DEC's for CX Cargo?

[4PW's]

Dudes.

Is the suggestion on a Middle East thread about CX Cargo hiring DE Captains on the freighter true?

Checked the company website's Careers link, but nothing showing.

I guess that says it all really; no.

Nonetheless, I thought I'd ring the bell here, see if anyone answers.

Not trying to wind you good people up, so if you have been, please just ignore my well intentioned post and get on with enjoying your life.

[Night Watch]

4PW's

The CoS that all CX pilots currently operate under forbids the recruitment of DE Capt's. The company would not do it, as it would be a clear breach of contract.

Nuff said :ok:

[Loopdeloop]

Not quite "Nuff said"
They've advertised recently for F/O slots on the freighter with "rapid command". If you joined the company today with a shed load of experience on the Classic and took a couple of brave pills you could probably start an F/O course and switch it to a command course if everything was going OK. The seniority for command on the Classic is zero so as soon as they're willing to give you a go you could find yourself doing a course.
There are many reasons why I wouldn't recommend this course of action, do a search on this forum under classic or freighter and I'm sure you'll find them!
Good luck

[4PW's]

Hmph. Thought so. The ME thread's assertions are a crock. Like NW states, nuff said. Thanks for the replies.

[19weeler]

Since when has cx cared about "breach of contract"?

[jtr]

So there is no truth to the rumour that there are guys getting hired on the freighter as F/O and training from the LHS?

Not on the freighter so I wouldn't know, but that is how the "story" goes

[Loopdeloop]

One of the returning 49ers did but I don't think anyone new to CX has done so yet.

[Re-entry]

actually 2 49'ers. F/O in the morning, command course by the afternoon. Both aced it.

[cpdude]

actually 2 49'ers. F/O in the morning, command course by the afternoon. Both aced it.

Both were ex-Captains at CX and 49'ers. IE. Special case!

[4PW's]

Good on 'em.

They earned the position.

CX don't have a DEC program per se, which is probably a good thing.

[dragon501]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAAHHA and not even April's fools day yet...

[Chacka]

Sorry guys but a mate of mine just got the call for an interview for Direct Entry Captain..Freighter.....sounds like trouble brewing in Paradise!!:hmm:
For what base? North America, Europe.....?

[cpdude]

For what base? North America, Europe.....?

Don't believe that CX is hiring DEC for CX brand flying. Air Hong Kong...yes, Dragon Air (Freighter)...probably, CX...no!

[Five Green]

Dabrat:

Tell your buddy to double check that because things are not what they seem. If in fact he is comong to CX and not Air hong Kong or Dragon, then he should know the risk of not making it through is while not extreme something to consider.

Cheers

[404 Titan]

I can confirm there has been “NO”, repeat “NO” interviews for direct entry captains for CX or CX Freight and I know first hand. There have been interviews for DEFO’s with the possibility of a quicker than normal commands but only after all those ahead in seniority list have been given a look in and/or a go first. Any person making such a claim as having attended an interview for DECapt’s CX or CX Freight is fishing and trying to create a wind up. My advice is to ignore them.

[SMOC]

I can confirm there has been “NO”, repeat “NO” interviews for direct entry captains for CX or CX Freight and I know first hand. There have been interviews for DEFO’s with the possibility of a quicker than normal commands but only after all those ahead in seniority list have been given a look in and/or a go first. Any person making such a claim as having attended an interview for DECapt’s CX or CX Freight is fishing and trying to create a wind up. My advice is to ignore them.

Well you better look into it, seeing the CP told me at a fleet forum he had just interviewed a bunch months ago, with only a few suitable candidates. They were given the nod but that was the last I heard. They would go straight into the left seat for line trainning and if they don't pass will be offered the right seat.

Also I've met a guy at a flying club in the UK who was going for the position, and I believe he was one who got the OK.

This is the Classic Freighter I'm talking about.

[404 Titan]

SMOC

I have. There have been a number of individuals interviewed for the expressed intent of “Rapid Command”. These individuals if selected will be employed as DEFO’s on the freighters and once all suitable F/O’s on the companies seniority list have been given a go and/or a look in and any other suitable F/O given a chance to bid, then and only then will these new F/O’s be given a shot at command. It may just be that there are no suitable F/O’s on the companies seniority list and no other F/O’s are prepared to go to the freighter. If this is the case then these individuals will probably jump straight into the left seat. I would suggest these individuals were interviewed because of this very reason and not to jump the seniority list as was infered by the original poster in this thread. Oh and did I mention the failure rate on the Classic command course?:oh:

[jtr]

TITAN since you have your finger somewhere near the pulse, do you know which seat these "F/O's" will be doing their initial training in?

