Defopax

[A/T less]

What's the latest on the DE FO PAX stuff?

[Harbour Dweller]

Seems to have gone a little quiet.

Guys employed as DEFO(Pax) for both SYD & AMS have started their Airbus training.

[A/T less]

I guess not quiet enough if they're here and stolen spots from S/Os.

[Harbour Dweller]

True.

Two of them are former CX S/O's who resigned. They were then employed again under the DEFO(P) conditions.

[Veruka Salt]

A/T Less,

How have "they" stolen spots from S/Os ?? :rolleyes:

[A/T less]

That question does not deserve an answer.

[Veruka Salt]

You obviously have an issue with it champ, so please elaborate . . .

[Kane Toed]

Veruka Salt posted:
...so please elaborate Well, my guess would be that his thinking is this:

CX need 100 FOs in 2007 (approximate numbers for demonstration purposes only)
50 of these slots will now be filled by DEFOs

thus, only 50 SOs will be upgraded.

It's reasonable to assume that before DEFO on the pax fleet happened, all of the FO slots would have been filled by SOs upgrading, or freighter FO's who had done their time to rise to the top of the seniority list. If you are currently a CX SO, this might be looked upon as a 'bad thing', or perhaps that slots had been "stolen" from SOs.

Oh - no "champs" here VS, that would cause a cross cockpit authority gradient!

HTH your understanding.

[A/T less]

If you need an explanation as to why a guy would be unhappy because people are upgrading (for lack of a better term) out of seniority. Then you haven't experienced a real seniority system.

These people are "taking" (if you like that word better) a position from an S/O who have put in years to get. They're no better than the "champs" who came to CX during the recruitment ban.

They'll be the first to stab YOU in the back if/when necessary.

[Harbour Dweller]

Then you haven't experienced a real seniority system

Veruka Salt knows all too well about seniority systems.

He is also very well aware of how others can come from left field & slow down, even stop your career progression.

Just one of his reasons for leaving his former employer & joining us.

On the other hand CX has always had the ability to employ DEFO(P) and all S/O's signed this contract upon joining.

I agree it is not fair to pilots employed as S/O's. A lot of S/O's have the experience required for an FO position prior to joining CX. The company should have used this experience prior to employing DEFO(P).

Yes the system is wrong, but it's possible under our contract.

[elgringo]

REALLY, what IS NOT allowed under our contract???!!!!!!?????:eek:

[Veruka Salt]

Thanks for the perspective.

Were S/Os offered these F/O slots prior to CX hiring off the street?

[A/T less]

there's a contract?? oh yeah, that thing!!
But we all know the company only honor the stuff in the contract that benefits them.

I read something on there that I thought was funny; "the company shall not change the payscale without an officer's consent". well isn't that the 100% truth! When they handed down that big paycut during "the mess" that got us the 49ers, didn't they say "sign and accept this new offer or be sacked"? (or something to that effect).

I guess at least they were true to their words.

CATHAY PACIFIC, NOW YOU'RE REALLY FLYING!!

[A/T less]

He is also very well aware of how others can come from left field & slow down, even stop your career progression.

that'll never happen here!

OH WAIT!!! IT IS HAPPENING NOW!!!!!!!

[cpdude]

Unlike several other airlines, CX hires S/O's with a minimum of only 1000 hours single engine piston. DEFO's require 1000 hours of jet transport or command in a turbo-prop/corporate jet. On the street, the difference in years to acquire the DEFO minimum qualification from an S/O's minimum qualification point would be several years. I suspect an average of 3-5 years unless you're very fortunate.

My point is that S/O's should have their seniority frozen for 3 years and then upgrade at that point.

CX used to hire DEFO and I think they should now offer the new DEFO position to any S/O's that meet the minimum qualification of DEFO prior to their joining point at CX. Those that do not meet the minimum should be given an upgrade at the 3 year point in priority over any new-hire DEFO.

That's my 2 cents.

[Harbour Dweller]

Veruka Salt,

Were S/Os offered these F/O slots prior to CX hiring off the street?

The quick answer, NO.

DEFO(P) only have the conditions they are starting on due to the CX pilot body voting against COS07.

Had we voted for new DEFO(P) to join on COS07 you would have been starting on a salary much closer to Freighter pay. Now that would have been a paycut from your previous situation. It may have even changed you mind about joining.

Thanks to the CX pilot body we prevented that from happening to you & others joining as DEFO(P). You can now enjoy working on our current conditions.

However, under our current contract the only way for CX S/O's to take a DEFO(P) postion is to resign from CX. They will then be re-employed under DEFO(P) conditions on a base.

Problem is you lose all seniority in doing so. Rumour has it that this can be as many as 300 spots!! And for the final kick in the guts they even started behind new joiners employed off the street.

So, has this been fair for our current S/O's? No it hasn't!

In short, current S/O's (as well as most other CX pilots) stood up for DEFO(P) to have a better starting package. In return they are being thanked by having their upgrades delayed by these same DEFO(P) newly employed into CX.

[BillytheKid]

As a soon to be new joiner (DEFO) I'd like to add my two cents worth...

I did not apply to CX as an SO for this exact reason! All those that did apply as such accepted the job knowing that this was the reality. I agree that it is wrong that they are treated as such so I do empathize with them. However, I do not sympathize with them because they knew the deal and chose to take it. How many of those SO's chose the job because they could not meet the minimums for DEFO? Half? At least a quarter of them. Now because they have three years with the company, they think they should be able to alter the agreement they signed. I just do not agree with that. Again, I do agree that CX should't run the SO/FO progression as they do; it is not my job to determine how CX should run the company. If it was my job, I would start everyone off as SO and they would work their way up to command.

