BALPA union or pilot club?
 

Fellow Aviators.

I would be interested in the views of UK pilots past and present on BALPA. The question being union or pilot club.

The view I have based on 30 years in the industry is as follows:

The complaints I hear frequently about BALPA are as follows:

1. It is often said to be a BA pilot union but this is unjust as BA pilots make up less than 50% of BALPA pilots.

2. BALPA is inward and failing to deal with issues at the heart of union 'raison d'etre' such as occupational health or flight safety issues. perhaps the issue of aircraft cockpit smells and fumes and the best example of this point. On one hand the newer IPA now at 2000 members seems to be doing exactly what unions should do, fighting a serious occupational health issue and investing in research to prove exposure and members of a gloabl group tackling these matters sitting beside the TGWU (now 'Uunions unite'...?) who have equally been very outspoken on these matters and who I have been advised by a CSD friend are running legal cases against BA for crew illnesses. The TGWU are also fighting hard on these issues I am told. BALPA on the other hand I am told by a spokesperson for HQ tell me support the COT work. A surf of the net has revealed to me a paper put together by the Government which looks like it was written by a child. BALPA support a report which my friends says pilots do not have to report these smells!!! Surely a lie? The son of a fellow Hamble friend tells me BA have not done any Risk Assessments in these regards and BALPA are doing nothing. The more you dig the more interesting it gets. I am told the head of this global research group (name escapes me) is reported to be a former BALPA NEC member who set up this group of over 500,000 crews yet BALPA are absent. This makes me feel that BALPA on this front is a failing to protect our colleagues. In fact the ongoing smells at FlyBe seems to be weekly stories in the media. My cousin flew the 146 for Dan Air and he was complaining 20 years ago...this has to be BALPA' biggest failure.

3. Work Time. BALPA have tried to bring change but again have failed, work practises in many UK airlines are seriously different from the big companies like Virgin and BA and here BALPA are failing again.

4. Drug and Alcohol Policy. This has been a good sucess for BALPA and they should be commended.

5. Climate Change. This recent initiative to try and claim its not our fault is pure nonsense. BALPA should never have taken this view but workedmore to find solutions.

I have outlined a few points and would be interested in your views. But for an old timer I have to conclude that BALPA seem to always put the industry needs first even if it is at the detremint to its members health or the planet we all live on.

Many say many are only in BALPA for the insurance on that dark winters night.... A neighbour and former KLM UK pilot tells me his friends are sick (from oil fumes) and asking BALPA to help but silence and inaction is all that is happening. If we don't fight legal battles for our sick friends and former work mates, then what's the point.

BALPA I fear is no longer a union as we hoped it would be.

Gents and Ladies, what are your candid views on the matter?

In response:

1) Your figures seem correct.

2) BALPA claim that they are doing something about fumes but they'll get better results by working in partnership with other agencies than by banging on the table shouting "WE DEMAND ACTION". I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt a little longer.

3) Of course work practices are different in some companies to Virgin and BA and I think it's unrealistic to expect complete consistency across the industry. BALPA have no leverage with a company except through it's members in that company. If the membership is low how exactly should they force the management to change?

4) I agree.

5) I disagree strongly. Much of the so called evidence for climate change is pure bunkum, especially the nonsense about the temperature of the USA dropping after 9/11 as aircraft were grounded. Why can't the climate change doomsayers explain why it was hot enough to grow grapes in Northern England in Roman times yet they had no aircraft, power stations or internal combustion engines? I expect my union to contest baseless claims and I also want them to give the public a reality check about the relative scale of each part of the problem. No point talking ourselves out of a job if the sacrifice is cancelled out by a new power station opening in China next week.

I really can't agree with your suggestion that BALPA puts the industry first, I just don't se any evidence of that. What I don't want is the association becoming a single issue pressure group with all our funds p*****d up the wall on frivolous lawsuits pursuing oil fumes damages which don't have a hope of succeeding. If we can draw some conclusive, irrefutable links between oil fumes and sickness then I'll be right behind the lawsuits but right now there just doesn't seem to be enough data.

Oh come on, you aren't seriously trying to plug the IPA over Balpa now, are you? It certainly seems like that.

I am a member of both and feel that I am in a position to make a valid comparison. Balpa is not only much larger and stronger but have the expertise on staff to handle most situations. The IPA (or IPF if you are trying to make a real comparison) is several leagues down the list in terms of expertise, experience and clout.

