Balpa Or The IPA which is better?

[Brae_Cwynd]

Well, you clearly have not read my PS. BALPA will effectively be free. How much cheaper do you want it to be

BC

[xrba]

Wrong Brae Cwynd. You state that " The disaffected DA pilots all ran off to form the IPA." In fact, after realising that extensive lobbying of THEIR union for their rights would achieve nothing, due to either BALPA's indifference, or, more likely, prior collusion with BA on BALPA's part, some 170 of the 300+ sacked pilots formed their own action group and took BA to court. The IPA was already in existence, but was then a fledgling organisation incapable of large scale action. Nobody ran off thank you.

The wise DANAIR flight engineers, who paid a fraction of BALPA's fees over the years to the TGWU, at least received a redundancy settlement, which BALPA had not deigned to organise for its DANAIR pilots.

Well, a New BALPA is now with us, with a new General Secretary, new Chairman, and a new Constitution of the NEC. Hallelujah! Just like middle-class New Labour they have changed their spots. Just don't ask New Labour where the middle-classes' pensions have gone.

If you feel that BALPA is a safe and effective repository for 1% of your income so be it. I prefer more trustworthy havens which charge considerably less.

I shall watch with interest the manoeuvring at EasyJet.

[Finman]

'shall watch with interest the manoeuvring at EasyJet'

Best get some cocoa and a sleeping bag then.

Balpa have been 'helping' easyjet for over 3 years now with no visible result. How much in membership fees will they have collected? At least £1 million I would guess. Not a bad return for turning up at the odd meeting and arguing here and there. What is their incentive to finish the 'negotiations'? I imagine a great number of easyJet Balpa members will quit Balpa as soon as a 'deal' is finalized. Balpa know that; so why not drag it out as long as possible to keep the 1%/member coming in?

Frisbee (like a discus but more fun)

[SLT]

I've only been in airlines for 9 years but in every airline I've heard all the arguments that have been raised here and more! I'll start by saying that I'm a paid-up member of BALPA and have been since I was training. Yes, there have been some incidents through the years where BALPA's handling of a situation has been unsatisfactory to some observers, but how often do we out on the line get the real inside story on how these things really happen? It seems to me that most of the "Did you hear about the Captain that BALPA left to his fate in Timbuktu?" stories are embellished and distorted. Any story that is passed from person to person will suffer that. I have no doubt that there have been times when BALPA's handling of case has left something to be desired - but I like to think that the successes outweigh the failures.

And as for the Dan-Air stories - I've sat through the "BALPA are a bunch of w**kers cos of what they did to the Dan-Air boys" tales a hundred times. How many of those times have the "facts" of the story been the same?? Not once. Not one of the guys who's sat there and told me how BALPA stitched everyone up was actually there and on the receiving end. Now - before everyone flames me - I wasn't there, I've never met anyone who was, and as such all I know of it is anecdotes from guys who "heard from a mate". I have no doubt at all that it was a hell of a lot more complicated than it looked and I don't doubt for a minute that the guys who went through it suffered enormously and they have my sympathy. But for how many years are the anti-BALPA brigade going to use this as a reason why you shouldn't join???? As far as the guys of my age are concerned - it's largely irrelevant. You can't punish the children for the sins of the fathers and a great deal has changed in BALPA since then. It was a LONG time ago!!! We're all looking forward not back!!

The 1% issue - ah yes!! The other main argument against BALPA. Well - yes, it's a lot of money, yes you hope you'll tramp through your career never needing the legal representation etc that it affords you. But as Brae_Cwynd said - you can't compare the likes of Amicus to BALPA - £9.20 a month times however many million members against the 1% that the few thousand BALPA members pay - you do the maths. I'm more than prepared the hand over that money safe in the knowledge that I have my safety net in case I have a "moment" or should I fall foul of unscrupulous management. BALPA will not fight your case if it's hopeless - no organisation would. It's incumbent on all of us to go through life being as professional and careful as we can be. But if Murphy decides to stick his foot out one day, or you manage to cross a vindictive management type - there's your safety net. What price your 1% then - stacked against your career, future and family's livelihood?? Private lawyers will fight anyone - even their own shadows - you're paying them!!!