[Night Watch]

BillytheKid
I presume that as you come from ATL you will be a DEFO on the freighter? There is not a single SO in the company that has a problem with that! We are talking about DEFO PAX. It is the guys going on to the passenger fleet that are slowing down the SO's within the company, NOT the freighter guys. A DEFO on the freighter can't come over to the PAX fleet until he holds the seniority to do so.... therefore an SO that was hired 1 day before a DEFO freighter will be an FO before any movement by the freighter bloke to the PAX fleet.

[Kane Toed]

BillytheKid incorrectly stated:
All those that did apply as such accepted the job knowing that this was the realityYou'll find that today's reality in CX might be vastly different tomorrow. There was certainly no discussion of DEFO on the pax fleet when I joined, so I used that 'reality' to make my decision.

Furthermore I, and many current SOs meet the minimum requirements for DEFO.

[Team America]

Just enjoy the S/O job for what it is, fly somewhere for a lunch and have a few beers and come home for lots of days off. You will be upgraded hopefully in less than 4 years, and will have a command before all those DEFO pax who joined after you anyway.

You will be on bypass pay after about 3 years (as feighter guys come to pax fleet) so $50k a month for being an S/O is pretty good.

Relax, F/O spot won't happen over night, but it will happen :}

[BillytheKid]

Hmmm..

You're pissed about DEFO pax but not freight. So this is really about money and not flying then? I don't really believe that. I think you're pissed beacause your seniority can hold FO, but CX decided not to "let" you progress and has instead hired a DEFO pax. Should I be pissed that the guy hired the day before my three years is senior to me for the PAX bid?

I think your problem is with CX, not the DEFO. I am accepting that I may never make it any further at CX then what they hire me as. Again, that is the reason that I did not apply to be an SO.

How about the union getting a contract that no longer allows bypassing seniority for career progression instead of infighting? You know, be a part of the solution instead of being a part of the problem.

[cpdude]

BK, your right but remember CX are pro's at turning us against each other. That is how they succeed with contract cuts. Unfortunately, it will never change because we are too much of a diverse group with specific needs depending on our location of domicile.

Good luck at CX!

[BillytheKid]

CP-

Thanks, see you there!

[A/T less]

BillyTheKid,

You being a soon to be cathay pacific pilot I can gaurantee you that your attitude towards Cathay will be much different in a year.

Here, you having not spend 1 day at CX and already accusing the poor S/Os for "accepting the conditions of service" and now bitching about it.

Well, I for one, I'm sure others too, were not even shown the COSs until we were IN HONG KONG TO ACCEPT THE JOB. Some asked to see this at the interview and were quickly denied access.

So did I know they can hire people out of seniority? FFFF***CCCK NO!!!!

But your next accusation will be that we were naive and got what we deserve. But you know what? A company that runs business honestly would not "trap" future employees in this matter.

I am sorry to say that your honeymoon period at Cathay Pacific will soon end and you will face many of the hard facts about how this company goes about ruining their employees lives.

There have been over 30 guys (yanks) bailing out for jobs back in the States since Oct. Can you put 2 and 2 together? and Oh by the way, these aren't the lowly "inexperienced" S/Os (your words), these are the freighter F/Os that are bailing out. Can you guess why?

But you're suffering from "FNG syndrone" you don't see clearly until it's too late.

Good luck.

[elgringo]

BK...

UNION??? CONTRACT??

Unions aren't legal in Hong Kong, it's an association..with, I think, and correct me if I am wrong, less than 50% membership.

Contract changes at the companies whim...

This isn't the USA...better learn that REAL FAST...and as someone said befor your attitude towards Cathay will change...FAST.

[fire wall]

Quote "There have been over 30 guys (yanks) bailing out for jobs back in the States since Oct."

Bullsh1t, try sticking to the facts. The number may reach 30 (or more) but at the moment was 9 FO's and 2 Capt as of last week.

BK, there are some bitter and twisted people here and do not let that sway your decision.

[BillytheKid]

A/T-

How many of those SO's chose the job because they could not meet the minimums for DEFO?

Tell me where I said the SO's were inexperienced. Meeting minimums and being an experienced person are different to me, but I guess they're not to you. You sound like a bitter person that likes to beat his chest about how great they are and how dumb everyone else is.

FNG syndrome?!? Anytime you want to have a p$ssing contest about paying dues, let me know.

If a company won't tell me the conditions I am to work under, then I don't take the job. It's that simple. I do not have any sympathy for those that blindly choose things in life and then complain about them afterwards. To me that is irresponsible. I have made a great effort to understand the working environment at CX and I accept that some of things are less than desireable.


White Guy-

Yes, it is association versus union. I use the terms synonymously, but I probably shouldn't. And I am also very aware that it is quite different than the USA, but thanks for pointing that out.

Fire-

Thanks for the kind words...there are quite a few bitter folks on this board it would seem.

[777300ER]

If a company won't tell me the conditions I am to work under, then I don't take the job. It's that simple. I do not have any sympathy for those that blindly choose things in life and then complain about them afterwards. To me that is irresponsible. I have made a great effort to understand the working environment at CX and I accept that some of things are less than desireable.
Wow! You really seem to have it all figured out. I bet your the kind of guy that is content with everything and never complains. Either that or your just another naive %$^$head that will start bitching months after getting here. Only time will tell.

[elgringo]

BurgerKing is very naive...and should I say arrogant..good luck with that here at CX. I'd check that attitude at the door..you have the wrong colored passport to be acting this way. If you have only worked in the US, you have NO idea what you are getting yourself into...

Goodbye and goodluck

[cpdude]

BK,

As you can obviously see, there are many S/O's or JFO's with a puffed chest that want to give it to a DEFO on this forum. They get brave due to anonymity. As for color of passport...that's crap! There are many Brits and Aussie's that hate North American's but also many good guys too. The ones that hate us we just hate them back!

While on Freighters, you will be flying with some good guys. When you eventually cross over, you will be a SFO and a Relief Commander. On the ULH flights you will be #2 in-charge. S/O’s are the least of your concern!