If yoy want to compare them both along the lines of union or pilot club, then the IPA certainly fits the latter much better than Balpa. I would assess the IPA more of a junior pilots club which helps them feel better about trying to find their first jobs.

Balpa has many study groups that have a real effect on the industry. They are more often than not invited to the many conferences and working groups when new procedures or systems and technology are introduced. They have sway in the industry and operate to a high standard of prosecution.

We often see the impatient but ignorant rants on here from people who have little understanding of how things actually work in the industry and in politics. They expect quick, simple fixes to complex and intricate problems. typical knee jerk reactions but like the old RR Spey egines (an old Trident pilot would know about those) are 90% noise and 10% thrust.

To throw the old adage that most pilots are in Balpa just for the legal insurance protection shows the typical ignorance of most non or anti-Balpa noisemakers and assumes an equally ignorant approach to union or association recognition. Most of us who are in Balpa will have researched the benefits of being in the union and concluded that there is far more to it than the usual IPA rhetoric that their legal cover is on a par with that of Balpa's.

The only thing that the IPA have managed to do is split the brotherhood of pilots and give management a neat wedge to drive into any aspiring pilot groups with a divide and conquer strategy. You onky have to look at the debates on here from Jet2 pilots who are in dire need of proper recognition. Amateurs pining for serious recognition getting shafted left, right and centre by their management through joint workers councils. There are other companies that have unilaterally recognised the IPA as the official union and you only have to look at the lifestyles and remuneration standards in those companies and compare them to the ones where Balpa is recognised as the prime representative union for the pilots. It is like comparing chalk and cheese when you compare the standards.

There is much more but I won't waste any more time. To answer the question, "is Balpa a union or pilot club?" the answer is neither. It is an association of British airline pilots which has been growing steadily for many, many years and has some political lobbying power, working study groups that look out for our interests and enough professional expertise on staff to assist the many Company Councils in their day to day work protecting our lifestyles and renumeration.

BALPA??

British Airways Line Pilots Association

As an unenthusiastic member of many years I can say that it is probably only that 'dark winter night' scenario that keeps me in the 'Union'. The perception remains - however invalid - that it is very much concerned primarily with BA. Furthermore, its assistance when needed is not guaranteed and will depend upon its own view of events rather than any undertaking to assist members even in seemingly impossible circumstances. Until, however, a really worthwhile alternative exists that can achieve recognition by employers, the Association will retain its pre-eminence.

Union or professional 'Association' - now thats another story completely !

I have never understood why pilots do not consider joining a big union like the TGWU. Is it considered to "working class" ?
BALPA did well for the Dan Air staff, and have been vocal in their opposition to self sponsored type ratings haven't they? :suspect:

BALPA is not perfect but then who is!
Their stance on the ridiculous security we as crew have to endure annoys me as they make great claims as to what they have done on their site. When the reality is they have done very little other than write a few cosy letters to the authorities. When they should be holding them by the balls and telling them that their members will not put up with it any longer.

But in their defence they have much improved things where I work and I can honestly say I have very little to moan about because of their efforts.
They have also taken on and won concessions from the tax man which I or anyone else could not have done as an individual.

They are also the only show in town when it comes to that dark horrible place due to their worldwide connections and legal eagles that know aviation law.

As for the TGWU I’m sure they are very good and use to be a member years ago when I was in engineering. But feel they would be somewhat lost in the world of aviation due to no other reason than it is not their sphere of expertise.

Regarding their stance on security, perhaps you have't read this: BALPA SECURES NEW BAGS PROTOCOL

Just one more little thing that helps us but goes relatively unnoticed. Staements like "grabbing them by the balls" don't really help and deep down you know that these things take time and a lot of work behind the scenes to achieve.

So, please, let's have a bit more common sense and realistic objectives based on a proper understanding of how the world really works. Leave the knee jerks for the gym. :rolleyes:

Ok hadn’t seen that but can’t say it makes much odds as the liquid rules remain so unless I want to loose the contents of my bath bag I will have to continue to check bag.

All the inconsistencies still remain i.e. can take case through at certain southern UK base to go in hold yet at others you are not allowed which is costing companies a lot of money to send crew bags down conveyor belt on positioning flights.

Knee jerk I think not this has now been ongoing for enough time for the authorities to come to their senses but they seem to choose not to listen. So please tell me how to approach a body that will not listen other than by using our collective power to make them listen?