[404 Titan]

jtr
Personally I don’t but I suspect some will do their initial training in the left seat for the reason I stated above.

[jtr]

I had also "heard" they would do it in the LHS.

So they join as an F/O, they train in the LHS, thus can only fly on the line with C+T, so that will not go on any longer than it needs (if that long at all), then they get signed off to fly with F/O's when they are still sitting in the LHS (sounds oddly similar to a 3 bar check)...

hmmmm.....

Let me think about it, they never fly in the RHS, the first time they fly on the line once out of the training system is as a Captain, but they are not DEC's?

If it walks like a duck...

[404 Titan]

jtr

You could be very right there but if the company is in breach of contract by employing DEC over existing suitably qualified applicants on the CX seniority list, I can see a court case coming on, don’t you.

[74world]

Hi 404 Titan,

For info I was offered an interview as a DEC for CX cargo, but I have changed my mind since I've applied for the position so I won't go!

YES! Cathay is employing DEC........if what you said is true, that is: they have existing suitably qualified FOs, why don't they upgrade those guys?

Don't you have a union in CX? That would be a very interesting question to ask them.

Regarding the labor law in China/HKG, do a search on the net and you will find out why CX is not worried about that!

Cheers.... :cool:

[cpdude]

jtr
You could be very right there but if the company is in breach of contract by employing DEC over existing suitably qualified applicants on the CX seniority list, I can see a court case coming on, don’t you.
question, they may be in breach of contract but...if no one in the company wants a classic command what should the company do?:confused:

[404 Titan]

cpdude

The point is if no F/O in the company wants to take a Freighter Command position then the company isn't in breach of contract is it?

74world

You were interviewed under the possibility of a “rapid command”. I’m splitting hairs I know but the positions weren’t advertised as DEC because the company can’t guarantee that. If you were employed and all the positions for command were filled from within the company you would have been stuck in the right seat. The chances of that happening in reality are remote at present because most F/O’s on the freighter bid to transfer to the pax fleet after three years and those that are on the pax fleet already don’t want the crap conditions on offer on the freighters. The company has created a mess for itself which it is trying to fix with COS07 but quite frankly will only make it worse.

[cpdude]

cpdude
The point is if no F/O in the company wants to take a Freighter Command position then the company isn't in breach of contract is it?

Is that true? In a practical sense how would that work? Would they not have to notify pilots of the opportunity and course of action should no one apply?

[drongo]

Interviews are in about a month for Germany bases on the 747-400.

Pilots will be employed as FOs and when they complete the training will be promoted to Captain.

The initial pay is about £2000 below the current captains wage, a combination of FO pay and a top up, normal Captain pay when promoted.

[SMOC]

I've just spoken to a DEC, has his induction course Monday, he's sitting having a coffee in CX as I type :eek: after ground school and everything else he goes straight in the LHS for line training as stated by others.

[Five Green]

CP Dude ;

Not true there are plenty of guys willing to give the classic commands a try. They are not being given their chance because of polotics. They are too young or their training record is not pristene or they have run afoul of some training Captain.

At CX we have the ridiculous situation that the longer you are here the more likely you are to get a bad report (line check or sim).Then you are held back from command. If you come as a DEFO and do your command within the first two years you can get through. If a candidate with the same experience waits and begins to loose his flying ability while flying longhaul relief then gets a bad report, that is it wait another year Cat b'd etc.

It is ridiculous.

So yes it is a contract violation (IMHO)to hire rapid command (direct entry Captains) while arbitrarily and unfairly holding current pilots back from command courses. As for Union, well we have an association but we only have 50% representation so understandably no influence on the companies policies etc. All we can do is go to court and that takes a long time to resolve.

Hapy flying !

[BalusKaptan]

Sorry to upset you all however, Yes, it is true. DECs onto the Classic Freighter. Cannot as yet confirm the number but at least three starting in the new year. They are recruited as FO's for quick upgrade. This means training right from the start in the LEFT SEAT.

This is straight from the most recent C and T meeting.

[geh065]

If they are employed as FOs and given a rapid command (Doesn't matter how rapid - could be days), then surely the company does not breach any agreements correct? Very sneaky, and not in the spirit of any agreement, but technically allowed as far as I know.