[CXdreamer]

guys, can you plz stop bitching and have a proper conversation instead ??
Me, for a start, am quite interested in some more elaborated explanations.

I don`t think BK meant to be belittled, he just gave some valid points.

I am wondering myself about what is better; accepting a SO position or waiting till you get the FO slot. But more and more I start to feel some aggressive vibes from all the SO`s who are feeling they are mistreated. Why the hell does CX have such a `****ty` selection process then if there are so many unhappy (with ALL the requirements for FO) SO`s ???? I just wonder :rolleyes:

CX has always been my dream, but I dont like the idea of me getting a FO slot and a few hundred ppl wanting to put a knife in my back because I accepted that position.

The recruitment ban is over, isn`t it ?????????????????

[BillytheKid]

BurgerKing is very naive...and should I say arrogant

You must be joking about arrogance. Pot, meet kettle. Wow. Naive too huh? Why...because I think that taking a job offer without knowing your working conditions is irresponsible? And don't give me that sh$t about having a US passport either. You and your buddy A/T like to verbally bash people without actually having any basis in which to do it. CXDreamer was right on, I do have the right to voice my opinion without anonymous whimps like yourself lobbing insults meanwhile dodging the discussion. If you have any relevant points to make about my opinion, then make them. I await your lucid response.

777-

I don't believe that making an informed decision about my career is the same as saying I have everything figured out. Do you believe that?

[Night Watch]

Ok everyone... lets calm down a little.


The fact of the matter is that a lot of pilots (DESO) since SARs have joined CX with A LOT more experience then is the minimum for DESO. The majority have over 5000 hours TT with either heavy jet, command Biz jet or muli-crew turboprop. The reason the joined as an SO and not FO is simple..... there are a very limited amount of DEFO slots in Australia, none in New Zealand or South Africa and a whole lot less in Europe then the States. So the DESO way in at the time (there was no mention of DEFO pax at the time.... although it was in the COS) was the only one available. These guys and girls rightly are a little pissed that even though they have the experience, they have crew joining on THE PAX FLEET of a higher rank then them.

Once again BillytheKid.... there should be no CX SO that has a problem with you, as a DEFO on the freighter fleet has no effect on their progression.

[BillytheKid]

Nightwatch-

Agreed. I am obviously not going to change any opinions here and mine will not change when I am being insulted. I had hoped to have an adult discussion about an important subject, but I guess I was being naive.:ok:

[A/T less]

BillyTheKid,

You're right, we're all wrong. (and irresponsible too I might add)

On another note, Cathay Pacific core management group (aka Da Brits), they just love Americans who show up and speak their minds. I encourage you to continue that attitude once you're hired. I think they might be interested in hearing what you have to tell them.

Maybe start off by suggesting how they should fly those 747s, they'd just love to hear an American perspective!

Cathay management is very open and loves constructive criticisms from employees, especially if one is an American.

You'll love it here.

[A/T less]

Bullsh1t, try sticking to the facts. The number may reach 30 (or more) but at the moment was 9 FO's and 2 Capt as of last week.
Hey FIRE,
The facts might be hard for you to accept mate! Those are only the F/Os that I have mentioned.
Do you think there aren't any S/Os leaving? I know of 5 that have gone in the past 6 months. Some went back to Europe (Easy), another to (jetstar), couple other guys re-joined their old companies. Another poor guy lost his family during the Tsunami then CX wouldn't let him off probation so he bailed too.

[Numero Crunchero]

Wow,
must be 4 am and a million empty bottles on the table for the 'discussion' to denigrate to this.

For the SOs reading this. CX has always been able to recruit DEFOs. It did until 1996 but has always retained the right to do it. It hasn't in the past cause it is cheaper to have SOs. But now that the training system is maxing out, training courses are the limiting factor. You do not lose seniority because of DEFOs. You will get bypass pay when entitled.

Next point. Lets say CX can do only 300 courses over 12 months. For every upgrade to CN you need an FO upgrade from SO and a recruit to SO. I am going to ignore transfers between fleets to keep it simple. So basically a CN upgrade needs 3 courses. So if CX only recruits SOs it can only expand by say 100CNs. If CX hires DEFOs, it could theoretically expand by 150CNs as the other 150courses would go to DEFOs. That would be the worst case for current SOs...but if the airline can sustain a higher growth rate due to DEFO's, time to command will come faster as all SOs are senior to the DEFOs and 50 people ahead of them on the ASL were promoted to CN, and that 50 would not have been upgraded if CX didn't recruit DEFOs!

The reality is likely to be somewhere in between. A mixture of SOs and DEFOs recruited and some SOs upgraded. Of course there will be the initial influx of DEFOs as the company has stated that it is happy to overfill FO positions on 3man route basings such as Australia, and use extra FO in lieu of an SO.

I have yet to meet anyone that has any problem with a DEFO pax or freighter pilot. PPRUNE seems to have some vociferous SOs though.

To potential DEFO joiners, don't sweat it....the angst on this website is not representative of what happens in the company.

cheers and good luck!


PS A/T less, good luck in your job hunt. You are obviously too unhappy to stay here.

[bobrun]

SOs I know are not generally "angry" at the DEFO pax, as the posts here would make it seem...but although a lot of them won't say it aloud, I know quite a few who are deeply disapointed at being bypassed.

[fire wall]

A/T less quote: " Those are only the F/Os that I have mentioned".

the fact remains that your statement "There have been over 30 guys (yanks) bailing out for jobs back in the States since Oct." is either an inocent mis representation of the facts or a blatant lie to further your arguement. We are not talking of S/O's leaving, that is not part of the discussion however perhaps you should look at your options.

[BillytheKid]

A/T-

I looked back at your posting history and I see that you have a lot of anger which you direct towards others on this board. Back in 2003/2004 when you were interviewing you sure were a polite person. I guess since you got the SO job you don't have to fake it anymore though.