Capt Tim Bamber
 

I think BALPA has failed its members on fatigue, flight time and now air fumes, in other areas it has been average.

I have been reading about the air fumes and wondered who the Captain Tim Bamber who is quoted as speaking for BALPA is. Sometimes he is listed as a dentist and sometimes as a Captain. Are there 2 Tim bambers?

Is the Captain Tim bamber the same as the Dentist Tim Bamber who was done for false records by the dental board? Is this person an employee of BALPA or a BA pilot or what?

Sounds like the sort of question that you would like to get your teeth into!

I can not understand why it is that BALPA as a Union charges 1% before tax of a pilots salary as opposed to charging a flat rate subscription. It seems to me to be a licence to print money.
It would also seem to me that if you want promotion in a BALPA recognised company then you need to put your name forward for a BALPA post election. Shortly after you have been elected into your BALPA position, you will be offered a managment post in the company you are working for.
1% of an average salary for someone just starting out on a 40 year career works out at around £40,000 over the career asuming an average salary of £100,000 pa over the next 40 years.

Except Blackball, there are few pilots who will average £100k over the 40yrs of a career (sounds like simon calder all over again) and a significant portion of the 1% you speak of, qualifies for a tax refund..if you claim for it.

Maybe the said "individuals" might think that given BALPAs proclivity for navel gazing and seemingly little else, that 1% is on the steep side.

morally vapid individuals who navel gaze while undergoing a tim bamber prophylaxis should not be docked 1% tax refund or not:)

What??? :confused: 'BALPA did well for the DanAir staff' - not on my planet they didn't. Five year of paying my dues and I got shafted by them. And many others along with me. Yes it was a long time ago - fifteen years any day now - but some things you don't forget and forgive.
:yuk::mad:

There's a red herring if ever there was! The majority of pilots join BALPA for the legal protection. This means that the spread of membership is not based upon how well some pilots think they'll be represented, but is largely due to the "insurance" against individual, illegal victimisation.

The fact is that BALPA has a proven history of fighting well for the interests of BA pilots, but has an equally proven history of frequent, miserable failure when representing pilots in other companies. There are success stories (and no doubt some will respond by describing them as "evidence" in support of a counter argument), but they are few and far between when compared to BA success stories.

I tire of hearing this cop out! It must be part of the indoctrination process for new CC members, based upon the number of them who've quoted it to me, almost word for word.

The evidence clearly indicates no shortfall of pilot sentiment and agression. Time and time and time again there have been clear cut votes by pilot workforces in favour of action. Time and time and time again BALPA has weakened and backed out of supporting any action!

Unless you're a BA pilot. BALPA is your union and you know it!

Stop blaming the pilot workforces for BALPA weakness!

How exactly do you expect BALPA to fight for a workforce if they've not got the balls to do anything about it? The head office team are always there to provide support and legal advice to individual company councils, but it's down to the company council, ie your colleagues, to do something. BALPA are not some knight on a white stallion who rides to the rescue and fixes all problems. BALPA are the company council in each employer who have to engage with the management. If you vote in muppets then you'll get poor results. BALPA works well in BA because the BA company council are very effective. I've seen company councils who've shot themselves in the foot with both barrels with ridiculous demands and gotten no improvements. The results you get depend on how good the leadership is within your company. The same head office team that gets results for BA, Easy, Britannia is the same head office team that doesn't get results for others.

Ask the Monarch pilots about \BALPA. They won a pretty good deal, led by a good CC, ably supported by big BALPA. No union is perfect, BALPA is better than most.

