CoS 08
Five Green
You bring up a very good counterpoint to those who say 'RA65 and DEFO are going to happen anyway so this vote is just about pay and ASL'.
The glaring fact, as you say, is that cabin crew are not being given the same option to work to age 65 at this time. Therefore, attempts to present RA65 as fait accompli are misrepresentations of the truth.
Those that say '...it is going to happen anyway, there is nothing that we can do about it, so you better just vote for it...' are being mischevious. It is an argument that has been shown, historically, to be false. Here are some examples:
First Housing Agreement - voted down despite assertions by Murray Gardiner that '...the Company will throw their toys out of the cot if this doesn't pass; they will do what they want anyway; industrial relations will suffer irreparably if this does not pass...'
The subsequent Housing Agreement, the one we have today, represents an improvement on the original agreement. The Company did not throw their toys out of the cot, they did not simply impose an agreement on the aircrew community, and industrial relations did not suffer, (although it could be argued that they were at an all time low after the 49er debacle anyway).
DEFO Agreement - voted down by a landslide, despite assertions by Steve Turner that '...the Company can do whatever it wants with respect to offering new joiners any contract they choose...'
The fact is that new joiner DEFOs to the passenger fleet ever since, have been joining on CoS 99 provisions and they can thank the AOA membership for voting down the DEFO deal. The Company did not simply offer new joiners a contract of their choosing, they respected the comprehensive outcome of the vote.
It is true that DEFO freighter pilots have also been recruited on inferior terms over this time period, but I believe that they should be employed under passenger terms anyway since the Company would like to see all pilots fly passenger and freighter aircraft. Precedent for this situation exists, since this is exactly what occurred before a separate freighter company was created.
We should not agree to lesser conditions for future colleagues just to help the Company out of a situation they themselves created.
This second attempt to pass a DEFO agreement, though deficient, represents an improvement on that originally tabled.
If that which is negotiated is simply going to happen anyway, then why negotiate in the first place? Why have a vote on the proposal? Why seek approval for it?
My view is that we do have an opportunity to have a say on the subject. We can influence our future careers, (and that of our future colleagues), by the stance we take today on these issues. And I believe that the Company will listen to the result of the vote on this agreement, (should there be one), and the more comprehensive the vote one way or the other, the more carefully they will listen.