[BalusKaptan]

geh065....right on. You got it in one.

[Five Green]

The real question is why would the company hire DECaptains with no company experience and yet hold back Pilots who have been with the company and are a known quantity.

The same thing is happening on the 400 Freighter fleet. Albeit not quite as quick but certainly less than two years.

It has been said to new joiners that you are better off going for command in the first two years on the freighter than waiting to try after that as you will by then have some black marks against you !! How ridiculous is that.

Of course there is the issue of pass rates The pass rate on the classic (which is the only fleet that is hiring Rapid command (DECaptains) is below 50 % .

You pays yur money and you takes yur chances !

[cpdude]

The real question is why would the company hire DECaptains with no company experience and yet hold back Pilots who have been with the company and are a known quantity.

The same thing is happening on the 400 Freighter fleet. Albeit not quite as quick but certainly less than two years.

It has been said to new joiners that you are better off going for command in the first two years on the freighter than waiting to try after that as you will by then have some black marks against you !! How ridiculous is that.

Of course there is the issue of pass rates The pass rate on the classic (which is the only fleet that is hiring Rapid command (DECaptains) is below 50 % .

You pays yur money and you takes yur chances !

I think you answered your own question.

For the same reason the F/O's are better off going for a command in the first two years.

[canuck revenger]

Nothing exemplifies the perverse nature of this company better than this ridiculous situation. The company would seemingly want to have people in the left seat who they have no experience in dealing with, to the career detriment of their own long-serving FO's. Only in CX...:D :ugh: . The system of training in this company is beyond broken, it's smashed and pulped. I would have any potential candidates for this 'job' carefully consider the following: why would you chance a job with this company when HUNDREDS of it's own fully qualified FO's won't volunteer for the position? Does that not raise any little 'red flags' in your minds? This company is rapidly becoming a laughing stock, and situations like this only make it more so. If you have ANY chance of a career with a 'proper' airline...take it. Working for CX is like living in the real life version of Jack Nicholsons movie 'One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest'....:{

[cpdude]

Nothing exemplifies the perverse nature of this company better than this ridiculous situation. The company would seemingly want to have people in the left seat who they have no experience in dealing with, to the career detriment of their own long-serving FO's. Only in CX...:D :ugh: . The system of training in this company is beyond broken, it's smashed and pulped. I would have any potential candidates for this 'job' carefully consider the following: why would you chance a job with this company when HUNDREDS of it's own fully qualified FO's won't volunteer for the position? Does that not raise any little 'red flags' in your minds? This company is rapidly becoming a laughing stock, and situations like this only make it more so. If you have ANY chance of a career with a 'proper' airline...take it. Working for CX is like living in the real life version of Jack Nicholsons movie 'One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest'....:{

I must agree and state that the training department and the entire upgrade process at CX is the most troublesome part I find within the airline.

Rostering might be an issue but the #1 problem as I see it is the training system. However, it is not the majority of the great trainers that give selflessly but of the system which is set and controlled by a select few at the top.:*

[4PW's]

Guys,

I feel for you, having your career plans thrown into chaos.

Still, there's so much more to life than a job, unless you make the job your life.

Get out there and live, matey's.

Play to your strengths, not your weaknesses.

If work is a weakness, make it a small part of your life.

Sounds simple, harder to put into practice, but true from start to finish.

[Five Green]

4 Pratts :

Don't mistake the desire for better and fairer working conditions as being synonymous with a lack of home life. You can be a keen observer of events around you, make comment (usually because you care about more than your own hide) and still live happily.

I myself still find the posotives at CX still outweigh the negatives. However as a former checker in a previous life I am immensely frustrated with the current C & T state of affairs. Never have I seen a company so at odds with itself.

They want to expand but are doing the following:
trying to pay less, making upgrade harder, running off the most experienced C & T with reduced COS, creating working conditions in C & T that keep people from applying and force others to quit C & T, making rostering difficult and punitive resulting in a possible loss of badly needed co-operation, failing to heed that they are an internationaly crewed airline now and not British or Australian, and last but not least making upgrading from within the company harder than it has to be and harder than direct entry.

I cannot fathom how the coperate side of this company is sitting idle while this plays out. Expansion oppurtunities are going to be missed. Market share will be lost. Hong Kong itself is in danger of loosing it's gateway status. All of which can be directly tied to the inability of this company to put Captains in the cockpit.

