CB,
No doubt you will fling the 49ers book in my face and spout some conspiracy theory about how people in positions of authority are only there to safeguard their own wealth and security
As Voice will probably not answer you, I will take the stand for an short moment.
You have to learn how to slow down and read the line. He said AND. Nowhere did he state that the 49ers-book was filled with conspiracy theories. Ease down and read slowly.
Furthermore, you are right, the package is a down right insult. So what, does Cathay need to offer in order make the package attractive for pilots like you IF you would aspire to fly with CX? Pegged to the inflation rate? Take into account the average mean of pay scales used for flightcrew at SQ, QF, EK, EY or any competitor? Measured yearly to the GDP and adjusted accordingly? Housing allowance of 20K HKD? An secured Provident Fund?
So far, I have seen many calculations based on the rental and property markets, global economy, regional economy and all does not add up for a living in HK as an SO. So, if a wannabe wants to join (and let’s just for argument sake assume he/she is an 27 year old, single, and has about 150 hours non-PIC.), what does he/she needs get offered? Does an offer like EK or EY do more justice to the potential commercial airmen?
I know this al hypothetical and off-topic, but as some of you gents are so willing to show the bad side of this, I would like to know what a potential viable solution actually is for an company like CX.
Because essentially you all tell the kids with SJS and like, that they have to walk away from the offer or else they are spineless idiots. So, let say this happens, and every wannabe is taken another road to fulfill his/her flying aspirations by doing hours in GA or the military. At CX, This will probably in turn make the upper level managers have to reconsider the package offered. This will lead to an even more disruptive rostering, pushing discretion to the limits, and other non-desirable situations, as it is already quite on the thin line and so in that perspective, it ought to mean the airline will have to either decide to quite some frequency on routes and start parking planes. Assuming they will not let it get to that stage, does the company HAVE to start to hire DESOs and or DEFOs? What package should they get?
Now, the DFO has given already away that the old terms will not be reinstated. So, there is no use of arguing about A-scales or B-scales or whatever. What alternative for the company is left? Again not looking from a wannabe perspective, but from a corporate one.
If you are prepared to answer the above, I reckon you will gain more understanding without too much repeating yourself. As some of these “kids” are by far not up to level you argue or bring forward your arguments, it might be an alternative route to bring your message across. Just my 2 cents worth.
I reckon, the ones who actually do understand from what angle you are coming, are NOT on this thread or are reading it from the sidelines with nothing to add. Some will try to engage in the thread, but it is not something wise to do with someone like yourself who has a hardened (albeit realistic) stance towards the CPP.
Once again, you and some others made perfectly clear what a wannabe must do before he/she even considers of joining a company like CX. That much has been said, but what does the company have to do in order to keep the recruitment alive? Or is that of non-importance for the topic at hand?
It is not meant to be sarcastic or cynic, I really do not know the answer. I just would like to see what someone else has to say for the other side of the spectrum. We know what the bad side is. There must be an good side. More importantly, how does an company like Cathay work to the good side IF it is even possible to do so?
You did mention that someone needs to defend his position on why he/she is in favor off taken up the package. True, when making the decision to accept or reject the offer it is important to factor in all possible perspectives, facts and long-term issues that one can find. However, regardless of the all of the above, it is up to every individual to decide what to do. It is no problem to burn down someone from an anonymous forum. However, if you want to have a constructive and lively “debate” as you stated before, you definitely need to show more than just shoot-to-kill critics. If you could display different styles of reasoning, it would help the audience that you are capable of interacting with a more objective view. Although you can keep on burning people on here individually by needling, making fun of, etc, the constructive part of your statements will eventually (and unfortunately) be pushed sideway, because it becomes too personal. I am ASSUMING that it is not the message you would like to bring across, because I am ASSUMING you want to show the world that this company has become one of the worst airlines to work for as aircrew with the current standards(or somewhere in the vicinity of that statement). By needling you do not attack the argument, but the person and therefore your argument regarding the CPP as valid as they are, lose momentum and that is a pity. If it is your intention to just have rants, I stand corrected and will step aside.
Nevertheless, keep telling your version of what is the reality, but do remember that this forum is indeed with spineless kids with SJS, and some will not be able to argue as lively and vividly like you do. Most of them will probably lose the interest of reading your information around it and still will apply to CPP, and if offered an cadetship, accept it, regardless if they are called spineless or gutless.
Yes, you and others have “forewarned” the newbies and all that comes with it. Unfortunately, the world is not the same place as it was a view years back and using the “cold hard” facts is not intmidating to many spineless kids with SJS anymore.
You can keep on arguing and telling the same story in the same style, but at one point –in this thread-you are running around in a hamster-wheel. Is that really worth your energy and time?
Once again, it is not meant to be cynic or sarcastic to anyone personally, all I would like to see for a just a brief moment whether there could be a positive constructive side or it is just a rat-race straight down to the gutter and in an couple of years, CX will be an mere memory?
Ofcourse if you want you can bash me down too and I will lose my credibility, dignity or whatever. So be it. Then again, I am not out to bash down you, I merely am somewhat intrigued by your STYLE of writing and want to try to have some insight about what makes you and others write in such an hardened style. I know that the gloves came off a long time ago on this thread, so I reckon I will try the softer approach for once. If it needs to be this “hard” way, no worries, I will just move nicely along and leave the fighting for the grown ups.
Barney Out.