Why did you start this thread? You ask a seemingly innocent question, then turn it into DEFOPAX bashing in the very third post. If you're that angry with CX, then leave.

[Cedar Tree]

The S/O life looks pretty good to me with lots of days off. Why rush into the F/O short(er) haul flying? You'll just end up complaining about the roster.

If seniority determines skipper, then why not just enjoy your free time? I'll take bypass pay and more days off!

Some S/O's are upgrading to F/O after only 2 years 8 months, not a long wait if you ask me.

[cpdude]

Time spent on recce is seldom wasted! BK:ok:

Another frustrated S/O waiting to upgrade (for the record...I think they should have a fixed upgrade date...3 years...from hire).

What is...is! You can let it go and not worry about what you don't control or chose to live miserably. It's your choice A/T and others.

[A/T less]

Why is it that everytime someone points out the things that are imperfect about a company, there's always an army of kool aid drinker telling them to quit or move on?

Is that how you wimps solve problems? Just refuse to see the problem and run away?

As for BILLYTHEKID, I smile everytime I read your posts, because I know so well what type of person CX will transform you into. I know, because it happened to me and MANY OTHERS!

Just wait a few years, junior boy.

[cpdude]

I know so well what type of person CX will transform you into. I know, because it happened to me and MANY OTHERS!
Just wait a few years, junior boy.

...and it DOESN'T happen to many more!

Nothing wrong with trying to solve problems but please don't lay the blame on new-joiners because you don't agree with the rules.

If you want to attempt to really solve some problems then get active in the AOA, otherwise go keep yourself company! If you have no faith in the AOA...then your screwed buddy so accept it and take it like a man.

[Numero Crunchero]

A/T less
I normally refrain from commenting on individuals. I prefer to answer questions and argue logically, rather than attack personally. But seriously mate, you have huge issues. Do you get angry and blame the 'wimps' for everything wrong with your life? Less rhethoric please and a little more substance to your comments would go a long way!

I will say it again....you will not be bypassed for command...you will get bypass pay if you are suitable for upgrade to FO and you have DEFOs ahead of you.

I think the premise of your argument is that we are not training contrained? If we are NOT training course constrained, then DEFOs are costing you time to FO but not total time to command. If we ARE training course constrained, DEFOs will still delay your upgrade to FO but accelerate(shorten) your total time to command as the airline can grow faster than it could if it followed the strict SO-FO-CN career path.

Short term pain, long term gain buddy!

By the way, please do not for a minute think that the above logic applies to the "RA60 will accelerate your command" sophistic company espoused mantra! B#llsh*t!

PS A/T less, I can assure you the company has been more consistent over the last few years than it was in my first 8 years...3 contracts, 1 sign or be fired. Its just a job mate, get over it. Enjoy the time at the office...enjoy the free trips to far off destinations. Before you know it you will be 'stir frying' around asia as an FO on min days off reminiscing about the good old SO days of 3 ULRs a month and 18 days off!

[A/T less]

NC,
So if CX starts hiring DEC tomorrow, you would be totally OK with it? (and please don't tell me the contract doesn't allow it, because we ain't got any contracts)

You're perfectly OK with the current situation is because it is NOT affecting YOUR career progression.

On the topic of BYPASS PAY: We are NOT ELIGIBLE for bypass pay until Cathay gives you the "tech interview" (interview again to upgrade). You could be CAT A (hoop #1), but until the interview (hoop #2) has been GRANTED and that you passed (hoop #3), and that the REVIEW BOARD gives you the thumb's up (hoop #4) you CAN NOT be classified "suitable for upgrade" hence, NO BYPASS PAY.

Cathay going to give a few hundred S/Os bypass pay to work 9 days a month?

[Richard Wong]

We employ you on very good conditions, if you don't like it...Chek Lap Kok is only 40 minutes away...YOU GO HOME NOW!!! GO NOW!!

Our airlines need to get more locals in here, the foreigners are simply just a pain. I wish Mr. Philip Chen would make some changes in FOP department and start an anti-gweilo movement and send all of you complainers home on a freight container.

[Mr. Bloggs]

Don’t think it’s the DEFO’s fault but I guess it depends on where you sit. Blame the DFO. He’s the orchestrator.

They need S/O’s in Hong Kong and need DEFO’s on a base. There are many F/O slots on bases not filled, so CX is hiring directly to these bases and saving huge amounts of money.

Point: It is those that have been screwed and those that will. It’s only a matter of time. This time it is the S/O’s.

Not much you can do about. Go on Strike? Complain to your Chief Pilot?

Getting angry at the DEFO’s is not going to solve it. Wrong guys to get angry at.

Welcome to the Big Brush Stroke Airlines, the Black Heart of Asia.

A/T: You are correct. It does not effect certain people and it’s the I’m Alright Jack Syndrome. I have seen it in 1993,1999, 2001 and when we ditched the 49ers.

Any suggestions on how we fix the problem?

[Numero Crunchero]

I love statistics...you can say anything with them!

In 84% of this company's history they have employed direct entry FOs to the pax fleet.
In 100% of this company's history they have employed direct entry FOs to the pax or freighter fleet.
IN 100% of this company's history there has been at least one person who had a whinge that couldn't be solved! Congratulations A/T, you win.

I had my command delayed several years (not sure how many) by the introduction of ASL. I am still here...it affected me, it annoyed me but I CHOSE to stay. After choosing to stay I think I kinda lost the right to whinge anymore as the only other solution to acceptance was to quit. A/T, you have two choices...accept or leave. Maybe you should resign and give up 2 years seniority and come back as a DEFO!

Did you know that many of the first LEPs were working for CX for 5years+ before they actually joined the aircrew seniority list? I think they have a bigger gripe than yours. But thats just my opinion. Your command will come faster with DEFOs being employed. HKG will be the major base for DEFOs once all the bases are full. Its just cheaper to fill the bases first.

