What happens to a union in any close Ballot?

[Angryfool]

In relation to the BACC ballot recently over work coverage, which was passed by a slim majority 53% to 47%, what implications will this have on the union and it's members?

In fighting within the union, members begining to realise exactly what they've signed up to, a lot of members who voted no being bitter and conspiracy theories about vote rigging from some. Makes you wonder though, someone like me who voted yes, is this the start of the downhill slope for the BACC? The closest vote for ages, the no voters, 47% of them aren't all 'unable to fully understand the details' as one of our reps stated.

Serious issues need to be resolved, starting with some of the reps looking at themselves.

[Human Factor]

IMHO, a close vote is not a bad thing. It shows BA that the pilots will not easily roll over. The pay deal was approx 70/30 in favour as well remember, not especially cut and dried.

If the BACC were to make a recommendation and consistently have a 99% vote in that direction, all BA would need to be concerned about would be getting the reps on side. The rest would be easy.

The membership are not easily convinced - not surprising given the occasionally cosy history of the past few years. I quite like it that way and I believe it makes the BACC position stronger as BA know they need to appeal to a somewhat broader base. Keep in mind the current set of reps are not likely to have the wool pulled over their eyes either.

[Angryfool]

Human Factor

Keep in mind the current set of reps are not likely to have the wool pulled over their eyes either.

Perhaps more like the current set of reps are more like the military police, and castigate anyone who critisises any part of the work coverage agreement. They come across as patronising, condescending and a few more things which I don't care to mention. That is what i meant by the reps need to take a close look at themselves!

[niknak]

Well chaps. a vote is a vote and in any union contest, the majority carry the vote, thats how Unions, Employers and the Law sees it.

Obviously you are not happy with the service you are getting from you rep's so why not volunteer to take on the role?

I can assure you, that as a Rep myself, you will encounter people like yourself every day of the week, always willing to give out considered opinion and to criticise, but rarely willing to take up the role or responsibility.

That said, I would urge you to take a more active part, it's remarkable how much you'd learn.

[Angryfool]

niknak

I can assure you, that as a Rep myself, you will encounter people like yourself every day of the week, always willing to give out considered opinion and to criticise, but rarely willing to take up the role or responsibility.

Please do tell what people like myself are? Have you read my post at all? You may wish to tell me exactly what or who I am criticising.

If you say as you are, a rep, then;

Obviously you are not happy with the service you are getting from you rep's so why not volunteer to take on the role?

This is exactly what i'm alluding to. It is dangerous to assume without having all the necessary information to hand. What service am I not happy with? Have I questioned the democracy/legality of the ballot. No. For one who voted yes to the work coverage, i'm glad it went through, just about.

What do you think my concern is niknak?

[puddle-jumper2]

NikNak,

Are you saying that pilots who are not prepared to be reps themselves are NOT entitled to have an opinion ?
Or perhaps it's OK to have an opinion as long as it's supportive of their CC

[hunterboy]

Perhaps more like the current set of reps are more like the military police

With some of the reps taking 30 - 40 hrs BALPA credit a month for their duties, in essence, they are part time pilots on full time pay, why on earth would they want to rock the boat by being obstructive or argumentative?
Far better to spend a career flying aeroplanes twice a month, with nice big blocks of days off available for draft (no names, no pack drill), spending all that time at home with the wife and kids.The only down side is shrugging your shoulders to the hard working line pilot with the line, "well, this is the best we could get...."

[frangatang]

And no more does it apply to than the reps liviing overseas.Very cosy,couple of trips a month at the most.Ask them why they work so little and its the standard..l do it all from home.Bollox

[hunterboy]

Unless BALPA (i.e, the Reps grow some balls and start thinking strategically and not tactically), the T&C's in BA are going to go downhill rapidly. This new Work Coverage agreement looks terrible on the face of it. Maybe BALPA have pulled a blinder and the agreement has some unforeseen effects. Sadly, judging by our recent agreements, I think our reps have fallen into the trap of thinking they are running the company and doing the mgmts' jobs for them. No wonder LCG can afford a new Bentley and walks around with a permanent grin on his face.

[Dick Deadeye]

Doesn't affect me anymore, but over many, many, years, one of BALPA's BA company council's biggest failings, and one of BA's best ploys, was to get too involved in solving BA's problems for them, and to believe that they were somehow helping to run the airline.

Most of us paid our dues for BALPA to solve our problems, not BAs.

Any guesses on how long before the next BALPA rep's name is added to the list of defections to a senior management job?

Mike Jeffrey (1970s)
Colin Seaman (1980s)
Rob Hall (1990s)
............(2000s)

Seems like the present crowd, like those before them, need a reminder they are a union, not an aviation consultancy.