Equally, what was the union doing allowing flexicrew to take the jobs of existing FOs?
They probably didn't realise until it was too late, because the company didn't tell them. What
was the cadet scheme has always been accepted in the past, and until 2008 they were all given full-time permanent employment afterwards. This was never a problem. Then the company suddenly changed their tack at the end of last year and FlexiCrew came into being - before BALPA knew, or could do anything, about it.
I was disappointed with BALPA's response to our situation at the time, but I understand it and I really can't see how anyone can blame them for this particular part of the situation. The only gripe I have with them is how slow they have been to respond, develop a policy on this type of employment and decide how they are going to go about tackling it. That
is a problem.
The key point, though, is that FlexiCrew was not a totally new concept, but something which morphed into existence unexpectedly from what used to be the cadet entry scheme, before anybody could do anything about it. You cannot blame BALPA for this, particularly as - I reiterate - the cadets do not have any representation.