A/T what you should be far more worried about is RA60. That will DELAY your command...the opposite effect to DEFOs.

[Kane Toed]

Just as a matter of interest NC, could I ask why you brought up this point in relation to delay to upgrades?
Did you know that many of the first LEPs were working for CX for 5years+ before they actually joined the aircrew seniority list?I'm assuming it's because the first tranche of LEP joined under the impression that they WERE going to be on the seniority list, and then this was changed once they were in the company? If that's not the reason, then I'm not sure how pertinent it is to the current thread?

A/T may be banging the drum a little more vociferously than I am, but he does have a point - the reason that the delay to SO upgrades is not a 'hot topic' is because there are only 300 of them, and most are -understandably - not prepared to rock the boat when they have only been on board for a short period of time.

I accede to the 'put up and shut up' argument; actually there is little choice. Furthermore, I accept that it's the company's responsibility to make money for the shareholders, whereas it's only their choice if they want to give me any information that might affect my life. Notwithstanding all of that, there is the feeling amongst us bottom feeders that there has been pretty major change to our career path.

I'm into numbers too NC, in fact I have a Maths Degree (pure and computing tho' no stats!), but I'm still not convinced by your long term projection. There are two points that I contest:

Firstly, your final comment about RA60 is critical. Remember, that from the bottom of the heap, we have both DEFO on the pax fleet AND RA60 as potential changing factors. Assuming that your argument is correct, and that all these DEFOs who are going directly into 'my' RHS are a good thing for me, I have to hope to hell that I get upgraded before RA60 is an issue. If not, those DEFO will still be in 'my' seat, and no-one will be upgraded for 5 years. Probably fair to assume that I'll be in the jump seat for a while longer if that's the case.

Secondly, you projection assumes no slow down in expansion or other negative factors. If however something does go wrong (and I've also been in aviation for almost 20 years - we know that things are always on the change), then the delayed SOs will be watching it unfold from... the jump seat. Take if from me, important as it is be beat the rest to command, it's just as important to progress at a reasonable rate. If nothing else, it's very very difficult to keep flying skills sharp for years with 12 hours 'hands-on' in the sim per year.

Finally, I'm not convinced by the bypass pay comments either. I'm really not sure that a profits driven airline would give their SO's the upgrade interview simply to allow them to get bypass pay. By the way, as a shareholder, I'm not sure I would want that anyway! Once those RHS are full, interviews will stop - or perhaps there will be a number of D Cat SOs!

Mr Bloggs:Any suggestions on how we fix the problem?Thank you for that, I almost feel as though someone above my pay grade is listening!

I think that it would be reasonable to go through the SO's that were recruited before the DEFO pax programme started, and offer all those who meet the hours requirements for DEFO pax (in seniority order). No change to seniority number - not need to resign and drop to the bottom of the pecking order. Once they have been upgraded then bring in the DE guys. Those SOs who don't have the hours will remain as SO's, but for them the impact is likely to be less in the long run, as they are almost certainly younger and at an earlier point in their aviation career. They can afford to play the long game, and still have the ultimate security of a lower seniority number.

Finally, I'm sure that some people are happy to just sit there and take the money, but I would say that the majority of CX SOs have joined to progress. To be brutally honest, the lifestyle as a SO is great, but the job...

As always, just my uneducated view on things!

KT

[Harbour Dweller]

Excellent post Kane Toed :ok:

[Numero Crunchero]

queensland frog, well said.

I brought up the point about LEPs as I do see it as similar. They joined under a system that didn't give them seniority until they had been FOs for about 2 years. Then the rules changed and it became DoJ for seniority on the ASL. So not exactly the same...just pointing out that this airline has a long and distinguished history of disappointing pilots.

I actually sympathise with your case far more than you know. I know that the AOA GC are concerned and had some safeguards built in to the failed DEFO proposal.

I know that management are concerned at having 'institutional' SOs. I have heard, anecdotally, that the longer the time spent as SO the more difficult is the transition to FO. So it is in their financial best interests to keep things moving.

I didn't major in statistics, my degrees are in finance and science. I just love statistics as you can 'prove' almost anything with them;-)

I agree that if RA60 comes in without safeguards and/or a slowdown occurs, things will look bleak for SOs. I hope you are an AOA member...SOs+FOs are in the majority in the AOA so any vote on RA60 will need to be acceptable to those who it will affect most. I believe RA60 should be your greatest concern, not slowdown. CX has committed to a growth rate over the next few years that should ensure plenty of upgrades.

Heres some numbers for you mr mathematician. I think CP airbus said about 50 - 60 commands on bus this year. I assume the same for 777. That would mean say 120 commands, not counting freighters. The retirement rate varies but averages almost 60pilots per year. Assuming no pilot leaves if RA60 is introduced, the upgrade rate halves. If a slowdown occurs and we don't order any more aircraft, about 3 years from now there would be no upgrades...no one will leave until they get to 60. Then from 2012 onwards, as the first RA60 pilots hit 60, we will again need 60commands a year just to replace retirements.

If the current growth rate continues indefinitely, RA60 will delay your command by about 2 1/2 years. RA60 and or extending using current CoS terms of bypass pay, will delay commands. Anyone that says different is pulling your chain or trying to sell you a used car.

KT and AT, many of us are looking out for your best interests, as others did for me when I was a newbie. FOs and SOs outnumber CNs...so when it comes time to vote, if you are not happy, reject RA60. In the meantime remember "have the courage to change the things you can change, the serenity to accept the things you cannot change, and have wisdom to know the difference". Chill, enjoy the view.

[Cronus]

"Those SOs who don't have the hours will remain as SO's, but for them the impact is likely to be less in the long run, as they are almost certainly younger and at an earlier point in their aviation career. They can afford to play the long game, and still have the ultimate security of a lower seniority number."

Excuse me but, what the f*ck?