I say all this because I care. It does not have to be so hard. We could move forward and enter the new milenium or even the 90's as far as training methods and employee motivation is concerned. We should have an aircrew body of successful and proud Pilots, not one of low moral and frustration. We should be able to expand the airline and not give up the great job it could still be.

Soap Box off,

Having said all that I am off to Phuket !! Cheers !

[cpdude]

4 Pratts :

Don't mistake the desire for better and fairer working conditions as being synonymous with a lack of home life. You can be a keen observer of events around you, make comment (usually because you care about more than your own hide) and still live happily.

I myself still find the posotives at CX still outweigh the negatives. However as a former checker in a previous life I am immensely frustrated with the current C & T state of affairs. Never have I seen a company so at odds with itself.

They want to expand but are doing the following:
trying to pay less, making upgrade harder, running off the most experienced C & T with reduced COS, creating working conditions in C & T that keep people from applying and force others to quit C & T, making rostering difficult and punitive resulting in a possible loss of badly needed co-operation, failing to heed that they are an internationaly crewed airline now and not British or Australian, and last but not least making upgrading from within the company harder than it has to be and harder than direct entry.

I cannot fathom how the coperate side of this company is sitting idle while this plays out. Expansion oppurtunities are going to be missed. Market share will be lost. Hong Kong itself is in danger of loosing it's gateway status. All of which can be directly tied to the inability of this company to put Captains in the cockpit.

I say all this because I care. It does not have to be so hard. We could move forward and enter the new milenium or even the 90's as far as training methods and employee motivation is concerned. We should have an aircrew body of successful and proud Pilots, not one of low moral and frustration. We should be able to expand the airline and not give up the great job it could still be.

Soap Box off,

Having said all that I am off to Phuket !! Cheers !

I agree and they (CX) don't care!

It's a pathetic airline but not a bad place to work.:ugh:

[Moussaillon]

Hi everyone,

Sounds odd to me but the Rapid Command process is confirmed on the Cathay Pacific web site.
Vacancies currently exist in Frankfurt only.
Aircraft type not mentioned.
At the end of a given period crew may continue to operate Freighter Aircraft or they may bid to operate Cathay Pacific Passenger Aircraft.
Regarding the switching to Cathay mainline my question is on which type and at wich rank (Senior FO, Junior Captain or Senior Captain) could this occur?

[404 Titan]

Normally Rapid Commanders will operate Freighter Aircraft for not less than three (3) years from the date of the successful Aircraft Line Check or forty-two months from Date of Joining, whichever is less. At the end of this period, crew may continue to operate Freighter Aircraft or they may bid to operate Cathay Pacific Passenger Aircraft. Officers will be considered in seniority order, however appointments to the passenger fleet are subject to vacancies being available and may require relocation to Hong Kong.
The offer says "in seniority order". It currently takes someone on the pax fleet about 9 – 10 years to upgrade to command. If you took a quick command on the freighter, you won’t be considered for a command slot transfer to the pax fleet for about 9 – 10 years from DOJ. If you were prepared to move across to the right hand seat to the rank applicable to your seniority on the pax fleet, you may see the pax fleet in about four years after all S/O’s on the pax fleet ahead of you in the seniority list have been given a shot at F/O.

[Numero Crunchero]

Howdy 404 Titan...your writing style seems familiar...did you recently apply for a J/s off me for your spouse!? :-)

As far as I can tell, there has been nothing untoward happening on this issue. Whilst not as well informed as Titan, I am still 'more informed' than most. Yes CX advertises vacancies on bases for captains...and FOs. But they must come off the seniority list. So around 2000+ people have to say no or be unsuitable due experience or Cat B'ed before it gets to the point of having a near new joiner do his upgrade as a CN. I just flew with the ex EK guy who was a checker back in the sand pit. He is an SO...can you think of a better candidate for DEC? He is still hoping to maybe get DEFO at least.
Don't let the paranoia take over guys!

[Five Green]

Don't let the paranoia take over guys!

Well it is not that easy. There are people with less than two years seniority applying for and getting upgrades on the 747-400 freighter. Meanwhile there are plenty who are not getting given courses who a far more senior and equally experienced. Explain that.

The same is happening on the Classic fleet. There are some very junior officers getting command courses. However the pass rate on the classic is by far the worst in the company. The year on year average is less than 40% pass rate. I wouid not be surprised at all if FOs were doing their first course here in the left seat. I would also not be suprised if the pass rate for those individuals mirrored the fleet average. There are also no guarentees that when you have served your 8-10 years (a figure I agree with) you will be allowed to transfer immediately.

