The BA Scope Clause.

[airrage]

Maniac,

"Kevin, (aka airrage) a lot of us know exactly who you are, and more importantly which questions you are not answering."
- Everyone knows who I am because I knowingly posted my name, company and fleet on another thread when accused on being a BALPA Rep(which is strange because most of my Posts are definately not Pro-BALPA - ask Chris Darke/Merv Gren. or the BACC Pay Team). I have no need or desire like some here to hide my Views behind Anonymity and as such prefer to post openly on the BALPA Forum where I also annotate my name with airrage to show my Pprune identity. So you can quit trying to act like you're some brilliant detective, I personally chose not to coward behind a false name. " SFO Kevin Judkins - not BACC check yourself !!!!

Note that I am not demanding Maniac to reveal his Identity. One, because I couldn't care less and two, because I respect his wish for Anonymity, despite him not affording me the same respect on this thread. He should have left it up to myself to post my name on this thread despite me having done so elsewhere. However, I have no reason not to stand by my convictions with my name attached. Perhaps Maniac will do the honorable thing and tell us who he is Now, at least the choice has been left for him to decide.

As for your questions Maniac;

"1. I note no reply to the entirely reasonable and logical argument put forward by Rhythm Method. "

-Rhythm Method is alone here I agree in Posting coherent arguements amongst the other anti-BA crowd and I apologise for focusing on the majority of nonsensical posts rather than talk to the only level headed man in the crowd. The problem with separate T&C's across BA Fleets is unfortunately not a new Problem in BA(Dan, EOG, BAR, etc). As I identify who I am, anyone in BA can confirm that I have ALWAYS voiced oppositon to any outstations on separate T&C's having suffered it at EOG myself for 5years. I have also backed up my Views through action by NEVER bidding into the LHS of any outstations because of this and even remained as an FO for an extra 2.5years at EOG when such a Command was available, so I have put my money where my mouth is. I often take abuse from people who have bid into such Commands for this outed View. The only problem with demanding BA Pay Full T&C's is that they would argue that it was the different T&C's which were the reasons BA were attracted to buy BRAL/CFE in the first place. Would you be happy to accept full BA T&C's and contracts(retirement age 55?), but then take up a Position in BA commensurate with your New Seniority since being TAKEN over ? Like as a SH FO ? FO's might, but I suppose most Capt's would prefer to retain their Commands on type even if it means you don't get full access to all BA aircraft in doing so. I would love to have everyone under one contract and Positions Commensurate with one Seniority List, thats all I have been after for 8years, afterall it is only the non-mainline Capt's who actually are benefitting from any lower-rate Pay because they now have a Command they wouldn't normally have gotten under one PAY/Seniority until Years Later(some would have possibly retired as co-pilots). The problem is most guys chose one issue(like being a CAPT on less than mainline rates) but gloss over the fact that they only have their Commands in the first place because of those lower rates. Despite their best efforts you can't separate the two Issues Easily unless you also allow a complete Re-Bid for Positions."

As for.........
" 2. You don't actually comment on the points put forward by Tinytim, all you do is tell him how wrong he is.

and

3. You KNOW what he says about scope is correct, accurate and current, but you are too arrogant (or maybe honest) to even deny it. You just continue to bluster."

......I find it hard to decifer any real Points raised by TT in amongst the agressive anti-BA posturing. I would be happy to give my opinion on legitimate Points raised by anyone. HS has answered most other questions I think more than fully.