I think I am pretty well qualified to comment on this having spent several years on a CC. I have also recently been forced to resign from my job and seek redress for constructive dismissal.
So I have seen Balpa from its inner workings out.
Put at its most simplistic, Balpa is grossly under resourced and as a result has to be highly selective about where it spends money. Recent accounts show gross revenues of circa £4m and legal budgets of less than £250K (for circa 10000 members!!).
My experience as an individual member needing help were very unsatisfactory. The impression I was left with was a well oiled operation trying to give the semblance of support but in reality offering nothing of any use. The legal support was well below par and, although my case was referred to lawyers for an opinion, Balpa's chosen specialists became experts on my case without any meeting with me or returning any of my phone calls. The filtering process is such that if these "specialists" advise the non qualified guy in Balpa that there is a less than fifty percent chance of success then Balpa does the Pontius Pilate thing and washes its hands.......
Having experienced this I retained my own advisers out of my own pocket and have just secured a very satisfactory settlement..........absolutely no thanks to Balpa.
So..........if you join Balpa expecting the best legal support if you need it, fgorget it! Your own household insurers probably provide better cover by referring you to specialists without precondition if you tick the "legal cover" box,.......really.
As a political lobbying organisation then Balpa are pretty sound. The general secretary and MG himself read and interview well and both like to wander the corridors of power talking to politicians and important people. I know for a fact that the Gen Sec was surprised at how appalling much airline mangement was when he joined the union a few years ago and that his expectations of something more akin to a gentlemens club were not met.
We were absolutely disgusted when one of thefirst major actions taken under the new stewardship was a high profile and expensive campaign to raise the threshold of pension pots to closer to two million than one million. This caused enormous offence to many of us particularly those working for scabby shorthaul operations where retirment with pensions of £10K a year was not unheard of. Nothing has been done on a similar level to address the very real issue of poverty in retirment of a lot of members and would be members.
This issue certainly gave oxygen to the view that Balpa was more at home taking on issues of greatest interest to BA members and their fortunate kinfolk.
There was then of course the Harmer case!!.....Need I say more except to wonder at why such resources and prioritisation were afforded (clearly at the expense of less glamorous grass roots needs)? High profile, attention grabbing, politically correct.......yes. But why was such attention given to a single member when this case has single handedly done more to destroy the careers of would be women pilots than anything else recently? Mad!

On a company council basis, the quality of support is totaly determined by who is your Principal Negotiator. There is at least one who is tireless, gifted, proactive and brilliant..........most of the others are thoroughly average. Above all, they are all grossly overworked and there are not enough of them.
So, overall, it is probably sensible to be a member on the basis of some element of security provided by collective representation, but dont delude yourself that Balpa will be there for you when the chips are down. Your lottery of support will be determined by many factors other than your own interests and, not least, by the resources of an impoverished and under resourced union.

TinyTim

excellent post, mirrors my experiences. Paid my dues from day 1 with 1st employer. 8 years on I needed BALPA ...... never did get a reply to my frantic calls! They soon rang back when I cancelled the DD

Some council members go above and beyond for the good of the members and some lobbying has been beneficial.
However, as you rightly say, I have guarenteed legal cover with my home insurance policy.

CLUB......

I would like to echo many of TT's well made points. I don't think BALPA do a good job of representing the interests of it's members who are employed by the smaller operators (not sure I'd use 'scabby' as an adjective but I get your drift.....) - it's my belief/perception that they are more interested in the bigger players - and I'll make no apologies for again mentioning the 'plight' of many BALPA members who are currently serving their 'apprenticeships' in poorly paid instructor posts! As for the proliferation of SSTRs, I quite agree GAWZK - the union has been remarkably mouselike on this issue - any connection with the fact that BA are one of the few employers who don't bond/expect a TR as a condition of employment??? And I quite agree that the significant expenditure on Ms JS could and should have been much better spent - a complete misappropriation of funds IMHO.

For the record, I'm with BA and have worked in the regions after starting as an instructor..........

PS Luddite - if you look at again at GAWZK's post again, I think you'll see that he certainly wasn't defending BALPA's stance re Danair ;)

I think that BALPA, many years ago, was the BA Line Pilots Association, and I can whole heartedly understand why ex Dan Air pilots are members of the IPA and TGWU. But these days are now gone. I agree that BALPA are only as effective as the CC that represents your views, but also you need 90% membership (if not more) to be very effective.No good balloting strike action with only 70% membership.

I am lead to believe, the reason BALPA is very effective for BA is because of their membership. Maybe someone can correct me, but I have heard that in BA you either join BALPA or pay the equivalent subscription to charity (not too sure about this).

I have been a member ever since I started my flying training. 1% of salary may seem a lot to some people, but if it wasn't for BALPA my salary would be a lot less than it is today. The 1% I pay has more than payed fo itself.

BALPA has prevented demotions/redundancies in our company after 9/11.

I haven't got a bad word to say. Although I would like to see more happening on the fumes front.

The only thing that really gets my goat, is the free loaders who pay nothing, yet reap the rewards of my subscriptions. Then have the cheek to say that they don't get a say in whats happening with their T & C's etc.