However the classic's days are numbered. Not sure if they will get another ten years out of them. You never know though, they said that ten years ago. It all depends on airframe availability, global economy, price of tea in .......well you get the picture.

Makes you think about leaving a job to come to the classic.

Besides, you are not really paranoid if someone is always after you !

Happy hill burning festival !

[Numero Crunchero]

Five green
I suggest you let the AOA know of whom you are speaking. They could make some enquiries to ensure that commands are not being offered out of seniority.
The high failure rate almost becomes a self fulfilling thing. I heard that about 15 out of 16 guys got through on the bus and so suddenly the bus command isn't so frightening. You still have to wonder how one fleet can have such a high failure rate over the years. Just need to get management to look up "sytemic error" in their handbooks!

[404 Titan]

Numero Crunchero

:oh:

Not guilty your honour.

[Five Green]

Five green
I suggest you let the AOA know of whom you are speaking. They could make some enquiries to ensure that commands are not being offered out of seniority.
The high failure rate almost becomes a self fulfilling thing. I heard that about 15 out of 16 guys got through on the bus and so suddenly the bus command isn't so frightening. You still have to wonder how one fleet can have such a high failure rate over the years. Just need to get management to look up "sytemic error" in their handbooks!

This issue has been brought to the AOAs attention. IMHO it is of greater importance than pay, rostering, etc. If you are held back it represents aprox $400-500 000 hkd for 1- 1 1/2 years Cat B. You divide that over the average career years left (assume age 40) and you get about a 2% pay cut It is pay raise/rise difference of 2% if get through first time.

This does not even address the FOs who are CAT C'd!

The AOA is of the opinion that there is no way to change the system in the CX training department. They are not willing to touch this issue as it is one of religious importance to the company. To question CX's "High Standards" is to question life itself. Just read some of the threads discussing this topiic earlier. You have many posters here that are convinced that there are no systemic problems. These posters are also convinced that the real problems are the candidates themselves. This attitude is also reflected in the training department.

This is why there are people taking commands out of seniority. Actually there are four levels of such routing of the seniority list. First there are FOs who take PAX command ahead of those who have been held back. Second there are the FOs that are taking freighter commands ahead of others who have (of their own choice) passed up freighter command to wait for PAX command. This is a result of the lower pay for more work scenario on the freighter. The third layer of routing occurs when FOs take freighter commands ahead of suitably senior and qualified FOs who have put their names in for command and have been passed over. Fourthly we have the new joiner rapid command candidate.

Meanwhile the training programme, at all levels is most definitely being used to further alternate agendas.

Have you had your head in the sand ?

Glad you made it through though (and I mean it, as getting a command at CX is a major accomplishment !), carry on !

Cheers

[Numero Crunchero]

No five green...not the sand, but I have been accused of having it up part of my own anatomy;-) But it is so far up I can still see light when I yawn!
I was on the GC a few years ago at a very interesting time...pretty much when the first Cat B's started happening. Given how 'opaque' the system is it is difficult for the AOA to fix the problem when no problem is 'visible'. Yes I know there is obviously a problem...but if it can't be identified how can we fix it? The star chamber is the ultimate in non-tranparency and total discrimination! You constanly hear of guys doing really well, then suddenly getting put in the sin bin for a year after 4 bar!? Go figure.
What I have noticed anecdotally is a very high correlation between Cat Bs and vociferous golf playing types from 2000/1...and apparently management don't like ex FEs either.
I understand your angst over junior guys getting freighter commands. But this needs to placed in context. ASL was introduced I think in 96. It was a major achievement of the GC to get freighter guys back onto our seniority list...one compromise was that the company wanted to keep freighter command pay on C(D) scales. At least freighter commands are offered to everyone within CX.
I would like to believe that the training department/star chamber are consistent across fleets...the statistics belie that assumption. How can the airbus continue to have a significantly higher failure rate than the 777. I mean, if you had the choice of which aircraft to go onto for CN and you weren't chuck yeager, you would choose the 777. So that would mean stronger, more chuck yeagerish, candidates would be left on the airbus. SO how come the failure rate stays so high on the bus vs 777?
I remember a QF mate telling me years ago that the long haul fleet had had a 100% failure rate whilst short haul(737) pass rate was almost 100%...the long haul fleet trainers just assumed that there were lower standards on the 737....not that their 9month long haul command was almost impossible to pass!

