Please excuse the emotive rant; I've been up for 32 hours now (4 hours in the bunk doesn't count) and if they ever talk about 3-man ULH I'll cry.
ACMS, as much as I like where your head's at, when I talk to people who have been here longer than I (most people), the result of turning down the first offer will either mean it will be imposed anyway as an improvement to COS or be thrown out completely as we had rejected it. I wish I could believe otherwise.
Although PPrune is sometimes a haven for malcontent, it does offer valuable insight into the wider issues affecting not just one group of aircrew. As an AOA member, I await the outcome of the GC's decision whether or not to support the proposal.
Hong Kong is all about making money. To that end, the local population is encouraged to be part of a compliant, efficient, money-making team. "Same Team, Same Dream" (wasn't that communism?) Enter Jo Pilot, a member of an educated profession taught to question everything and all of a sudden questions like, "Why are we not given even inflationary pay rises when the Company is making record profits?" don't make any sense. Apart from the obvious cynical responses, that about sums it up for me.
Put another way, the Company (I really dislike using generic terms, I'd much rather use individuals or bodies) arguably didn't need to pay us any more in the past and so, as has been the case for the last 14 years, our conditions have eroded, or become more efficient dependant on which office you occupy. There's an air of change at the moment. We are told people are leaving, there will be a pilot shortage and that the Company (there I go again) will need us in the coming years. Is this really the case?
BB