View Poll Results: Should Non BALPA members be excluded from negotiated benefits?
YES
33
44.00%
NO
42
56.00%
Voters: 75. This poll is closed
BALPA Members / Non Members
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BALPA Members / Non Members
In your organisation you probably have pilots who are members of BALPA and those who are not.
Do you think it would be appropriate to EXCLUDE non-members from the benefits negotiated by BALPA on behalf of members?
YES or NO
Do you think it would be appropriate to EXCLUDE non-members from the benefits negotiated by BALPA on behalf of members?
YES or NO
Last edited by flappless; 2nd Sep 2002 at 20:22.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any organisation representing its members should only negotiate benfits for those same members.
Sorry, I thought that it was really simple. Join, get benefits, don't join then **** off! And before I get flamed here, I am not just referring to BALPA.
I think that, as a comitte member myself to a large pilot organisation, benefits should only apply to those that have supported the organisation concerned.
Let me put it another way. Should UK state pensions apply to those that have opted out? No, thought not...
Sorry, I thought that it was really simple. Join, get benefits, don't join then **** off! And before I get flamed here, I am not just referring to BALPA.
I think that, as a comitte member myself to a large pilot organisation, benefits should only apply to those that have supported the organisation concerned.
Let me put it another way. Should UK state pensions apply to those that have opted out? No, thought not...
Last edited by Jetdriver; 4th Sep 2002 at 05:59.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry - we suffer while interminable negotiations take place or we are unable to do our jobs the way we would like to because a particular organisation is in the way.
We suffer and may benefit because of your activity - we don't join you because so far we are not impressed by your performance and having 2 masters (pay or otherwise) leads to confusion.
Convince us it works, then we join.
We suffer and may benefit because of your activity - we don't join you because so far we are not impressed by your performance and having 2 masters (pay or otherwise) leads to confusion.
Convince us it works, then we join.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
President Blair has forced the recognition of unions upon us through legislation aimed at appeasing his paymasters. Many of us object to this imposition especially of reactionary and negative organisations such as BALPA. However, the legislation does prevent the establishment of union country clubs and preferential regimes, it specifically prevents ‘closed shops’ and discrimination. In principle any attempt to force membership of politically affiliated organisations must be wrong.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: HON121º/14 NM
Posts: 664
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I joined BALPA for a number of other services which they offer, and which I have so far found more useful than negotiated benefits. This may change, but the negotiated benefits are not the only reason to join the union.
That said, I don't why I should subsidise some one elses pay rise negotiations.
That said, I don't why I should subsidise some one elses pay rise negotiations.
Me neither. However, since my company have been represented by BALPA (about two years now), the company council still do nearly all of work, but the only people who now get the info and get to vote are the BALPA members. Hardly seems like democracy to me.
One percent is a lot of cash. Some people haven't joined because they just can't afford it. More people need to be encouraged to join, perhaps with lower fees and voluntary purchase of the legal cover.
And despite having recently signed up lots of new companies for representation, BALPA are still only really intersted in BA. You only have to look at the situation at Maersk to see that.
DW (BALPA member)
One percent is a lot of cash. Some people haven't joined because they just can't afford it. More people need to be encouraged to join, perhaps with lower fees and voluntary purchase of the legal cover.
And despite having recently signed up lots of new companies for representation, BALPA are still only really intersted in BA. You only have to look at the situation at Maersk to see that.
DW (BALPA member)
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Uranus
Posts: 450
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dan,
Absolutely right about BALPA only being really interested in BA. In my firm we tried getting them involved and most of us joined, their response and assistance received was ****** all..............
Now most of us have resigned in disgust, me included.
Absolutely right about BALPA only being really interested in BA. In my firm we tried getting them involved and most of us joined, their response and assistance received was ****** all..............
Now most of us have resigned in disgust, me included.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 2,584
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh for heaven's sake! This old chestnut again.
Dan, Dan, I'm sorry you're disillusioned but...The only people who are able to make a Union work are YOU, the workers. Your company council IS BALPA if you are recognised, and I'm sorry but a local failure of BALPA is usually the failure of the local members to help themselves. There is no superior force that is deployed from BALPA HQ, you may be able to get negotiators etc but if YOU don't organise it nothing will happen. Why is that a surprise?
It is utter rubbish to say BALPA has no interest in non BA, total cobblers. Perhaps BA's successes with BALPA result from the unusual level of solidarity thet BA pilots show, in contrast with most other companies that struggle to reach the critical mass to reach recognition due to pilot apathy. Own goal, sorree!
You, yes you pilots are BALPA, no one else. It's not called the "British Airline Pilots Nannying Association", is it? Yet that seems to be the expectation of many. Fees too high? Tell that to the Kegworth crew.
Come on folks, BALPA is first and foremost the best and only legal insurance you can have if it all goes horibly pear-shaped, and secondly will offer you the advantage of skilled negotiators and legal advice on less contentious industrial relations matters if you only bother to all pll together to organise it. Act alone as most pilots do and, well, fall by the wayside alone. And serve you right.
Can't afford it, one percent? Come off it!
Dan, Dan, I'm sorry you're disillusioned but...The only people who are able to make a Union work are YOU, the workers. Your company council IS BALPA if you are recognised, and I'm sorry but a local failure of BALPA is usually the failure of the local members to help themselves. There is no superior force that is deployed from BALPA HQ, you may be able to get negotiators etc but if YOU don't organise it nothing will happen. Why is that a surprise?
It is utter rubbish to say BALPA has no interest in non BA, total cobblers. Perhaps BA's successes with BALPA result from the unusual level of solidarity thet BA pilots show, in contrast with most other companies that struggle to reach the critical mass to reach recognition due to pilot apathy. Own goal, sorree!
You, yes you pilots are BALPA, no one else. It's not called the "British Airline Pilots Nannying Association", is it? Yet that seems to be the expectation of many. Fees too high? Tell that to the Kegworth crew.
Come on folks, BALPA is first and foremost the best and only legal insurance you can have if it all goes horibly pear-shaped, and secondly will offer you the advantage of skilled negotiators and legal advice on less contentious industrial relations matters if you only bother to all pll together to organise it. Act alone as most pilots do and, well, fall by the wayside alone. And serve you right.
Can't afford it, one percent? Come off it!
