Singapore Airlines vs FO Pavlinovich - Employment Contract

[nevan]

I do apologise to those of you that have been waiting for my Defence to be published here on Pprune. The document is a public document available through the Supreme Court of Western Australia. I will publish it here in its entirety including all pleadings leading to the final Defence in the near future.
In the mean time I am publishing a standard SIA contract. The bond is S$320,000 which was approximately US$230,000 when signed in the early 90s.
While reading this, please keep in mind the following:
- SIAs preference for non family member guarantors
- the use of liquidated damages (unspecified damages)
- payment required in the event of death
- how would YOU feel if you signed the contract after they promised the world then was told by management on your first day that "you people are the lowest form of life here - dont forget it" (thankyou Mr Yong)

__________________________________________________________10 2 CPL CADET PILOT (INCLUDE ADVANCED TRAINER PROGRAMME)
A DEED FOR A COURSE OF TRAINING

THIS DEED made the day of one thousand nine hundred and between SINGAPORE AIRLINES LIMITED, a Company incorporated in Singapore and having its registered office at Airline House, Airline Road, Singapore 1781 (hereinafter called "SIA") of the first part and NRIC/Passport No. of (hereinafter called "THE TRAINEE") of the second part and
NRIC/Passport No. and No. ( ) of (hereinafter called "THE SURETIES") of the third part.
WHEREAS SIA has on the request of the TRAINEE agreed to provide a course or courses of training at SIA's expense in Singapore and/or elsewhere, in connection with his employment as a cadet pilot; And THE TRAINEE has agreed to undergo the aforesaid course of training and on completion to serve SIA or any subsidiary company of SIA as SIA may direct or approve (hereinafter called the "SUBSIDIARY") for a period of seven (7) years; and THE SURETIES have agreed to guarantee the performance of the obligations of THE TRAINEE hereunder.


WITNESSETH as follows:
1 . THE TRAINEE of his own free will and with the consent of THE SURETIES hereby agrees to undergo the following course(s)of training as a cadet pilot in Singapore and/or elsewhere commencing on or such other date as may be stipulated by SIA :
a) Advanced Trainer Programme
b) Training on any SIA Group aircraft type
2. SIA in consideration of the premises and of the services to be performed by THE TRAINEE hereby covenants as follows:
(a) SIA will accept THE TRAINEE as a cadet pilot provided that THE TRAINEE shall obey the commands of the officers of SIA or its nominated instructors and observe the covenants on his part hereinafter contained.
(b) SIA will through its officers or its nominated instructors during the course of the said training to the best of its power teach or cause to be taught to THE TRAINEE the business or profession of an aircraft Pilot as aforesaid and all things appertaining thereto.

3 It is further agreed and declared that if THE TRAINEE in the sole opinion of SIA:
(a) fails to obey directions given by _SIA to THE TRAINEE or affecting THE TRAINEE;
(b) fails to show sufficient application to the said course of training;
(c) by his own misconduct renders himself in the opinion of SIA unsuitable to continue such course of training;
(d) shows himself unlikely to develop or attain the physical and/or mental standard sufficient to enable him to complete the said course of training successfully;
(e) by his own conduct renders himself unsuitable to serve or continue to serve SIA or its SUBSIDIARY (as the case may be) in accordance with the provisions of Clause 4 of this Deed;
(f) resigns or leaves the service of SIA or its SUBSIDIARY (as the case may be) either during the course of training or during the period of seven (7) years referred to in Clause 4 of this Deed; or
(g) is dismissed or has his services terminated for any reason whatsoever either during the course of training or during the period of seven (7) years referred to in Clause 4 of this Deed;


