The OP asked the question if BALPA was fit for purpose.
BALPA is a labour union bound by the labour laws of the UK. BALPA is almost toothless when it comes to protecting its members because the labour laws of the UK make them toothless.
Can BALPA stop Flybe from doing it 'Saad's way' - no they can't, because until an employee has actually been dismissed, the union and employee can't claim unfair dismissal.
Does ignoring policy F mean a clean cut compensation claim for the employee - No. Because again the laws of the UK mean that just because its written in black and white doesn't mean it's legally binding. If the company can convince a judge that the policy is unworkable, unrealistic, unfit for purpose, and unfair to the greater workforce, then it could be deemed void.
Is policy F unfit for purpose - well Flybe needs drastic changes to survive, a turnaround within the constraints of policy F would bankrupt the company, doing nothing would bankrupt the company, not following policy F gives them a lifeline, a small gamble that if it went to court they wouldn't pay massive legal fees for unfair dismissal, however losing in court...... would bankrupt the company.
HONOUR
All BALPA members listen to what is being said because it applies to every UK airline pilot. Have a look at your contract and work out which sections you think your compny will honour? Then consider the Flybe situation and if it impacts you. If your answer is, "I'm ok Jack", your head is firmly in the sand. Any BA pilots following this issue?
I feel for all those in Flybe at the moment. There but for the Grace of God.
BALPA is divided by it's structure, management know that. EASE FTL rulings have impacted on BALPA's perceived influence.
Is BALPA fit for purpose? I remain a member for individual grievance coverage.
Best fortune to all in Flybe.