The problems are with the system...and I know it is frustrating but take it out on them not the GC. I can tell you that the GC is only as powerful as the actions the members are prepared to take....and since 2001 that isn't much!

Life is too important to be taken seriously.

PS Titan...damn...thought I had you worked out;-)

[Five Green]

Given how 'opaque' the system is it is difficult for the AOA to fix the problem when no problem is 'visible'. Yes I know there is obviously a problem...but if it can't be identified how can we fix it?

OK Here are the problems : There are no published standards by which the Command courses are decided. More importantly there are no standards by which you are CAT 'Bd . You should be given a concrete reason for both in order for you to improve and for others to come to the course/command assessment more prepared. Also what "standards" there are, are applied diffferently by all the trainers in the company, not only between fleets, but between trainers within the three fleets as well. This in part explains the better pass rates on the 777. The trainers there are doing a better job and are applying the standards more evenly.

The system relies on intensive written reports. There are no limits to what can be included. Someone's idea of what is crucial is not everyone's. However once the "errors" are written up in strong language then the star chamber will lean to failure rather than extension or extra sectors.

Then of coourse there is the fact that the Star Chamber acts after your final check and not before. Why they cannot leave some responsibility with the checker I will never know.

So now the problems are identified. The beef I have with the AOA is that they are not willing to take this up with the company. Go ask them yourself and you will see.

I understand your angst over junior guys getting freighter commands. But this needs to placed in context. ASL was introduced I think in 96. It was a major achievement of the GC to get freighter guys back onto our seniority list...one compromise was that the company wanted to keep freighter command pay on C(D) scales. At least freighter commands are offered to everyone within CX.

You are missing the point. What was a good move for the AOA has been lost. Now the company can bypass anyone, which results in very junior oficers getting command out of seniority. It might also interest you to know that some of the DEFO freighter offiicers that joined under the ban have now made Captain. There should be limits as to what someone can be Cat B'd for. There should also be a pre-determined time and training to get the candidate to the level required.

The problems are with the system...and I know it is frustrating but take it out on them not the GC. I can tell you that the GC is only as powerful as the actions the members are prepared to take....and since 2001 that isn't much!

Yes I agree that the strength of the GC lies in the membership. However the GC has not even engaged the company on this issue. The company is loosing millions per year on training because of these outdated training methods and heavy handed checking. Surely the AOA could approach the business side of the company and suggest some improvements.

Over to you........

[Mr. Bloggs]

When there was a Pilot DFO there were no Cat’B's.

It was a huge deal when MG got Cat B'ed by the flying DFO (GC) for signing a letter on behalf of the AOA. It was later taken off his P file by KB.

In the past, the STC gave you the 4 bars at the end of the flight and you proceeded to the bar.

There was no such thing as the Star Chamber/Review board.

It seemed to all change when the present DFO rose to power. He needed a system to keep the F/O’s inline after most went sick in ‘99, to protect the A Scalers, but that is another thread.

The AOA or the Flying Managers are not about to change it. If they try, the manager will be out on his A.s.s just like Jmac, but that is another thread. No one is to challenge the DFO.

The situation is, the present DFO is revengeful and he will use any excuse to Cat B. In the beginning, it was political, in the end it was political and somewhere in-between he made up items of flying. If you complain(legitimate or not, cockpit or bar) it will be reported to the DFO. The DFO will then consider you “not suitable to represent the company as Commander” and assign you the appropriate category.

In the past, few were past over and most got their chance at a command before the present DFO arrived. Times have changed.

As for Check and Trainers, some have their own agenda. Some may be getting revenge at the expense of the candidates due to the way they are treated by the GMA. Some may want that extension or age 60. The fleets and C& T on those fleets are vastly different.

Why do some checkers debrief and then write a different report to how you were debriefed. You are totally blind sided by the report

Some Checkers are looking at the big picture and not the trees and write the report accordingly.

Not bashing the AOA, but the GC is weak because the members are weak and the DFO has made sure of it, but that’s a different thread.

Rule by fear and intimidation.

As for seniority, what does it represent these day? The order you are accepted for staff travel, but that’s another thread.

We are in the "merit" system

[Numero Crunchero]

Five Greens
can you please excuse how i express the following thoughts...I don't want to sound patronising or as a know it all.

