Equal Misery For All
>>Thermal Image Those SIA Mauritius Pilots do not come that cheaply to SIA as you would have us all believe.
thegypsy: My point is not that they (as a category) are cheap to SIA but that it is not logical to sack the whole lot when there are those within this group that earn less than a good number of locals. However ALPA-S want the entire lot to go first before those remaining will take no-pay leave or any pay cut.
>>These Pilots pay no tax in Singapore thus losing the Singapore Government {the majority shareholder in SIA} some $30000 each per year plus the local economy also loses out because they spend their money outside Singapore.
I don't think the government is bothered about this loss of revenue. In the first place if they were then the London-basing scheme would not have been approved. 120 of them make a paltry $3.6M contribution to income tax revenue at $30k a head. Of course the multiplier effect of them spending their salary in Singapore is a little harder to quantify, but it's probably just a drop in the ocean.
SIA claimed that for April they lost $200+M, and EVEN IF 50% of SIA belongs to the government, this means the government lost $100+M. Who cares about a piffling $3.6M "lost" in tax revenue in such a context?
>>Most of these Pilots were not prepared to join SIA and be based in Singapore and most have also not been in the Airline that long apart from those who transferred out of mainline to live at home.
Absolutely, that is their wish, just as any local is free to join such a scheme, so long as he has right of abode / residence in London or wherever the base is, a factor not determined by SIA. Which leads to another point. The expats have come and gone at a steady rate. However the locals seldom leave. Whether this is because they are not wanted elsewhere or they themselves don't want to go, it weakens any argument that they have been serving SIA loyally for 30 years or whatever the number may be.
You can only be loyal if you have a choice to leave but choose to stay. Expats who stay in SIA long are probably loyal, because they as a group have demonstrated their ability to come and go. However, locals in SIA who stay long are probably there because they have no choice. Of course this is a combination of nature and nuture (because for the 1950s-1960s baby boomers higher education was limited etc), then again expats of the same age have shown no disability to change employers.
>>It is normal practice when job cuts are inevitable for 'Last in First Out ' to apply.
This however gives rise to a paradox. In tough times you need to take drastic action to stem operational losses. Last in is usually most junior hence cheapest. Axing such staff is less efficient than taking a honest hard look at who is doing what for how much, and then axing those who cost the most but do the same thing as those who cost the least. Makes sense? What would you choose - cut headcount by 1 and stop losing $10000, or cut headcount by 1 and stop losing $20000?
Fortunately or unfortunately in SIA, the progression for a captain is linear - if you are meritorious you go on to SUC, LIP, IP and SIP. There is no branching off at any point to "senior captain". This means that all line captains are in the same "class". The difference in pay is meant to reflect cost of living increases, not experience. So, a line captain with 1 year line experience, to SIA, is able to do the same job as another line captain with 30 years experience, because they are on the same pay scale. If not there would be another pay scale to reflect and compensate for experience.
Therefore, since SIA thinks that all line captains are the same, why axe one that costs, eg $10,000 to keep, when there are others twice more expensive at $20,000 or more?
Expats have not been doomed to line pilot status, we've had quite a few who were SIPs. So they do have room to show their talent.
The logical and pragmatic solution is to categorise and then rank all pilots by appointment and then pay, then see who are the expensive ones nearing retirement and then let them go. They have already demonstrated this with the axing of some 310 and 340 pilots, who were "too old to be retrained for another fleet".
I don't think they will victimise the expats and spare the locals. PM Goh has already said that the expats are here for strategic reasons.