They're smart, but not so smart. The tiniest and slightly committed research would've exposed all these pitfalls. And whilst I have always advocated to never use a rumour network to seek factual answers, opinions based on first hand CX experience and international widebody airline operations have been on this web site for a very long time since C-Scles inception.
They knew all along that they had you guys over a barrel well after the 6 year term was up, due to the ICAO unrecognisable hours as SO, competitiveness of other applicants to leave CX and join a new airline (such as EK which seems to be the theme here), let alone seniority system starting at the bottom of a new airline. If those agreeing to and signing C-Scale weren't aware of this, let alone the housing scene in HK then all the more fool you've been.
The "free" training" What a joke. How many times over have they made that back on the pitiful remuneration savings they pay you? A quick calculation (correct me if I'm wrong): B-Scale = $36 k housing after 3 years. C-Scale = still $10 k housing. So, after 3 C-Scale still stuck on $10 k and B-Scale up to $36 k. 36 - 10 = 26....Now, 26 x 12 months x 3 years = $936 k HKD they've saved!! And what's your "forgivable loan" worth?? Coincidence?? Now, keep going with those comparisons over 30 years.
What an "opportunity", eh! But for who?
If they were so smart they wouldn't keep getting caught for price fixing, let alone screwing up the fuel hedging calculations. Then again, they still awarded themselves bonuses for doing so. Smart or morally corrupt? CX's iJourney system? Yep: they awarded themselves a gold star for that one as well. Sign or be fired tactics, CoS98, CoS08, 49ers....there seems to be a theme here? So to say that new joiners weren't aware of CX's style just doesn't wash. Most could regurgitate the questions and answers from the recommended reading list, but how many read Warhams "The 49ers: The True Story"? Next to Handling The Big Jets it should be regarded as compulsory reading.
NotCallingYouShirley: You're spot on with your comment that going somewhere else other than CX will progress a pilot's career far better. Without ICAO recognisable hours, what have the iCadets got to offer anyone? OK, so let's agree to perhaps 1500 hrs of usable experience after 6 years. Do you think that is competitive enough to take on others with 3-5 times that amount going for the same job? (CX's min hours used to be 1000 but applicants really needed 3-4000 hrs, multi engine command time, turbine time, even jet time, etc to be "competitive"). Widebody employers know what an SO does and don't count it. So, after 6 years at CX and 1500 hrs usable hours you'll still need perhaps another 2 years to keep going to be competitive against a guy 5 years younger but who has real hours logged from day 1 of his professional career. Now let's consider seniority to start at a new airline at the age of 28-30 at the bottom of the pile "if" you joined CX at age 20...!!!
So a year in GA to build 500 hrs TT and then straight to the RHS of an A320, Embraer, 737 or even ATR is FAR better than the "iron handcuffs" of CX that as you can see can and will hold you back for longer than 6 years. Many other situations will plant you into the RHS of a narrow body jet fresh from flying school: no time in GA required. But you had to back yourself financially for the training. No, not easy but many thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of pilots have been doing it for decades before. And if you can't get those resources together then signing up for this CX "opportunity" has proven to be the devious snake in the grass you were all warned about.
You guys have zero rhyme or reason to "resent" anyone at CX on a better remuneration package than yourselves. You asked for it and all the while justified the decision to take it. Back as early as late 2009 when the aviation scene was beginning to recover jobs were there for anyone who wanted to look - but maybe not the exact shiny jet with a CX swoosh on the tail.
Last edited by ChinaBeached; 9th Mar 2013 at 02:11.