My experiences with management has taught me of what I like to call the 'victorian england school model of union behaviour'. That is where you don't speak unless spoken too and if you do you will get a clip behind the ear! In the view of management, the HKAOA has absolutley NOTHING to offer to the success of CX other than rubber stamping some dodgy deals to stop the boys whinging! Training is far too complicated and above teh abilities of any GC member so why let them comment on it. Now is this the view generated from the DFO or the individual fleets?
You said!
You are missing the point. What was a good move for the AOA has been lost. Now the company can bypass anyone, which results in very junior oficers getting command out of seniority. It might also interest you to know that some of the DEFO freighter offiicers that joined under the ban have now made Captain. There should be limits as to what someone can be Cat B'd for. There should also be a pre-determined time and training to get the candidate to the level required.
So what...the new AOA has no discrimination based on DOJ. The point is that guys senior didn't want to, or couldn't do these commands due categorisation problems!
You said...
However the GC has not even engaged the company on this issue. The company is loosing millions per year on training because of these outdated training methods and heavy handed checking. Surely the AOA could approach the business side of the company and suggest some improvements.
I don't mean to sound facetious but it has been tried many times always with a mirror man response...."we will look into it"

THE AOA is not on the board, nor is it in Flt Ops, nor is it the training department. Its job is to look for unfair actions that are identifiable and fixable. If CX decides that 10 or 15 guys are cat C or D how is the AOA supposed to know if that was fair or not? Five green you suggest far more power than the AOA GC has!

cheers
nc

[Five Green]

Numero cruncher:

Can't say I totally understand your reply.

You have however highlighted the lack of immagination and motivation that is hand cuffing the AOA.

It would seem that you echo the thinking "why try if you are going to fail anyway" when it comes to dealing with training and the company in general.
That is the most ridiculous way to approach a problem. If the GC took the issue to the company then you bring the issue out of the closet. You force the company to deal with it. You keep it in the lime light and let them know that it is not going away. Even if nothing gets fixed is it not still better to keep asking ?

We are not talking about 10 - 15 guys. The training system affects every single pilot who has not achieved "Commander" status. If the AOA was seen to be taking this issue on it would most cetainly posotively affect AOA membership successful or not. You did hit the nail on the head when you said that the AOA is in the business of looking for unfair treatment. It should not differentiate between what is possible and what is not. If it is unfair it is unfair.

It is a bit shocking that you have made "commander" here and are unaware of the realities of the pilots coming up the seniority list behind you.

I know you have the pilots best interests at heart but to give up before trying is a bit tiring. I have been here a long time and cannot recall the AOA taking the company on with regard to : failure rates, both at the command level and JFO, or the process of Categorisation prior to command, or perhaps keeping tack of howw many pilots are let goo.

I bring up the cost not because of the board of directors but because any issue that saves the company moneey must be beneficial for all concerned. That is of course if it is not about the money and say about....control and discipline....?

[Numero Crunchero]

Five Green
points taken!

You are right...I have slipped many things into the "its too hard to fix basket". I will re-erect my standby gyro!

A friend of mine joined the Gc just after I left (against my advice;-). He thought he could use the fincancial approach to both the AOA and the company....he failed. Why? Simplistic answer to complicated situation...because management don't like the workers telling them how to do their jobs. As a manager there is no jeopardy to saying NO to every idea. As a pilot, CRM teaches us to be open to all ideas and inputs...we have a significant cultural difference between pilots and managers. We look to achieving a succesful mission...and when our number comes up, to being succesfully upgraded. There is no such 'number' system in management and their definition of a 'succesful mission' is based around their career progression, not what is in the best interests of the company!. A very intelligent ex GC colleague of mine(AG) had tried to introduce a great new rostering system into CX in the mid 90s...he failed...not because of the system but, as he said, he took too long to learn the politics.

Anyway, 5G I will keep banging my head against the wall!

About your comment "It is a bit shocking that you have made "commander" here and are unaware of the realities of the pilots coming up the seniority list behind you."....you are paritally right. When I went through almost everyone got through...if not 1st time, definitely 2nd time. But I am not impervious or uncaring about what is happening now...far from it! I do believe it is the responsibility of those who have got through to help ease the way for those that follow, in whatever way we can!

Anyway, we may use different approaches but I feel we are on the same team!
cheers

[4PW's]

I guess all this chatting means the rumour was correct, then.

Dragon501, you still laughing?

Just check'n.