Norman Stanley Fletcher,
I have no idea as to who you are, or for whom you work, however I feel that your view of the modern workplace may have ossified whilst you have been behind bars.
Firstly,
'...Nonetheless, they have a fundamental misunderstanding of the realities of our world and a totally false hope in the capabilities of the IPA. The IPA have never fought, let alone won, a single battle of note in the airline industry.'
A simple schoolboy post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy; the IPA have never been presented with an opportunity to try and win a 'battle of note within the airline industry', but as amazing as it sounds, until a few years ago I had 'never flown, let alone landed, a Boeing 737 in the airline industry' either, yet having been given a chance to do so, I find it's quite straightforward really. Perhaps the IPA may just get used to it too ?
'...grasp that fact rather than adopt a welfare state mentality that says, 'Because I pay my subs my job should be secure. If your company is not making money your job is not secure - it is that stark and you should not be deceived otherwise. '
This is an easier one; you have simply missed the point.
True, the baby management (PD aside) don't seem to be the brightest and most able of their generation; however we are not arguing about that. Few if any of us have run an airline in the worst recession for a generation, and I suspect we would find it a little more difficult that it may seem from FL370. However, we are arguing that this company have unilaterally changed our TCs, ignored previously agreed pay arrangements and disregarded the contract that we signed on joining the bmi group. (I have not even started on loss of licence criteria yet).
Better management would have enlisted the support of it's workforce in times of difficulty rather than pi****g them off, (literally and metaphorically), a bit more Guy Gibson rather than Capt Bligh would have worked wonders, we are reasonable people. But that's their perogative, it's their decision. We looked to BALPA to defend legally binding agreements that were already in place, and they singularly failed to do so.
'...The best that BALPA can do with a loss-making company is ensure that redundancy deals are fair and reasonable'.
Errrr.... they did not. The company reduced pilot numbers by base last year, tried this year, and may well do so again in October.
'...The only game in town is BALPA - warts and all '.
Seemingly not. BALPA have forfeited their mandate and there are several other options, the most suitable of which may well prove to be an association that is keen to enhance it's standing amongst the pilot community.
There are other issues, but I think you get my point.
Lastly though, I'm still not entirely sure what a 'welfare state mentality' is ? I did visit my GP recently, drove to the shops on a public road this afternoon, and have a street lamp outside my house, so I'm a bit worried that this might count ? I do hope you can help.
All the best.
MoT
Last edited by miles offtarget; 22nd Mar 2010 at 20:11.