then and in every such case THE TRAINEE and THE SURETIES shall be jointly and severally liable for themselves, their heirs, executors or assigns to pay SIA on demand as liquidated damages the amounts set out in Schedule A to this Deed.
Notwithstanding this, SIA reserves the right to amend these amounts as and when there are unforeseen increases in training, travel and other costs. The TRAINEE and THE SURETIES shall be informed of such increases.
4 (a) THE TRAINEE agrees to remain in the service of SIA during the period of training and thereafter to continue to serve SIA or to enter into the service of the SUBSIDIARY for a minimum period of 7 years from the date of completion of his training if so required by SIA. The date of completion of training shall be the day preceding the day THE TRAINEE operates without supervision as a functional pilot on aircraft of SIA or of the SUBSIDIARY and is appointed as First Officer.
(b) In the event THE TRAINEE accepts another course of training (hereinafter referred to as "the subsequent course of training") whereby he will be required to serve SIA or the SUBSIDIARY under a bond for a designated period of time (hereinafter referred to as "the subsequent bond"), such part of THE TRAINEE's earlier course of training and earlier service bond to remain in the service of SIA or of the SUBSIDIARY for a designated period of time which is still outstanding shall run concurrently with the subsequent course of training and the subsequent bond.
(c) For the avoidance of doubt, should the TRAINEE leave the service of SIA or of the SUBSIDIARY without completing the subsequent course of training and/or the subsequent bond, the liquidated damages payable shall be the sum total of the liquidated damages corresponding to the periods not served by him under both service bonds (including any period of training, if applicable).

5 In the event of this course of training being terminated under the provisions of Clause 3 hereof, SIA will not entertain any claim whatsoever from THE TRAINEE, either by way of compensation or of termination benefits.
6 It is further agreed and declared that anything hereinbefore contained to the contrary notwithstanding, SIA may by one (1) month's notice in writing to THE TRAINEE cancel this Deed at any time, without assigning any reason whatsoever, therefore and thereupon all benefits to and liabilities of THE TRAINEE or THE SURETIES under this Deed shall cease without prejudice to any antecedent benefits and liabilities.
7 Nothing in this Deed shall restrict SIA's right to enforce the terms of any other agreement concluded between SIA, THE TRAINEE and THE SURETIES of such other agreement, whether or not THE SURETIES of such other agreement are also THE SURETIES of this Deed.
8 THE TRAINEE shall not make any claim against SIA in respect of any loss or injury occasioned by the normal hazards of his training hereby provided for.
9 It is hereby agreed and declared that if at any time during the currency of this Deed either of THE SURETIES shall die or shall be adjudged a bankrupt then and so often THE TRAINEE may find another surety who shall be to the satisfaction of SIA and who shall be ready and willing to be substituted in the place of the surety so dead as aforesaid or being adjudged bankrupt:
Provided that in the event of another surety to the satisfaction of SIA not being found or in the event of such other surety refusing to enter into an agreement whereby he/she agrees to be bound by the terms and conditions of this Deed relating to THE SURETIES SIA may at its option at any time thereafter terminate the course of training and THE TRAINEE shall thereupon cease to have any claim to any benefits under this Deed.
10 It is further agreed that upon THE TRAINEE resuming employment with SIA or entering the service of the SUBSIDIARY after completion of the course of training this Deed shall continue to apply, in so far as it is relevant, until fully performed.
11 It is hereby further agreed that the liabilities of THE SURETIES hereunder or their estate shall not be affected or prejudiced

(a) i) by any extension of time, reduction of monies payable or any concession or waiver or indulgence given or agreed to by SIA with or without the assent of THE SURETIES; or

ii) by any change in the nature of work undertaken by THE TRAINEE hereunder; or
iii) by any forbearance, whether passive or express, on the part of the SIA in enforcing any of its remedies hereunder; or
iv) THE TRAINEE not serving SIA for the full Bond period for any reason whatsoever, including, without limitation, the discharge of THE TRAINEE by SIA
(b) THE SURETIES agree that as between THE SURETIES and SIA, THE SURETIES shall be principal debtors for all liabilities herein and all sums of money which may not be recoverable from THE SURETIES on the footing of a guarantee whether by reason of any legal limitations, disability or incapacity on or of THE TRAINEE or any other fact or circumstances and whether known to SIA or not shall nevertheless be recoverable on demand from THE SURETIES as the principal debtors;
(c) the liabilities of SIA and THE SURETIES shall not be affected by or in relation to either THE TRAINEE or THE SURETIES in the event of bankruptcy, mental incapacity or death; and
(d) this Deed shall continue to bind THE SURETIES and THE TRAINEE notwithstanding any change in the constitution of the company (whether by amalgamation reconstruction or otherwise) by which the business of SIA may from the time being be carried on and shall be available to the company carrying on the business of SIA for the time being.