Sorry but if any comment on this thread reeked of envy then that was it. Why shouldn't BALPA lobby to raise pension limits if it affects BALPA members? At what, if any, detriment to other members is this? Why should BALPA be addressing the issue of poverty in retirement? That is a social concern and the place for the government. BALPAs concern is the retirement status of pilots and is tackled, correctly in my opinion, by pushing for better pay deals and better pension schemes for pilots. Thats what they have been done. Opposing a cap on pension limits is no different to imposing a cap on pay. Would you expect people to meekly accept a cap on pilots salaries of, say, £50K, just because there are people in scabby shorthaul operations who aren't earning £50K?

An intersting mix of misinformation and personal opinion there. First, you are referring to the Starmer case. Politically correct? Perhaps in your opinion, but this case was just the first that came to bat in an employers refusal to offer adequate right-to-request part time working to an employee. It had significant positive benefits for any pilot in that company, both male and female, and exposed the managements many safety and experienced reasons for opposing the part time working as bare-faced lies attempting to disguise the fact that they simply didn't want to pay to comply with the RTR legislation. All employees are required to comply with RTR legislation and it's now clear from this case that for a large company to say "We simply don't want to pay for it" simply won't wash at a tribunal. That benefits, Starmer, you, me or any other pilot, of either sex, who wished to request part time working.

As for single-handedly destroying the careers of female pilots, well I think compulsory maternity leave probably had a far bigger effect than that. If an employer is the kind who would be deterred from hiring females because of the possibility they might request part time working in the future then they are probably already deterred by the prospect of maternity leave.

The use of the indirect sexual discrimination claim was controversial, but there's more than one way to skin a cat and sometimes it's the end result that counts more than the means. Al Capone went to jail for life for tax evasion rather than the countless murders he sanctioned, but what's more important? That he's convicted of murder or that he goes way for ever? It is clear from your post that you really don't know the first thing about the Starmer case, not the build up, not the course of the tribunal, not the lies, double-speak, deceptions and political manoueverings of the management involved. Perhaps if you held off your Daily Mail style rants until you did know something about it you'd see the highly significant subtleties of the case. In ten years time you might even think that BALPA were actually ahead of the game on this one.

That'll be BALPA the British Airline Pilots Association, not the British Flying Instructors Association? Flying a C152 around with a student is not airline flying and is beyond BALPAs remit. Is it not the case that instructors are only associate, not full members anyway?

And what connection would that be do you think? Why shouldn't an employee bond? A type rating can be an expensive thing, why should smaller operators not be allowed some surety that the people they are training will stay with them? In the world outside flying fixed term contracts are quite common with penalties for early termination. SSTRs only exist because people will pay for them. If nobody was willing to stump up the cash then the whole idea would die, but there's always somebody out there willing to work for less.

Sadly you don't know the first thing about the case either, so jump off the bandwagon.

With an "I am allright Jack" apologist for Balpa like Mr Solo spitting his venom at all and sundry here I cant help but feel that this attitude characterises that which so many of us are discontent about.

My post was essentialy about resources (or lack of) and the prioritisation for their use.......not the politics of envy.

Yes it was a mistake to mention Ms Starmer because of the hysteria the mere mention invokes in some.........At the risk of repeating myself I gave the " Million pound plus pension potter campaign" and Ms S's case (BTW.........how much of that £250 000 went into her case?......at least£100 000 I bet) as examples of where Balpa had deployed scarce resources without regard to the needs of grass roots trade union issues (which I dare to suggest should be any trade union's priority)

These were indeed doubtless both worthy causes...but had no relevance to the majority of us members and were a waste of scarce resources......especially when the result is that Balpa cannot support a member who has lost his job.

I await your nasty and personal response Mr Solo.

Completely agree with TT.

HS you are not on the same planet...........1400 plus posts!!!! Get a life!

Condescension - don't you just admire that in a post eh, Mr Solo? :D

If BALPA is purely for airline pilots, why allow non-airline pilots membership? And if you are going to allow non-airline pilots membership (admittedly at a reduced associate rate) surely the parent organisation has a moral if not legal obligation to look out for their interests too?! Or are you suggesting a sliding scale of benefits based on annual subscriptions? I.E - the more you pay the more you get? I'm sorry HS, but your trite comment about BALPA being only for airline pilots is complete tosh. I'd be very interested to note how many of the UK's airline pilots started out as instructors - I think that many of those who did, might have opinions at variance with yours and have a bit more empathy for those at the bottom of the ladder!!! But then empathy is a concept with which I doubt you can relate, judging by the content and tone of some of your posts.....................