Exactly why should I be disadvantaged because my experience, on date of joining, didn't meet the requirements for DEFO? It's a ridiculous suggestion.

All those wannabe's checking out the rash of threads on how much Cx sucks, as Flava Flav says, "Don't believe the hype"...

Cronus

[BusyB]

NC,

"when it comes time to vote, if you are not happy, reject RA60"

Where do you vote if its a law in various states?

Can't ever see a vote on that I'm afraid, possibly a negotiation to introduce it but not a vote.:confused:

[cpdude]

I agree that if RA60 comes in without safeguards and/or a slowdown occurs, things will look bleak for SOs.

How is that? A low-time 20 something guy with 35+ years available to him has a bleak outlook? They got in young with little experience and good on them but if they have to wait an extra couple of years to get a command...too bad!

I'm sick of this RA60 concern. 60 or even 65 should be the retirement age even if I and others don't want to proceed beyond 55. Forced to retire when you are healthy and capable is wrong and the courts have agreed with me so accept the new limits and get on with life!

[404 Titan]

cpdude

That’s a complete distortion of the truth. Do you know the demographics of the average SO joining the company? It aint 20 years old mate. It’s closer to 35. A very large proportion of those could have joined as DEFO’s on the freighter if places were available in the ports from which they were employed but they weren’t. RA60 will delay any FO and Command upgrade by at least 5 years. Simple mathematics.

While I concede that being able to work until 60 may appear attractive, especially if you already hold a command and/or have had several wives or started late in this career like me, it is detrimental to the pilot body as a whole.

Using your analogy that retirement age should be 60 or 65 is just as floored as 55 in the eyes of some courts. It is age discrimination. Now having an open ended retirement age would really be great for everyone wouldn’t it? Not.:yuk:

[Kane Toed]

404 Titan quite correctly stated:
RA60 will delay any FO and Command upgrade by at least 5 years. Simple mathematics.Absolutely.

Spot on with the age thing too. I remember being 35! Freighter? None available where I can live. DEFO pax? After my time.

Oh well, more chance to go diving I guess! At least if I can't be a CN (or even FO) at least I could be a DM!! :hmm:

[BusyB]

404,

"While I concede that being able to work until 60 may appear attractive, especially if you already hold a command and/or have had several wives or started late in this career like me, it is detrimental to the pilot body as a whole."

I'm not sure that "as a whole" is true these days. Yes, it might well be worse for some although PC's words in ATW talking of CX possibly having 240 aircraft in 10 years would definiely need them to retain pilots to the max age. In addition the way pensions are going I see lots of people needing to work longer.:sad:

[tryhard]

"Detrimentantal to the pilot body as a whole"

My God, what a f^%$ing joke. Firstly there is no "pilot body" in cathay. Just a group of individuals squabbling over absolute ****e.
THIS AIRLINE IS AN ABSOLUTE JOKE.

:yuk: :yuk: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :} :ugh: :ugh: :ugh: :{ :{ :{ :{ :{

[Drunknsailor]

Try Hard,

Go home, you'll feel better.

[cpdude]

That’s a complete distortion of the truth. Do you know the demographics of the average SO joining the company? It aint 20 years old mate. It’s closer to 35. A very large proportion of those could have joined as DEFO’s on the freighter if places were available in the ports from which they were employed but they weren’t. RA60 will delay any FO and Command upgrade by at least 5 years. Simple mathematics.
I didn't say 20, I said "A low-time 20 something guy with 35+ years available" which means about 25 with 35 years available! I'm also talking about ALL S/O's not just the ones that qaulify for DEFO but couldn't find an open base to their liking.
As for your "SIMPLE" math...it's too simple and therefore not accurate. It would be accurate if there was no expansion, no hiring and upgrades relied on retirement alone. We all know that's not the case so why make such assumptions?
RA60 has the potential to cause a minor delay (a year or two) to an F/O's command to speeding it up by a couple of years depending on expansion and seniority of an individual F/O. IE. a slow-down at first but then the entire machine will speed things up.

[fire wall]

If the travelling public had any idea of the juvenille and unstable nature of some of the crew that inhabit foward of the flight deck door then I suggest that staff travel would be a hell of a lot easier.
Try hard, you are a case in point and were your identity known then I can assure you that the only thing you would responsible for on any flt deck I am involved in would be manning the radios. Idiot.

[404 Titan]

fire wall

I suspect the company already knows who he is. It only takes on average six posts here for the company to work out who you are, if they should so desire.

[A/T less]

TITAN,
So how many ppruners have you turned in and did it help with your progression to the left?

People do funny things when there's a lack of seniority system in place to upgrade. Lots of Brownie points=4 bars.

[Numero Crunchero]

AT, I can vouch for 404. And he is not left seat yet.
If you really don't want CX to know who you are log in under different names and have people log in for you when you are flying. It is simple mathematics to work out peoples identities on this forum.

Busy B, HKG is an anachronism in the modern business world. Until communist china feels that old pilots have rights I think it will be quite a while before RA60 is forced onto us. The base issues...hmmm...lets see what happens. Maybe that is the way it will go. If you stay in hkg, it is 55RA, if you go on a base it is 60? But that is a major change to our COS so, as you know, I have always assumed it is something we have to agree to...ie a vote!

cpdude

Please inform us math deficient plebs how RA60 "accelerates" time to command? Remember KT has a maths degree, 404 has an accounting degree.

Let me attempt to preempt your reply. If all C+T are 55, we can EXTEND them. But that costs the company money as then there is bypass pay. If the company knows that it will have to extend them, it will plan ahead and not train up new C+Ts and that will also mean it will not need to upgrade new line CNs to replace those that would have been upgraded to C+T. If they knew they couldn't extend, they would have to train up lots more CNs in advance of any expansion. Its not like we dont have years notice of any aircraft arriving so they have plenty of notice for their planning.

