters supporting CD's Election ?
2. MG sending out his first letter.
3. MG sending out his second letter.
1+2 above point load and clear that BALPA had no intention of running a fair Election and intended for CD to be re-instated with NO fuss. #3 above shows an unapologetic arrogance for it's members that smacks of maintaining the status quo of a cushy head office. Remember this is OUR union and we want it run democratically, not like some elite private society.
It's all our future's so lets not confuse the issues.