PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - BALPA unrealistic fees?
View Single Post
Old 4th Jan 2010, 07:35
  #30 (permalink)  
The Real Slim Shady
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Night Flight,

I have not said that the insurer would pay legal fees regardless: what I said was that if an individual pursued, or attempted to pursue a case against the advice of the legal eagles, he / she would be off their trolley.

However, the individual who pays a premium for insurance has the choice to fight or flee: it may be that the lawyer feels they have a case, which allows them to fight, or that they have no case, in which case a prudent individual would take the proportionate route and cut his losses. How many cases have you heard of where BALPA have declined to assist, or offered only some assistance, but the individual has gone on to win? I know of a couple and I know of one guy who gave up, even though BALPA were involved, because the advice and assistance was so difficult to get in anything approaching a timely manner.

As a member of BALPA, however,the choice falls to them, not you, and it could be that your perfectly reasonable and winnable case is traded for a sanction, accommodation or benefit they have been seeking from your employer for some time. The chance of trading you, and your case against the employer, for the "good" of the masses prejudices your right to assisted legal advice.

However, we don't have to dwell on this as you don't need legal assistance as your employer, and your union, well Barden's at least, deal with matters before it has to resort to the law.

Let's focus on the case in hand: the way the 40 Thieves spend your subs.

The training of CC reps was allegedly absorbing vast sums of the travel expenses, allowances and dining; however, the accounts don't reflect much in the way of training costs so that doesn't quite tally.

It is transparently clear that they have singularly failed in their efforts at collective bargaining and IR, maybe they should spend more on training, whilst scoring a stunning own goal by quite spectacularly foregoing the opportunity of fighting the corner of the CTC cadets when easyjet pilots are retaining the Chairman's seat and 2 further seats on the NEC. Those poor cadet souls are probably on the trainee membership scheme, which is free, hence the Thieves don't have any interest in backing them as they get nothing from them financially.

The consensus though is that they have failed: the consensus is that the CTC scheme was / is " a cancer ". So if "they" have failed, by your own arguments, the pilots are BALPA etc, you are admitting that you have failed: the admission is that the existing membership is facilitating the shafting of these cadets by inaction. The stereotypical "I'm alright Jack" attitude: hardly, comrades and brothers in arms against the tyranny, is it? So what are your subs for, if not " stamping on cancerous deals"?

We don't have to linger too long in this pit as everyone seems perfectly happy with them spending profligate sums to lobby on your behalf (a tad woolly, but it's your money) or do research on your behalf when there are other organisations far better placed to do this, the CAA as one example.

So in summary let's examine what you get for your tax deductible subs, apart from a glossy magazine every so often: collective bargaining that fails to stop cancerous practices, sacrificies FOs to protect Captains, ignores previously agreed scope agreements and gets you pay cuts and job losses. Legal protection at the discretion of the union so you have to go cap in hand to beg for help, "Please sir, I've been naughty will you help me"? Vast amounts of training for the CC Reps.

Did I mention a glossy magazine? Some vague lobbying which doesn't appear to have produced much of anything, airport taxes go up, security is ever more invasive but we won't have to carry ID cards. What is that attached to your uniform or around your neck? OOPS - it's an ID card!! Now that was a success, wasn't it.

What you get is your General Secretary pulling out his crystal ball and forecasting that this year will be a good year for the charter airlines.

LEISURE AIRLINES' PROSPECTS FOR 2010 IMPROVED
2010 will bring improved prospects for airlines like Monarch, Thomas Cook and Thomson who are in the leisure business, the British Airline Pilots' Association has predicted
Exactly 1 week after GSM went bust ! How subtle is that?

Maybe he can give you 6 numbers for this week's Lotto.
The Real Slim Shady is offline