antisthenes
9th May 2002, 14:06
Given BALPA’s recent increase in recognition agreements as a direct result of the 1999 Employment Relations act and now the potential for “city conscious” boards of directors to use Sept 11 as a basis for major “business restructuring” – is it time for BALPA to re-think its subscription rates?
The justification for 1% of annual gross salary is based primarily on the legal assistance afforded members but should this cover be optional?
Such a membership option would ensure that BALPA members are in the great majority which is currently not the case in many companies with recognition. This can lead to an unhelpful situation where a small majority vote of BALPA members may result in the wishes of a large majority of TOTAL employees not being reflected.
BALPA needs to realize that people can make up their minds individually with regards to legal protection. They need a collective voice however, to address changing industry wide problems.
The justification for 1% of annual gross salary is based primarily on the legal assistance afforded members but should this cover be optional?
Such a membership option would ensure that BALPA members are in the great majority which is currently not the case in many companies with recognition. This can lead to an unhelpful situation where a small majority vote of BALPA members may result in the wishes of a large majority of TOTAL employees not being reflected.
BALPA needs to realize that people can make up their minds individually with regards to legal protection. They need a collective voice however, to address changing industry wide problems.