12 A demand, notice, certificate or other communication may be given by any officer or solicitor of SIA and shall without prejudice to any other effective mode of making the same be deemed to have been sufficiently served on THE TRAINEE, THE SURETIES or their respective personal representative (s) under this Deed if sent to the address last known to SIA (or such other address as shall have been specified for the purpose in writing by THE TRAINEE or THE SURETIES to SIA)and shall be deemed to have been received by THE TRAINEE or THE SURETIES if sent by post to an address within Singapore, twenty﷓four hours after posting, if sent by post to an address outside Singapore, four days after posting, if sent by hand, immediately upon delivery by messenger or upon personal collection by THE TRAINEE or THE SURETIES, if sent by telegram, twenty﷓four hours after sending and, if sent by telex or, telefax, forthwith after transmission. In proving service it shall be sufficient to prove that the notice or demand was properly addressed and posted or delivered or transmitted.


13 The parties hereto agree that this Deed shall be governed by the laws of the Republic of Singapore and hereby submit to the non﷓exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of the Republic of Singapore.






[This message has been edited by nevan (edited 08 June 2000).]

[Whiskery]

You would have to be very sure that you would be prepared to go the "full distance" before signing and agreeing to anything THAT binding and one sided!

[titan]

This contract is about as one sided and constrictive as the Treaty of Versailles. Ironically, the Germans put up with it for about as long as the pilots in SIA put up with the above contract. The victors cointract went on to precipate WW2 which even though they won again, still cost 25 million lives; a lose loose situation. The difference though is that the Allies learnt from the mistakes of the past and instigated the Marshall Plan to improve the living conditions of the losers. Losers became ardent allies and the world is a better place now because of it.
If SIA is clever enough they may even find the moral here.

[BelowTheLine]

I don't understand the question. Did you quit and then they took you to court?

What did they owe you? One months' pay? Couldn't you just leave and go home?

I guess I don't understand this.

------------------
Keep The Blue Side Up

[Slasher]

This contract should be required reading by anyone crazy or suicidal enough to want to join this horrible bloody outfit.
BTW Nevan your Mr Yong told you the truth. All foreigners are scum as far as SIA is concerned. My course batch had that egomaniac FK come in and say "You people are NOT wanted here - only needed." Well the little brat didnt tell us a lie thats for sure.
If you want to experience TRUE discriminatory racism, injustice and opression first hand, join SIA. Why we ever bothered to liberate that island from the Japs is beyond me. Shouldve let them keep it.

PS Nevan isnt there a clause somewhere in there where the Stalag SQ High Kommand forbids any sexual contact by a foreign gwailo Cadet with a member of the master race?

[titan]

Hey Slasher I remember that one! Didn't one of the foreign national British FOs decide to do the right thing and marry a local girl who was in a predicament in about 97. When the government found out that the whitey had got married to a local without Government permission they chucked him out of the country; What ever happened to Ian?
........and that ladies and gentleman is an example of why Singapore has chosen not to sign ANY of the UN Human Rights Treaties.

[Slasher]

Titan Im unaware of 97, but in 90 or 91 (cant remember which) an Aussie cadet apparantly poked someone in jest during an overnight and was worried there might be a pregnancey. If the High Kommand found out he thought he'd be sent to a concentration camp. That was when I first heard about this "no-poking the master race lah" clause in the the 4th Reich's contract.
I dont know what happened to the cadet concerned or if he got into trouble or not.

PS UN Human Rights? SQ wont even sign the Geneva Convention!

[Gladiator]

Employment at SIA = Indentured servitude

[Whiskery]

Slasher - that cadet is now a B777 Captain,has two children by the same wife and has permanent residence status in Singapore!

[hounddog high]

titan,nevan,gladiator,storyman,slasher and the likes,

do yourself a favor. why don't you guys set a perfect company and suck all those stupid guys who signed their lifes away at SQ. Provide them with the best conditions and they will be happy and loyal to you and live happily ever after. I'll bet this will be your best plan to fix SQ, wouldn't it?