One more point, please tell me how 300 captains not retiring over a 5 year period will only delay an FO's upgrade by a year or two. Lets say CX planned 600commands over the next 5 years...I think it is about 120 for this year. If no one retires for the next five years, we only need 300 commands. So FO number 301 today would have had his command in 30months now has to wait 5 years.So all FOs/SOs more than 300 on the seniority list will have their command delayed by at least 2 1/2 years. There will also be knock on effect to FO upgrades. Any downturn will exacerbate that time. cpdude, do you have any idea what that means in terms of career earnings? You are 2 to 3increments lower in rank at 55 than you would have been. I haven't done an NPV calculation yet (but I will) but my best guess is that you break even at around 59. Great, increase to RA60 and then spend 4 years extra working just to get where you would have been if RA55 had stayed. Still cpdude, there is a silver lining. At least at 59 you are 4 years closer to dieing so less time to spend the money you have;-)

Lastly cpdude, please explain how needing to upgrade 300 less captains over the next 5 years will speed up everyones command...in an expansion or static scenario? I dont mind you using non 'simple' maths if that is what it takes.

[cpdude]

Well NC, this is how I see it all!

If all C+T are 55, we can EXTEND them. But that costs the company money as then there is bypass pay.

Money CX has, pilots they don't!

How many Captains do you need to fill 40 additional cockpits? Considering most of the aircraft will be ULR flown I would say 400+. This is needed in the next 3 years just for expansion!

please tell me how 300 captains not retiring over a 5 year period

Where did you get that figure from? You're suggesting 50% of our Captains will reach age 55 over the next 5 years? I would suggest it is half that figure. Over the past 30 months I believe we have lost only 60.
Like I said, your math is simplistic and fails to adjust for variables.

So here we come...where I answer your question so you can understand this notion of time to command in a growing airline.

We have about 2000 pilots of which 650-700 are captains. If we have 150 retiring over the next 5 years then that would allow 150 new captains to upgrade. I know you get this part and I agree with you! If those 150 captains extended to age 60 that would basically delay 150 upgrades. I know you get that too!

We have more than this happening in CX. We have 40 new aircraft arriving over the next 3 years. Up to 400 new captains are required to fill these aircraft. We both know where these captains will come from but who will train them?

If we lose 150 Captains, probably 120 of them will be C&T Captains. So you say train more C&T Captains but who will train them? CX blew it 3 years ago when they should have trained not only extra C&T Captains but line Captains too.
Last year CX ran 115 Command courses and failure rates were high. I believe only 70 passed but I could be wrong. This year they want 129 courses. If the retirement age does not extend to age 60 then the course numbers will fall dramatically. A pilot only 150 numbers away could wait 3-4 years instead of 2.

Remember every course takes a C&T. They are running 502 training courses in 2007 up from 442 in 2006. If they lose 30% of the C&T staff...well I'm sure your Math Major and accountant can work those numbers!

Personally, I think CX is doing too little too late. They will either dramatically change the course syllabus for new-hires and Command training or they will have to delay acquisition to prevent parking a valuable asset.

Believe me when I say…as long as we are buying aircraft, we can’t train them fast enough. So if you think forcing the retirement of senior C&T staff will speed up your command…you are so dreadfully wrong!:bored:

[Five Green]

Numero ! Well said and calculated again !

Also the crewing compliment is going to gradually change if we increase our Long haul flying. We will also increase the crew required as we switch to 777ers and more frequency with less capacity. Therefore we will have a much steeper triangle of seniority with a higher ratio of FOs to Captains and a slightly higher SO to FO ratio. All of which will negatively impact the career earning potential if (when) our retirement is pushed to 60 or higher.

As you said you could work 5 more years for 2 more years pay !

FG

P.S. we are five posters !!

[BusyB]

cpdude,

I agree with that calculation with the proviso that I feel there is an initial delay as they ramp up SO/FO/DEFO training instead of commands. Overall whilst CX is expanding towards 240 aircraft it means everyone in CX now will move through the system to command. (star chamber permitting).:ok:

[Numero Crunchero]

cpdude,
you got me. There is no slipping anything past you.
Here are the numbers of pilots reaching 55 from 2005 to 2012 based on a 2001 seniority list.
2005 39, 2006 43, 2007 40, 2008 34, 2009 61, 2010 68, 2011 51, 2012 54.

That gives us 82 retirements over the last 2 years. That gives us 260 over the next five years. Over the period 2009-2013(incl) retirements peak at 295(ie 295 guys who are still working due to RA60 vs RA55). Forgive my memory...it has been a few years since I looked at this data but i thought it was 300. By the way, a few of those retirees will be FOs.

So CX has money....why then can it not just EXTEND these C+Ts, thus ensuring that the pilots whose commands are delayed by this act, will not be penalised financially since they will get bypass pay! I know many of the C+Ts are in their early 40s or even younger in some cases. So I think the C+T wastage rate is going to be lower than you have suggested.

More planes flying with more captains senior to you does not mean you get your command earlier! It just means there are more captains in the airline who are senior to you. I dont think a guy whose command is delayed will take any consolation from the fact that there are more aircraft flying.

I agree with you on the training issue. They should have been upgrading C+Ts years ago. If they had done so, we would have not the situation where CX either needs to extend lots of guys or somehow get age 60. But from an FOs point of view, CX created the problem, so why should FOs wear the burden of the solution?