The other reason - and the one I believe in the most for being in BALPA (or whichever outfit has recognition in your company), is collective strength. Only as group can we stand up against unfair and unscrupulous working practices. Only as a group can we defend and improve our terms and condtions that we've fought so hard for. I firmly believe in this and the proof of the pudding is in the airlines with strong BALPA membership and ALSO (here's the key in so many airlines) a strong Company Council. BA, VS and a couple of other airlines have both these things and look what they've acheived. One is no good without the other. I've worked in 3 airlines now and my previous two lacked either one of these things. Top bunch of guys and girls, don't get me wrong, but either the strong membership was lacking, or the strong council was. What good is 95% membership when the CC roll over the minute things get heated? Or even worse, when the CC is self-serving!! We've all seen these things happen and things like that only serve to fuel the argument against BALPA. In my current company - we have both strong membership and a strong council. And they've acheived great things - all the time knowing that 95% of the workforce is solidly behind them. Yes, some of the things that get negotiated don't suit everyone, but they have to aim for the best deal all round. Speedbird 880 said "has your pension got better?" - YES!!! So has my flight pay, my basic salary, my loss of licence etc etc........ Easyjet - can't comment as I know nothing about it, but if they have strength in membership and council, they will acheive success. COLLECTIVE (key word) strength - the only way forward. Guys who aren't in because of personal convictions against - no problems!! It's up to the individual completely and we can all respect your views!! But guys who aren't in through indifference or "I'm not in because I heard from some bloke in the Truck that they weren't that good to some bloke in 1990", or even worse "why should I join - I get the pay deal anyway" - not good enough. Do your own research - weigh it all up and do what you feel is right. A strongly held view for or against is infinitely better than a fence-sitter who is gaining the benefits of the pay deals etc while not having the integrity to hang their hat one way or the other.

Reading through this thread - I too have been impressed with the way we've all managed to keep from the personal slagging that seems to appear far too easily in other threads - let's keep it up!! This is also the longest post I've ever made - reckon I'm gonna have to lie down!

Cheers all

[Brae_Cwynd]

Well done SLT. 100% correct.

[Roman]

All very interesting and well-reasoned posts - thanks. As John Maynard Keynes said (I think) "When the facts change, I change my mind". I still think however that the fundamental structural problem in pilots' working lives is seniority, and this issue is linked closely with union membership. While seniority has some benefits, it ties you in to an organisation with which you may no longer be happy, and so removes you from the free market in jobs, which I believe will become increasingly a feature of every other professional's experience. Fewer jobs-for-life anywhere, increasing numbers of self-employed contractors, perhaps? This profession cannot insulate itself forever from this trend.

[Finman]

OK. It seems the Dan-Air case is a little old hat.

Balpa have moved on - or have they?

Anyone care to comment how well they supported the Buzz guys who were dumped by KLM into the mercy of Ryanair. I understand they didn't score too well there either.

Anyone got the facts?

[Brae_Cwynd]

Errrr, I think you'll find that was the fault of KLM and your man MoL. Not BALPA. As we all know MoL is BALPA's greatest friend and admirer.

BC

[Finman]

Mol is not 'my man'

Can't understand how KLM or MoL could prevent BALPA from doing their job in supporting the Buzz people who were giving them 1% of their salary?

Anyone got the facts?

[Brae_Cwynd]

C'mon Finman, "your man" is the way they speak in Ireland not a suggestion that MoL is YOUR man.

Try to keep up please.

KLM sold the Buzz operation to Ryanair. Nothing much BALPA could do to stop it if the transaction is legal. Ryanair will have no dealings with BALPA and is currently suing them (together with IALPA) in the Irish courts. Plenty of threads on here to demonstrate MoL's hostility to pilot associations. Need I say more?

BC

[Finman]

BC

Sorry, I don't speak irish. If you wish me to 'keep up' then please write in English.

You suggest that Balpa can't/won't do their job in the face of a hostile MOL. Not a great recommendation of a union to join then.