You seem to think you've got the right formula and knows what's best.

BTW Slasher, the Brits failed to defend Singapore, let alone liberate them. You would argue the Americans did the job, yeah,with the Atomic bomb! Imagine if there wasn't any atomic bomb then? btw, whose brains were tap into inventing that bomb?....

from what i read, you guys had your pride badly hurt by a nation which is only a red dot on the map, who happened to have a quite reputable airline to say the least.

don't bury your head in the sand.

better duck now. flaks flying soon.

[Slasher]

Whiskery. Hey thats good news mate! Good on him. Looks like he dodged the potential poop then.

[Whiskery]

Yeah Slash, he still had to eat a bit before getting the four bars - but he is now on "clover" and they leave him alone.

[titan]

I'm feeling a little worthless.
The Allies save Europe and give democracy to the Dictatorship in Germany. Likewise the Americans to Japan. We Australians go off to defend Singapore, lose thousands of our men, and what did we achieve? Singapore BECAME a dictatorship - where only the likes of the contract above could ever be allowed to exist.
Why did we bother..........

How do you dance to a dirge?

[A Few Good Men]

The Washington Post

Singapore is a dressed-up dictatorship

When Alex deTocqeville wanted to look into new forms of governance, he travelled West to the new worlds and spent nine months studying America. With the same idea in mind, but not supposing that these days to find the new world one travels East, I went to teach for a year in Singapore.
I especially wanted to look into what Singaporean officials tout as a new, unique blend of Confucianism and capitalism, an Asian-style of governance that corrects what they call the West’s excessive emphasis on the rights of the individual.
Singapore’s government, the argument goes, focuses on the needs of the community and so spares its country the ills of the West while it promotes prosperity and general happiness. This new form of governance they call “authoritarian democracy”.
Since that country is a good deal smaller than the United States (three million people in a little over twice the area of Washington), I got to see it very thoroughly over the course of a year. At the outset, the country didn’t seem strange. Singapore is a modern, Westernized, consumerist society. The cultural overlap between Singapore and Tyson’s Corner must be at least 80 per cent.
Nor was the famous skyline hard to get used to: “Like Rosslyn on steroids,” a DC friend remarked. The longer I stayed, however, the more peculiar Singapore became.
There was a grim air about the university. On the chairman’s desk, propped up on a little easel and aimed to catch your eye as you sat in the visitor’s chair, was a small sign that read, “An ounce of loyalty is worth more than a pound of cleverness.”
Though I came from a military academy and was not likely to be a radical, the Singaporean authorities demanded that I be interviewed for political reliability by their ambassador in Washington. I was directed to furnish copies of everything I had published and was required to have a phone interview with the acting chair of the department before I finally was pronounced acceptable. Even so, I was in the country for almost 10 weeks before I was permitted to teach a class.
It took months to piece together what I was seeing in Singapore. Why did the chairman of my department bring two agents from the Internal Security department to the office of one of my colleagues and watch while they questioned him for 90 minutes and stripped his office of papers, records and computer files?
Why did the newspapers brag of the Government’s ability “to take a firm hand with irresponsible journalists”? Why was I visited after 10 pm by two policemen who demanded that I empty the water out of the saucer underneath a potted plant on my balcony (a threat to public health, they explaned) and which of my neighbours had called them to turn me in?
It took the entire year to appreciate fully the achievement of Mr Lee Kuan Yew, the man who ruled Singapore as Prime Minister from 1959 to 1990 and is still its dominant political figure in his role as elder statesman. Slowly his astonishing array of social controls became clear and the character of “authoritarian democracy” became obvious. I found that no organization on the Island has been left unpenetrated by his People’s Action party. His control of that compact and technologically sophisticated country is more total than any other national leader has ever achieved. Mr Lee has created the most perfectly realised autocracy anywhere, the world’s state-of-the-art dictatorship.
The press, the police and military as well as the electoral, legal, housing, education, trade union and employment systems are all entirely under his control, so dissent, even at the polls (where voting is compulsory and ballots are serially numbered) is quixotic. Total government control of a very successful economy permits the regime to scatter largesse, so compliance is richly rewarded.
Mr Lee has woven a web of rewards and punishments around every aspect of life in Singapore. Nine out of 10 Singaporeans live in housing on 99-year lease from the government. Their leases can be terminated on a pretext. In other words, their apartment, which typically represents most of their savings, can be seized.
On the other hand, if they behave well they get to live cheaply in safe, subsidised, spartan housing in a society where other real estate has been bid to well above Washington levels. If they do not behave, the consequences are dire. If, for example, a young woman engages in what the Government sees as morally inappropriate behaviour, such as having a child outside of marriage, she may be reported by the monitors in every housing block and expelled.
Singaporeans pensions are also held hostage: between 30 and 40 per cent of most people’s income is taxed away into a “Central provident Fund” and held by the Government. Those who behave get a sterling reward: Their compulsory contribution is matched one-for-one by the Government. On the other hand, they live in fear that their retirement will be expropriated. My colleague Christopher Lingle, the American academic referred to above who angered the authorities by publishing a piece in the International Herald tribune mocking singaporean propaganda, lost about $20,000, all his savings in Singapore, in this way.
The education systen is similarly rigged to provide huge incentives for compliance and lifelong punishments for deviance. Students must be certified politically reliable by their high schools or junior colleges before they attend a university. Males undergo two or more years compulsory military training before college; some among them are recruited by the Internal Security Department and directed to report on their classmates. Refusing such recruitment, I was told, is not an option.
In sum, civil society has been dismantled; the judiciary is utterly compliant and the legal profession has been reduced to a largely technical function. Complaints may be submitted to the official “Government Feedback Unit”.
Legal protections of such basic rights as habeas corpus have been abriged and trial by jury has been abolished. Paradoxically, Singaporeans were much freer under the british than they are today under Mr Lee Kuan Yew: Their civil liberties had much fuller legal protection when they were colonials.
When one district in the city had the temerity to elect to parliament a candidate from the tiny, feeble opposition party, the government launced a barrage of allegations, investigations and legal proceedings against him that lasted eight years, imprisoned him and left him ruined. When the victim took his case to the Queen’s Privy Council in Britain, they found he had been “fined, imprisoned and publicly disgraced for offences of which he was not guilty.” One year later, Parliament asbolished appeals to the privy Council for disciplinary matters.
Mr Lee also warned the dissenters that “the Government will not be blackmailed by the people…To make sure the excesses (votes against his party) are not carried too far…it is necessary to put some safeguards in the way in which people use their votes to bargain, to coerce, to push, to jostle and get what they want without running the risk of losing the services of the Government.”
Nonetheless, Mr Lee’s party intervenes to keep that opposition party alive, alternately mocking, intimidating and infiltrating it, then appointing a handful of its candidates to the Parliament, in order to sustain the fiction that genuine politics are possible in singapore.
The striving for control takes laughable turns. Last year high school debating teams were imported from several countries to demonstrate Singapore’s openness, but someone failed to apply in time for the permit that must be granted by the Internal Security Departement for any formal gathering. No exception could be made: The foreign students had to sit silent and watch the locals debate each other.
At other times, the control grows ugly. The leading creative writer of Singapore, Catherine Lim, was attacked and repeatedly humiliated on the front page of the straits Times by Mr Lee himself after she made a cautious plea to the People’s Action Party to soften its style or risk creating an :effective divide” between itself and the people.
Mr Lee used the occasion to establish a new limit on political expression, describing how he would confront those who questioned him. “I would isolate the leaders, the troublemakers, get them exposed, cut them down to size, ridicule them, so that everybody understands that its’ not such a clever thing to do. Governing does not mean just being pleasant. If you want pleasant result, just as with children, you cannot just be pleasant and nice.”
Such language was printed with approval in all the papers of Singapore. Editorialists professed to find his statements “reassuring”.
But Mr Lee went further in his intimidation of Ms Lim: “Have a one-on-one. I’ll meet you. You will not write an article – and that’s it. One-to-one on TV. You make your point and I’ll refute you…Or if you like, take a sharp knife, metaphorically, and I’ll take a sharp knife of similar size; let’s meet. Once this is understood, it’s amazing how reasonable the argument can become…”
In this, as in all arguments in singapore, Mr Lee has the last word. Outside Singapore, however, it is still possible to point out that under his rule “authoritarian democracy” has come to mean totalitarian control. What he touts as Singapore’s political innovation is in fact merely a sophisticated refinement of this century’s political invention: the totalitarian state.

