Five Green and frogman
Five green
you got me. I knew exactly what I meant to say and then wrote it ambiguously.
I have access to my numbers now so can be a bit more accurate.
What I meant to say is that there are 125(approx) pax FOs on the ASL above our most junior pax CN. Over last 5 1/2 years, since NC went from 3 to 4 bars, the most junior pax CN (also a keen Carlton supporter;-) is 400+ slots below me. IN between us there are over 125 FOs. That equates to a 30% failure(Cat C)/Cat B/Cat D rate in that time. There are probably a few who have deferred for lifestyle issues on a base.
I have not tried to analyse the freighter side of the house as it is a lot more problematic getting the data. We hear of the 'successes' of 2-3years to command but we hear nothing of the failures.
RA65 - a year ago management made it clear that full B scale for all extendees(for RA60) was unacceptable. Now they simply offer RA65 with A scale? More to it than just the need for expansion methinks. They have been asking for RA60 since at least 2001 I can assure you. But they haven't been prepared to pay the price - the reason the extendee's T+C are so frugal is that the extendee's cost equated to a new B scale CN 1 in HKG - so extending was close to salary neutral, ignoring bypass pay;-)
I do think it is 'mostly' because of onshoring issues - only the UK base is imminent though - April08.
Frogman
If I stay for 10 years (55-64)my total salary bill is $7million+ more than the B scale guy replacing me. I have old training cost figures from CX - the 3 courses that I deferred will cost less than $2million. And ultimately those 3 courses will occur, just 10 years later.
So please accept it, extending on A scales is a huge cost vs RA55. But another way to look at it is that they have kept me on 1994 pay scales (about what the current A scale is equivalent to after the 99-01 cuts) for 35 years of my career...so a win for them!
Some have accused me of being mischievous for pointing out that the CX 'market driven salary' is now at the same level as it was in 1990/91. So I will instead focus on closing the B-A scale gap before focusing on that new salary being the same level over 20 years later.
The most senior B scaler is on the same increment as I am. I earn 25.5% more than he does as, whilst I am also on CPAPF93, my 15.5% is based on a higher ghosted salary. My actual monthly salary is 24% above his.
The last CX offer had a 3% payrise in Jan 08 and another in Jan 09. HDP was applied equally so does not bridge the gap between the scales.
If CX were to repeat this deal indefinitely in Jan 2015 my B scale peer would have finally caught up with my salary scale - the same scale that was around in 1994. He would have been in almost 22 years by then.
RA65 is not an issue in HKG - but with over 450 based FOs and around 250 based CNs representing a 1/3rd of our workforce, there will eventually be an effect in HKG from based issues on RA. I am not suggesting the law will change in HKG any time soon, just that we have many more on a base than the cabin crew. The cabin crew on a base are on separate contracts to their hong kong peers.
I do not know what is happening about the FAU case - sorry!
If I stay beyond 55th birthday I save between 3 and 8 courses depending on growth rate. That will save them a few million up front...but then over 10 years I will cost them over $7million extra in salary and bypass pay would add up to $5million. The once only training course savings are approx $1-4million. So $12million vs $1-4million - do you still believe that RA65 on A scales saves money?
They are training/courses limited - between DEFOs and extensions they can halve the training requirement over the next 10 years.
If they used these 'saved courses' to expand the airline faster, such that there were no delays to command due to RA65, then we would have 346 a/c in 2019 and 381 in 2020.
Anyone still believe the company mantra that says RA65 will accelerate your time to command????