As far as JS is concerned - you are quite correct in suggesting that I don't know every last detail of the case. Does that disqualify me and others from expressing an opinion? I'm certainly not alone in my opinion as many of my flightdeck colleagues expressed similar views at the time of the case.

As far as SSTRs go, there are few people who support the idea. I realise that market forces and the desperation of wannabees means that they will continue for the forseeable future. But that does not mean that BALPA should sit idly by - surely it can at least publically condemn the practice of employers passing training costs on to the employee? It could show some leadership, take the moral high ground and do some serious lobbying. The point I am attempting to make is that BALPA can and should be doing more on this issue - head office employs some clever/media savvy people and I'm sure that can come up with something useful.

Bus Boy,
Did you ring the correct number? They have responded pretty sharpish on the only occassion I have had to ring it. On a weekend as well.:)
TT, BALPA I believe have always had the option in not supporting an unwinable case, as that would be a waste of monies. The trouble is that each and every lawyer you talk too often gives a different opinion. It is an opinion after all. I do not know, but I suspect that the number of non-supported cases are very few, if any. TT I'm not sure if yours was supported or not? or that you were just unhappy with those particular lawyers, so if you were not supported you have my sympathies. But is their any better alternative ? At least when it comes to it with BALPA at least their affiliated unions will be the ones that should be helping to get you out of the local jail when abroad.:cool:

No harm in reminding ourselves that it was the likes of Hand Solo and his mates in BA who about five years ago engineered the coup at Balpa which saw the booting out of the then general secretary Chris Darke. For what reason? One of his greatest sins was that he was a reformer and was trying to move Balpa in a more grass roots direction away from the cosy association that was there to advise on tax breaks, second homes and lifestyle choices on retirement at 55.............
The coup was successful and after an interim period where office was held by a BA Longhaul skipper the present General secretary was then engaged fresh from the revenue with all his connections there.......
Small wonder he sought to quickly repay his plutocrat sponsors by ensuring their final salary pension funds could approach the two million mark without penalty.
Sorry that epitomises Balpa even now...........the same faces are in office. It is a club serving the interests of very few and rips off the rest of us.
Dont waste your money. You can get legal insurance for very little cost elsewhere.

GC
So that will be why the NEC have just elected a new chairman and vice chair(wo)man inn the last week.

The winds of change are about to blow through the organisation.

Ice Pick......having been in the law for over twenty years myself I know only too well that there are as many opinions as there are lawyers. The same goes for the view to be taken over a set of facts by different Industrial Tribunal Chairmen. Litigation is a lottery. However, if there is clear evidence of bad behaviour and inappropriate conduct on behalf of an employer (abundant in my case), generally a Tribunal will try to give an applicant a remedy.

Balpa is correct in having a process to vet claims. This process however is overseen by a non lawyer, does not adequately consider submissions and has a tame lawyer on hand to endorse "its too risky" so Balpa are not interested. With the pathetically small legal budget available to Balpa you do not have to look far to realise why this check is in place.

Like I said before, dont look to Balpa to give you legal cover,make your own arrangements. There are however reasons to be a member despite this in my submission.

The BALPA legal budget is £525,000 for the coming year much in line with last years. It is only a budget and if more is needed the reserves will cover it.

So TT did they support you or not? and if not is that the norm or is it a rare occurance ?
I'm not having a go at you TT, am just interested as I suspect the BALPA legal cover is very high on members reasons for membership.:)

Sorry Ice Pick, Was not avoiding the question. Answer was no they did not as their lawyers said my case had a less than fifty percent chance of success..........without having met me and none of my telephone calls to the lawyer to discuss my case having been returned.
I retained my own specialists, pursued the matter and got an excellent, but not unexpected, result- no thanks to Balpa.
Boeingman......... half a mill goes absolutely nowhere in legal terms and one Starmer type adventure could easily scoff the lion's share. Hardly surprising Balpa are so reluctant to spend it!

Balpa
 

I have not been long enough in Balpa to commen their performance. So far they have done a good job. Not excellent but ok. I've been in unions which were not as effective as Balpa. But its mainly the size and lobby which makes them rather effective. But when it comes to a certain issue in a company, the Crew Council has to do the job. So it depends on their performance. I think in nowadays aviation business you do not necessarily need to be in a union unless you work for the bigger airlines such as BA.

Were you a member of the same BALPA I was in? This is the 'reformer' Chris Darke who tried to avoid a re-election campaign and secure himself in his post with a hefty pay rise? The Chris Darke who was at the helm when BALPA was invisible from the media? The Chris Darke who was overseeing a spiral decline in our working lives with barely a murmur? That reforming Chris Darke. Well I'm sorry for you that you didn't like the fact that he was replaced by a stalking horse candidate who happened to be a BA pilot, who happened to be the only person with sufficient balls to stand against Darke. And I'm sorry if it doesn't please you that he stuck exactly to the manifesto on which all BALPA members had the opportunity to vote on - to seek a capable replacement for Chris Darke - despite the oft aired views on here that it was all a BA conspiracy and the stalking horse would install himself permanently. I'm sorry if you don't like the fact that BALPA recruited an experienced trade unionist who knows his business inside and out to replace Darke. Perhaps it's not to your liking that BALPA know gets more media coverage in a month than the during the entire duration of Darkes reign; that JM is asked to speak on national TV and radio to represent us; that BALPA is fighting back in the environmental debate on our behalf with informed, and scientifically backed comment, to counter the green hysteria; that BALPA has got tax breaks on it's subscriptions, and impoved tax free allowances, for all full members; that BALPA has overseen significant pay deals at Virgin, Easy and BA, and lobbied hard for bmi members to the extent of balloting for industrial action. If you preferred the silence, inaction and BOHICA attitude of Chris Darkes leadership then all of the above must be a grave dissappointment to you.

Tinytim - if your post was about the lack of resources and not the politics of envy then why choose those examples. The pensions lobby did not come from the legal defence budget. We pay JM a full time salary and he moves around the corridors of power lobbying contacts for that. Do you really think it cost so mcuh more for him to bend a few more ears while he was there? Do you really think the campaign material they printed was any more expensive than producing a copy of The Log, or those annual filofax pages they send us that everybody throws in the bin? Bang for buck I'd hazard a guess that the pensions cap campaign was something of a bargain.

You state that you have 20 years law experience and that it's right that BALPA should vet which legal cases it pursues. On the other hand you question the JS case. I'm going to make an assumption here, and please correct me if I'm wrong, but I guess that you have never discussed the case with either of the Starmers, the BALPA reps involved, BALPAs lawyers or the BA managers involved. If that is the case then you are completely uninformed about the details of this case. Do you not think that perhaps it is unwise to quote it as an example. Do you think that if a case passes the legal means test of BALPAs legal advises and represents an almost watertight case for a member (as demonstrated by the victories at tribunal and subsequent appeal) that it shouldn't be pursued if it is deemed by the vox populi to be politically correct? Should all BALPA legal support be subject to popular support by a membership ignorant of the facts of any case? Which grass roots trade union issues did BALPA fail to support because of this case? Incidentally did you win your case at tribunal/court or did the other party settle before a decison was reached?

Sid the sexist:

For the same reason that the professional engineering associations allow associate membership to those who are not practicing engineers. It allows those who intend to pursue the career to remain up to date on developments in the industry. It allows them to benefit from career development advice. Associate membership does not confer full membership status on the member. BALPAs moral obligation to associate members is to assist them gaining a career within BALPAs remit and to defend the terms and conditions of that career as best they can for the associates arrival there and thats what they do. There is no need for a sliding scale of contributions. Full members pay their 1% and every full member is as entitled to BALPAs representation and any other. If you want to extend full represenation to flying instructors then why not extend it to airline cadets, or PPLs who are hours building, or air cadets. Where will it end?

Every last detail? I doubt you even know the first details! By all means you can express an opinion, but maybe you should caveat it by mentioning that you really don't actually know anything about the case and your opinion is uninformed. I too have heard many of my/your flightdeck colleagues express negative opinions on the case. Strangely enough when I press them on their views they, to a man (and woman) don't actually know any of the details of the case either. Funny how we condemn the journalists for espousing writing uninformed pap about flying yet we're quite happy to pontificate about a colleague with only the most meagre understanding of the issues.

I agree, although I think you'll find rather less public sympathy for your cause outside the industry. You might also find that publically condeming an airline could be somewhat disadvantageous to existing BALPA members in that airline, if not in terms of lost revenue then in the damage to a working relationship with the management. Megaphone diplomacy rarely yields results and BALPA have to ask who their priority should be; existing members or potential future members.

Sheikh - if an average of 0.5 posts per day of membership represents a requirement to get a life then there's probably a lot of people on this forum who fall into that category.

While I would not encourage anyone to resign from balpa, I can't help feeling there are a lot of us out there who are members because we feel morally obliged to but are really quite dissatisfied.
There are already some posts here which reflect my views and I bet the views of many others. We pay a lot of money for professional representation which is not really forthcoming.
The company council or plc members are generally all cast in the same mould so while their intentions may be applauded (sometimes), they are volunteers generally out of their league when it comes to dealing with management who they often regard as incompetent but are usually successful in keeping us in our place. When you do criticise, the response is generally to invite you to do better.
If I look at the balpa forum, I usually end up feeling uneasy about my workplace when I was quite happy before and I sometimes wonder how these volunteers can represent pilots who quite often don't bother to obtain the available facts before opening up.
On more than one occaison, I have seen balpa sit on the fence when they should have been giving guidance to their members about an important issue and then they appear to have sided with management and stitched up their members.
It may be true that companes with a large membership ratio enjoy better conditions, in fact the market place dictates what we end up with and any significant improvement has only happened when airlines can't get pilots.
Historically when balpa representing the pilots in Big Airways thought they had the upper hand with their employers, they stitched them up to such an extent that balpa has been unable to halt the overall decline in real terms to pilots pay and conditions and everyone else has suffered ever since!
There are occaisonally some interesting articles in The Log but overall I can quite see why some would think of balpa as a little club for some running at the expense of all the majority.
On balance I will probably remain a member until I retire but I really dont think it is good value.

Struck a raw nerve eh HS?

You may worship yourself in the mirror every morning as one of the architects of the coup I referred to which successfully hijacked Balpa and secured that the interests of you and your mates were looked after with some puppet appointments. The debate on the qualities of Chris Darke is archived for anyone who wants to remind themselves of it.

At the very least you will admit that there were very many who did not agree with you then and even now. I cannot imagine that even you would claim a monopoly on wisdom.

So Mr arrogant self opinionated spokesman for all that is fabulous and wonderful in Balpa.....there are a lot of us who do not think it is quite as wonderful as you for the reasons stated or that the changes brought about have served the interests of a lot of us rank and file members who are not sitting as fat dumb and content as you are.

Indeed, as the (self?) appointed spokesman for Balpa on this forum I suggest that your posts are doing more damage to the cause of Balpa and will secure that many of us waverers will leave.

I had nothing to do with the Chris Darke coup, except as a voting member who wondered what exactly Chris Darke was doing for me, as it appeared to be nothing very much, if at all. I also wondered what cosy arrangements existed between Darke and our association Chairman which moved the latter to abuse BALPA resources by sending out a letter encouraging us to vote for him in the election. I am glad to read that the debate is archived, as if I remember it well there were very few people in the debate who could point to something Mr Darke had done well for the association and almost all those opposed to his removal did so on the basis that it was some grand conspiracy by the BA constituency to hijack the union. I don't think that theory has withstood the test of time and I've seen very few posters who claim Chris Darke did a better job at the helm than Jim Macauslan is doing.

I have never said BALPA is fabulous, wonderful, omniscient or incapable of error. I have challenged peoples examples of what they believe to be BALPAs self-serving nature, particularly if the examples are based on personal prejudices rather than a cool assessment of the facts. BALPA seem to be achieving good results across a broad range of UK airlines; by no means all, which should be the goal, but a broad range. Unfortunately some people don't want a professional association, they want a magic wand which they can wave and get a big pay rise, improved working conditions and a respectful management, all off the back of a 30% BALPA membership level in their company. A wide gulf between what is desirable and what is realistically achievable will inevitably lead to dissatisfaction. I'd hazard a guess that some of BALPAs most dissatisfied members are BA pilots, who seem to go from generally dissatisfied to hopping mad with BALPA despite the widespread opinion that BALPA is in their pockets. Again, the gulf between what is desirable and what is achieveable is at work.

Given that BALPA spends most of it's time copping a bad press, as the very title of this thread shows, I don't think it's wrong to vehemently defend the good it does.