Several posters have said that they voted "NO" in the BASSA ballot and either have resigned, or are about to resign from the union. Perhaps it might be worthwhile for those still in membership to hang on and vote in the new ballot. Given the reported wavering among some "YES" voters, a few more "NO" votes next time might just make a difference.
One of the few plausible rationales for the BASSA leadership encouragement to VR people to vote last time was a fear that without them the result might have been too close for their comfort. Will they be more worried this time?
Some of the ideas for compromise and advance that have surfaced here in the last couple of days seem well worth exploring further. Is there anyone out there willing to put their head above the parapet and float them on the BASSA or CrewForum sites? They might just be enough to get discussion going, or if not, get a few more people thinking about the real world.
The effect of any change in any environment should always be evaluated. What appears to be a good idea from one perspective is likely to have disadvantages, perhaps minor, perhaps major, from others.
Reducing CC numbers has an imediate and visible positive impact on costs. It may also have a less easily quantifiable impact on service levels. That should be reviewed, and I would not be surprised to find that the results depend on the route. Perhaps the reduced numbers can work well on long sectors with plenty of time, such as LHR-SIN or LHR NRT, but it is more difficult to provide adequate levels of service on shorter sectors, such as LHR-BOS or LHR-TLV. Or it might be the other way round. Bring on the mystery shopper!
My interest is as fairly frequent SLF (just into EC Silver) and a small-scale shareholder (not many more than needed to get the shareholder discount).