From AOA newsletter:
met with the DFO on the 14th March to discuss the Normal Retirement Age (NRA) of Cathay Pacific aircrew
I always thought the NORMAL retirement age was 55. This is terminology meant to soften us up to a new way of thinking.
If we put changing the NRA on the back-burner until we have a pay deal that satisfies everyone, we run the very real risk of disadvantaging a large proportion of our number.
Strangely I feel that the only people being disadvantaged by not having an age 65 deal will be the A scalers who got a command after 4 years here and now want to stay on.
And this from the DFO update last week:
change in retirement age will not unduly slow their career progression and, if it does, agreeing to some form of compensation or By Pass.
I was under the impression that bypass was written in my contract - its news to me that management now has a choice to agree to " some form of compensation" This sounds like expectation management again......
The language being employed by the people on both sides of this deal scares me. It seems that everybody has already accepted that we will have to make some compromise on bypass!! Ie that the contract I was hired on is now up for renegotiation whether I want to or not?