Not sure why I'm still bothering, but I guess I'm a sucker for punishment.
I have the EXACT HKPLA document in my hand now.
Fine, if you do. Then you would know the exact details are not how you put them in your first post. Just saying.
The HKPLA is completely and undeniably linked to the HK rental market fluctuations
Nope. It is simply an allowance. TBH, I see one day when they will simply add it into the overall payscales. All it is is an additional monthly cash allowance. Nowhere does it say it is linked to housing.
Now, I fully admit that none of my other benefits are linked in any way to the CPI or any other COLA index or similar. But then, I don't see very many other companies, let alone airlines, actually have a pay which varies according to cost of living. Perhaps the UN?
CX turned around and threw AHK in your faces
Do you even know what happened? Basically, nothing. How is that even relevant to pay increases? Yes, it was a while since the last increase, but we ended up getting another.
I offered you to use another rate with your own more accurate career path time lines. You haven't. Prove me wrong.
I replied saying it was disingenuous to try and factor in 42 years worth of inflation and completely discount the possibility of any further increase in the HKPA. There is virtually no point in doing that because if CX never increases salaries AND OTHER ALLOWANCES SUCH AS THE HKPA no times in the next 42 years, the airline will not exist. It simply will not happen. Therefore, over to you to try and factor in some kind of hypothetical increase to salaries/allowances to balance out your equation.
To not have a gaugeable idea or consideration, like your new pal "whatever" and co., reeks of stupidity and ignorance.
To make assumptions based on some back-of-a-fag packet calculations using stats and figures you selectively include to make your point reeks of bloody-mindedness and over-simplicity. Of course you can have an idea of what the package is worth RIGHT NOW. I assume you would also factor in CPI in any other pay offers too, therefore reducing it's worth in the future? To not do so would surely be misleading?
All you can do is compare what is on the table now. That's it! Who is to tell if the other airline is going to expand massively, contract massively, cease to exist or otherwise fundamentally change within the space of the next 42 years? Make your plans for the next 5-10, and re-evaluate. Such is the variability of the industry we find ourselves in.
Therefore, simply forget CPI or anything of the sort - it will be pretty similar in other places and companies too, therefore if you have the same variable across all calculations, you can discount it.
For you to deny that entry level standards have not been despicably lowered is again, laughable. You truly believe that a pilot with thousands of hours of experience, often as Capt in light aircraft, > 5700 kg category turboprops, as well as jet aircraft are of a lower standard to a kid with zero hours, zero experience and zero credentials? Come on. Get a damn reality check.
Your turn to re-read what I wrote. Never have I said that you should compare an experienced entry pilot with a cadet in terms of entry level standards. What you were saying, however (or at least how it seemed) was that the entry level standard of cadets has been lowered. I dispute this wholeheartedly.
But what has CX down with the SO training? Recently they've lowered the FFS training from 12 to now only 6 (I believe) training sessions before being released for line ops. Again, CX show their true colours of cost cutting at the expense of standards.
Do you know of any other airline that performs quite as many training sectors? Do you know how many sectors EK performs before it's check to line for DEFOs? Perhaps worth asking before you denigrate CX's standards.
You did not live off 2 min noodles, take it in turns to maintain the control column with your knees so keep your hands warm, drive for weeks on end to be told day in, day out no jobs were on offer, fly into the freezing layer just to maintain above LSALT for fear of losing your job if you didn't or couldn't because you needed those hours, fly in 48 deg heat 8+ sectors a day..., and so on, and so on....just for the privilege of a CX DESO interview.
And there we have it - we finally get to the core of the issue. You are personally upset that the goalposts have changed. CX has widened the net to attract more people into the industry, and you are saddened because you are no longer one of the "privileged few" (I use that term loosely, so don't go overboard in criticising me for it) who gets invited for a DESO interview.
Can you seriously blame the guys going for it? If it's no longer as tiresomely difficult to get in, how, again, is that your problem? You seem to be both attacking those who are making the offer (CX) and those who choose to accept it. This is a business transaction defined by market economics. You missed the boat in terms of the expat package, and I'm sorry for you for that. But other people aren't so blinded to think that it will come back, and choose the option and make the best of it. They make the choice they feel is right for them. It is egotistical in the extreme for you to assume that you know their needs/wants better than they do.