Boondocker, you miss the point. The idea of the PCC is to totally change the WAY in which CC are represented in BA. They are not asking to get "elected" on a particular mandate with a specific list of "goals".
That is precisely the mindset that has got BASSA into the cul-de-sac they find themselves in. By drawing specific "lines in the sand" and refusing to consider negotiation over said lines, they have made themselves an obstacle to be overcome.
The PCC approach, as I read it, is to take a collaborative approach. Nobody knows where the next "challenge" to aviation is going to come from, so it is pointless to make promises to the CC community about what will and won't be achieved in future negotiations. What CAN be promised is that the membership will be fully consulted and it's opinions solicited before a negotiating position is decided.
Do people want a pay cut or freeze? What are they prepared to sacrifice to achieve their objective? Do they want a more prominent onboard security role? For more money or to give up some other function? etc, etc. These are just a few of the issues that MAY crop up in the future.
It is true to say that, invalid on-line polls aside, BASSA is simply not interested in the opinions of it's members, and simply pushes it's own agenda. A more collaborative approach will be a breath of fresh air, but it is unreasonable to make the PCC hostages to fortune by asking them to make firm commitments in such a volatile industry.