Based on our average cost of employment it is cheaper to work everyone up to around 93-96 credit hours a month than it is to employ more pilots. Maybe this is how the company will manage some of the expansion?

cpdude,thank you for the compliment. You are the first person in about a decade that has accused me of using 'too simplistic' mathematics;-)


I need you to explain to me that example you gave of an FO being 150 away from command. You said with RA 60 he will get his command in 2 years instead of 3-4 if we keep RA55. Did I get that right?


cpdude, I think what you are alluding to is that without those C+T replacements there would be more upgrades as there are more courses, right? OK, an example. On average, there will be 50retirees per year for the next few years(increasing to closer to 60). So, we need 50line captain upgrades, 50SO-FO, 50recruits and up to 50courses for CN upgrade to TC/STC/BTC. If we were expanding we would need around 150courses for the 50captains and a few more to keep the proportion of C+T constant. So say around 160-170 courses in total. If they are upgraded to replace retirees we need 200 courses(assuming all the retirees were C+T). So at best I can see that RA60 would accelerate command by about 10more captains considering we would need 10 more FOs and 10 more SOs(30courses). So RA60 accelerates command by about 10 due to more courses available, but delayed by about 50 due to 55year olds remaining...net effect, command is delayed by 40 per year. This is only true in a training limited scenario. If we are not training limited, commands are delayed in direct proportion to the number of retirees.

For simplicity I have ignored transfers across fleets but I concede that this will have a major effect as the older guys tend to be on the 400. It would probably cost up to an extra 50courses, or less than 17captains.

The smart thing to do for CX is to extend C+Ts, recruit more DEFOs and maybe pick a few guys under 50 for C+T!

RA60 helps the airline, it does not help FOs and SOs. An FO wants to get into the left seat. I dont think he really cares whether that left seat is one of 100 or 240. According to NPR, as long as it is shiny and new he is happy!

[Five Green]

NC and CP ;

Don't forget that some of the extendees are not C+T. So they definitely take away an upgrade.

What is the course duration for a Line Captain upgrade to training and a trainer upgrade to C+T and C+T to STC ? Are they shorter than a command course ? ie less hours required.

So we are talking about the need for a quick fix. Any quick fix that involves a long term degrade of our contract is bad news. What may or may not affect us in good times will certainly hurt us when we slow (and we will) to upgrade by attrition only.

Not even sure why we are talking about this as the company is extending at will anyway, so why agree to a permanent change ??

FG

[cpdude]

Here are the numbers of pilots reaching 55 from 2005 to 2012 based on a 2001 seniority list.
2005 39, 2006 43, 2007 40, 2008 34, 2009 61, 2010 68, 2011 51, 2012 54.

Thanks for that. I knew someone had to have an old list.

So CX has money....why then can it not just EXTEND these C+Ts, thus ensuring that the pilots whose commands are delayed by this act, will not be penalised financially since they will get bypass pay!

...because they are painfully cheap but it will sneak up and bite them good.

Based on our average cost of employment it is cheaper to work everyone up to around 93-96 credit hours a month than it is to employ more pilots. Maybe this is how the company will manage some of the expansion?

Many 400 Captains are already working 90 hours and it will only get worse!

I need you to explain to me that example you gave of an FO being 150 away from command. You said with RA 60 he will get his command in 2 years instead of 3-4 if we keep RA55. Did I get that right?

As you said, we are in a training limited scenario. 2007 will see 129 commands but I believe they need 150+ commands over the next 3-4 years. Also remember the success rate must improve from the 65-75% they had in 2006.

Let's say we need 150 commands per year. We currently will produce 129 commands this year which is already a 12% increase over last year. C&T is stretched and they need more people. We need a further 16% more command training over the next few years. If we lose 30% of our C&T pilots then at best we can accomplish 90 command courses which is 40 less in 2007 and 60 less than desired for 2008. Sure you can focus on Command training to still make 129 courses but then new-hires and JFO's suffer and CX needs all of them! So you say train more C&T pilots but this takes away from Command training and new-hires not to mention JFO upgrades as well. This is why CX is trying to hire as many DEFO pax as they can.

So...a pilot at #150 should only wait 1.2 years but with RA55 he could wait 1.6 years. A pilot at #300 would wait 2.1 years but could end up waiting 3.3 years.

Rememeber, you can't just train more C&T pilots because most of us see the lifestyle and will not do it.
OK, I concede that my initial estimates of delays due not factor out exactly as I suggested but there is still a delay to command over the next 3-5 years if we do not RA60. This as we have stated is only true in a training limited scenario as you suggested.

In an ideal situation, CX would make it desireable to become a C&T pilot and we conduct 200 commands a year over the next 3 years. But, CX is to cheap and doesn't have the management skill to see the writings on the wall.

[BusyB]

NC,

I think this discussion is a red herring, although why I have no idea.

If age discrimination applies to basees then anyone wanting/needing to work past 55 will go on a base.
This will then ruin the planned lifestyle of more junior pilots purely because more junior pilots have made things difficult in HKG.

This is one of those items like no more F/E, no more Navigator, no more 3 pilot aircraft.

Lets face up to the fact that legislation is changing everywhere and all we can do is try and improve our T & C's so we can make our own choices about when to go.:ok:

[Numero Crunchero]

why a red herring busyB?

cpdude
I accept your argument if the choice was no extensions allowed. Whilst they are training constrained it is their choice whether to take the expensive extension option or upgrade slightly younger captains to TC/STC/BTC. I dont think we need to do anything...they already have the mechanism in place(extensions) to deal with rapid expansion.

5G
much much shorter than command courses. I would estimate that you could upgrade 2-3TCs a month versus2months of command course flying.

BusyB, one other thing. Somewhere you posted about age discrimination forcing someone CX to allow us to fly past 55. That would only be true if the pilot falls under the jurisdiction of UK/NZ/OZ etc and the basing company. However, you cannot then come back to HKG and fly past 55 here regardless of what UK/OZ/NZ say. They have no jurisdictional power here. You may be able to work on a base after 55 but you couldn't come back to HKG and there is nothing any government can do about it!

[BusyB]

The only part of your contract that would be affected by the age discrimination laws is your retirement age. Any change to any other part of your contract becomes age discrimination. If your contract says that after so many years on a base you can return to HKG that applies.

It will have to be tested in court if CX doesn't grasp the mettle so we'll have to wait for a retiree on a base to go for it.:ok: