Mr Bloggs,
In 1999, yes I think they would have come after us even if on one scale. Every dept in CX was told to reduce costs by 20%. Obviously with fixed overheads such as fuel, leasing, route operating costs, the only obvious target was salaries. In 1999, before the hoo haa, I was earning more than any FO in qantas. Now as a CN I earn as much as a 400FO in QF.
I try to be impartial - just quote facts and figures. I am not doing any others a service if I colour these facts and figures with my view. So I try not to state my opinion but I often fail;-/
CX want to end the FACA - the only way to do that is fire or integrate the (approx 40-50)ASL crews. Some ASL guys rejected the chance to come across in 2000 as they were close to 55 and would have been forced to retire. Some didn't come over as they were close to command in ASL and didn't want to have to wait another 9years by joining CX mainline.
If I had my time over I wouldn't have signed the deal in 94. I very much doubt I will ever be offered 8% again being A scale!
Do I really believe they will grow faster? Yes. It makes no sense increasing retirement age and DEFO with resultant bypass pay issues and increasing costs otherwise. This airline is training capacity constrained. If they want to expand faster they can get aircraft from leasing companies.
This might be hard to accept but having a later RA costs CX more per cockpit. WHy? Because in the average cockpit you have higher increment CNs and in the short term, higher increment FOs. Add in bypass pay and the costs skyrocket. An airline that isn't training constrained wants the most junior CNs/FOs possible. The training costs involved wash out in less than 4 years because of the higher increments. Even if conditions were degraded, it is still costlier to have CNs remain after 55.
New joiners
Without the rejection last summer, new DEFOs would be on a much lower package. With AOA involvement hopefully the new deal is a big improvement on what was nearly imposed. There is nothing in our CoS preventing them from employing DEFOs at any time on any base. They just have to pay bypass.
A new joiner can come in 3 ways today. Freighter FO, Pax FO or SO. If they have the experience they will join as an FO. A unified FO scale will ensure that the pilot will be better off financially than if he joined under the current FFO or SO salary. SOs joining in HKG will still be joining on the salary as it exists today.
So any new joiner is better off financially - how has the AOA let him down?
On bypass, why is it a joke? Bypass pay is paid to someone. Currently they pay bypass pay to highest eligible FO and I believe the highest eligible SO for CN extensions. 'Eligible' is where the confusion lies. If you are Cat D or you voluntarily defer a command(like an FO on a base waiting for a CN slot on the base) you are not entitled so bypass pay goes down the seniority list to the next eligible individual. The CoS has no mention of assessment but I may be wrong on that.
Myths:
DEFOs cost time to command and RA65 will accelerate time to command.
Facts:
DEFOs will accelerate time to command for all FO/SOs on the seniority list as this airline is training course constrained. The only ones to suffer are current SOs...and they will receive bypass pay as per the deal last year.
RA65 will slow down command rate. As i said earlier, I do think CX will expand faster in future but not enough to absorb all the extendees. So I would assume a 2+year delay for a brand new SO(11+years).
Housing and other benefits (such as travel fund, education) are now taxed. The IRD is shifting in its interpretation of what is an allowance or non cash allowance. This has been a consistent trend. The AOA has been funding an appeal on the housing interpretation but it appears that IRD interpretation has infact changed and all these benefits are taxable. So it seems the advice CX got from its lawyers was in fact accurate. I know there is pilot whingeing, but does paranoia extend so far as to think an employer really wants every payment/benefit made taxable?
Whatever the deal, vote for it or not on its merits not prejudice or the histrionics of certain PPRUNE posters.
I think people should listen to the advice given by the AOA, CX, colleagues, competitor airline mates, PPRUNE, the DB plaza and then make up their own mind.