[titan]

I always enjoy reading this article for its bravery insight and succintness.

[773]

Do the expat's go straight to F/O, or are there S/O positions.

[Established !]

Houndog High
Why waste your time, same chaps bitching.
And still they come!

[Slasher]

As a bit of a follow-on from AFGM, Im posting this quote from an old post submitted long ago by MEC Man. Ive kept it because its an excellent piece of work and very succinctley says it all.

QUOTE:

Posted by MEC Man on Tuesday, 30 December 1997, at 11:57 a.m.

Asia could once produce great empires, genius philosophers, cultures and scientific inventions. It was able to do so because it knew that true wealth comes from intellectual capital. China, the cradle of an ancient civilization reached its zenith in the Tang Dynasty more than 1,000 years ago when Europe was still in the Dark Ages. Chinese sciences, arts, philosophies, medicines were once unsurpassed elsewhere. Unfortunately after numerous attempts to reinvent itself in the early 20th century, the end result was communism, a product of the convoluted tradition of Kant and Hegel, not even central to the main currents of Western thoughts. What stemmed from this futile reinvention is the bedrock of modern Chinese mentality.

Originality is often iconoclastic, unusual, controversial. It seeks to replace old paradigms with new ones. Unfortunately for Asia, its leaders have often condemned such qualities as "Western" - destructive and unsuitable for Asia's penchant for harmony - and therefore not to be emulated. Filial loyalty and a social order based on moral equity between the ruler and the ruled - admirable elements of Confucian teaching - have been wrenched out of context by latter-day emperors. In their new authoritarian guise, the Confucian values are transmuted into submission to figures of authority, avoidance of conflicts and group cohesion - ironically at any cost... And the use of power without constraint, and the act of control for the sake of maintaining control have also been juxtaposed into modern day normality.

Few in Asia, especially among the loud West-bashing advocates of "Asian values," have had the honesty to admit that Asian modernity is largely a product of Western mind... paradoxically, they will not admit that their intolerance to a human being's individuality and the encouragement of an individual's potential to create is the fallacy of their culture. Respect for the individual mind is the key to both creativity and intellectual renaissance, unfortunately, this behavior is condemned. Today's Asians, and tomorrow's, must reject the false prophet of "values," who stress blind deference to authority above all.

UNQUOTE

PS It should be noted that 30 odd years of LKY has, sadly, taken a toll on the ability of many locals (esp the young) to put forward successful arguments and rationale within the confines of debate. This is not strictly speaking their fault. After all they are a product of LKYs education system where lateral-thought development and individual thinking is not permitted. This is amply demonstrated here in the extremely limited debating skills of "Houndog" and "Established". Its a shame that they, like many of their fellow citizens, are incapable of putting forward a substantiated and rational viewpoint that, whilst opposing, could nonetheless be respected instead of resorting to simple "I dont like you!" childlike reactionary processes like those above.

[Gladiator]

Accurately written article.

Only those who have walked the walk can talk the talk.

[This message has been edited by Gladiator (edited 10 June 2000).]

[PiLoco]

Slasher:

Wow. Quite a quote. I've copied it to save.

IMHO, even America is sort of falling down on some points, though. There is a lot of groupthink, and people who think differently than the way the television tells them to are regarded as abberant.

Anyway, thanks for that thoughful post.

[PiLoco]

That's one heck of a lopsided contract, but probably not as rotten as the one you sign to join the military and get to flight school...

[Hotel Tango]

Thank goodness he doesn't have a large military force behind him. He might have had even bigger ideas.

Most of the British ex pats I knew (some years ago) flying for SIA were retired BA B747 and Concorde captains. They regarded their SIA jobs as a paid holiday and didn't give a hoot about internal and national politics. If, on the other hand, you are not a Singaporian and want to make a career with SIA that's a different matter. Take care.