Anyone have the facts as to how Balpa failed the Buzz guys? (preferably in English so that I can keep up)

[SLT]

The problem is as I understand it, not being an expert on this stuff, that a company only has to negotiate with a union if it's recognised within that company. That's why the IPA has very little muscle, despite being a helpful organisation, because it hasn't got the widespread recognition that BALPA has. Unions can't stop something that is completely legal and above board, such as the takeover of one company by another or as in the Buzz case, the sale of a company to another. If the company that's done the taking over doesn't recognise a union then there's not a lot you can do apart from do your negotiating in court. And you can only do that if labour laws have been breached. Distasteful and underhand as the whole business might have been, no laws were broken. All the union can do in such a case is to try and protect its member's interests and watch carefully to make sure all rules are observed.
MOL's hostility to unions is well documented, but given the fact that they've just lost their bid to stop some of their pilots suing over the union issue I suspect we will see a change there at some point. As far as I know it's illegal in the EU for a company to refuse to recognise a legitimate union if over 50% of the workforce are members and the request for recognition is made. It's not that BALPA can't or won't do their job in the face of O'Leary, they're doing (with IALPA) all they can to protect their members. But when you're being obstructed at every turn and having to go to court to get what's rightfully yours no matter how small - it takes time. Progress is being made however!!

[Finman]

Thanks SLT. You make good sense - and in English too.

I actually believe that Ryanair stopped many of the Buzz guys from being unemployed as Buzz was failing and would have been closed down by KLM. I do not expect Balpa to work miracles and a takeover is simply that. However I have also heard on the grapevine that many Buzz guys are very disgruntled about aspects of Balpa support they did not receive. Exactly what they expected or did not receive (which they felt entitled to) is what I am trying to discover.

I am just trying to get to the bottom of all the anti-Balpa rumours before I am willing to commit 1% of my salary to them.

[SLT]

That's very true Finman that there is often a disparity between the expected support, and the actual support one receives. Who knows what actually happened in Buzz - we on the outside can only guess. But it is a fact that if you expect something from the union, and what you get either wasn't quite what you wanted or expected - then naturally you feel a bit put out. However - sometimes people can be unrealistic in their expectations and that can only serve to increase the ill feeling towards the union when what's forthcoming isn't quite what you wanted. It's fair to say that a collective resolution to a problem isn't going to suit everyone and that often is further cause of anti-BALPA feeling. At the end of the day, as you quite rightly say, BALPA are not miracle workers and have to try and acheive the best all round solution.
You have to look at what each union offers - think about the power of collective strength - is there any point in being in IPA when you may be in a BALPA company? - and make your own decision. I don't think anyone would have a problem with your decision either way, so long as it's made based on your own views and has been arrived at by careful thought and perusal of fact, not fiction. I know I'd respect that. Good luck!!!

[xrba]

SLT, and others, the relevance of the BALPA/DANAIR episode for new pilots today is that BALPA. all that time ago, were incontrovertibly proved to be an outfit with no principles or moral scruples whatsoever. The exact details of it's perfidy, or where you heard them from don't change that fact. Since then, a few rules have been altered, and some personalities moved on, but I can find no real evidence that the outfit has been reborn. Until, by it's deeds, not just it's words, it proves otherwise, it will still be regarded as untrustworthy by a substantial section of the pilot fraternity. You could resurrect Robert Maxwell as a new saint, but I will still not give him with 1% of my salary. I wait with bated breath for the next time BALPA is put to the test, but, funnily enough, I don't have too many high hopes.

[SLT]

xrba, you're free to think whatever you like about BALPA and the way it handled the BA/Dan-Air takeover, and I'll respect you for your point of view. But the fact remains that it was 14 years ago - a long time! I don't believe, and most people seem to agree, that if a similar situation were to arise today, that the same thing would or even could happen. My point is that there's an awful lot of rubbish spouted by the anti-BALPA brigade about it - most of which I suspect has no basis in fact. Indeed, as the years go by, I would imagine that the stoies become even further from the truth. Were you there?? I wasn't! I've never come across an industry like this one for rumours - that's why this board is here!! I've had stories related to me as fact by someone in the bar, and they've been distorted beyond belief. I know cos I was there for the real incident! And when you try and put the story straight you get shouted down. Ah well - never let the facts get in the way of a good story eh!!!
I've yet to meet someone who was actually there for Dan-Air - I'd like to because then the facts might come out. But I think that to ask new pilots (even pilots who've been in nearly 10 years like me) to hold BALPA accountable for something that happened 14 years ago is bit much. I said it in my previous post - we're looking forward, not back.

BALPA's changed both in rules and personnel, and labour law has changed too. Carry on believing whatever you want - but I'm more concerned about what's happening in the UK industry today, in the future and most importantly in my own company than by something that happened all those years ago. Am I self-interested?? Maybe, but no one's going to give us anything for free. BALPA's been such a force for good in my company that I shudder to think what would have happened if we didn't have them. No one should kid themselves as to what management would force us all into if we didn't have such strong representation. I can't think of any alternative to BALPA that would have acheived so much. We might not all agree with what the CC do, but again, it's that "best all-round " solution again.

People are free to make whatever decision about BALPA/IPA/whoever they want. But I do believe that that decision should be based on facts, not bar stories.

[Right Way Up]

SLT,
Having looked at your posts I assume you work for Virgin. If you want to know the real lowdown on Dan-Air there are plenty of ex-Dan pilots there on both fleets. You may think 14 years is a long time, but of what I have seen of Balpa unfortunately it still has the attitude that unless you are 100% guaranteed of a win then don't bother. Great if you are like the former Gen Secretary who was all mouth, salary company car and bonuses, but actually did not achieve much. (Was got rid of by a membership coup of sorts). Not so good if you are the line pilot who assumed in a situation such as the Dan-Air one, that his union would do its utmost to protect his job. Here are a few facts:

FACT - Pilots were made redundant out of seniority.
FACT - The most junior Captains on the right fleet and base were still made redundant even though they could have been checked in the RHS. BA could still justify running sim sessions to check on a few pilots they thought might not be their sort!
FACT - BALPA advised the pilots that the case for unfair dismissal was unwinnable and would not pursue it.
FACT - When the pilots group won their case, Balpa tried to jump on the bandwagon.
FACT - The TGWU backed up the groundstaff and won their case.

For this particular case BALPA may as well as been on BA and Heseltines side, because they ducked out a fight they should have stood upto.

p.s my position in this. I was in Dan ops, was a Balpa member at the time, and also one of my family was lucky to be on the right fleet at the right base so went across to BA.

[trent88]

Hi,

You should consider having a insurance, It is comforting to think that nothing will ever happen to you and that you are invincible. But odds are that you are likely to get into an accident or have some type of health problem at some point in your life, and when that happens, you will want to have insurance that does not over charge. So when you question whether you need insurance, the answer is a resounding yes, you definitely need insurance.

for more info http://www.oneshopinsurance.com might help you with your concerns.

good luck!

[SLT]

Hey - no worries, I never said it didn't happen! All I said was that I had never talked about it with someone who was there. You were and you've given us some of what happened - thanks! I feel for the guys who were affected very much - but has BALPA changed?? Well who knows - I like to think it has, but one day it might be me that suddenly finds out it hasn't the hard way. I hope not. From what I've seen in our company (and you're correct by the way!), it has. That could just be our CC of course.

I'm sure there are lots of ex-Dan guys in VS, but I've never had the anti-BALPA chat with them - in fact it's the contrary. In VS the pro-union feeling is stronger than I've seen anywhere. There are the few who aren't members - they may be the ones you're referring to. If they are, then at least they have more legitimate reasons for not joining than the one who makes his mind up after hearing all the "There once was a Captain who got done over...." tittle-tattle.

Once again - I'm not saying it didn't happen and I'm not belittling the guys who went through it one bit. I just think that in today's airlines union protection is becoming more and more important, and you reach a point where you have to look forwards and see what you can acheive together. My opinion!!!

Cheers all

[xrba]

For your information SLT, I was a DANAIR Captain, so I do actually know the facts.