Why those 49?

[Joyce Tick]

Just reading in Flight today the letter from Quentin Heron. I understand all the reasons why the Cathay pilots shouldn't have been fired but can anyone tell me of any rationale, fair or otherwise, that was used to chose those particular names? Were they known to be particularly critical of the airline or anything?

[sigma]

Somemight argue that they deserved it due to the industrial dispute.
The guys were unfairly dismissed and they were chosen randomly. It is a great pity that this once great airline had to do something like this and it is unbelievable. There will be retribution for what they have done if not happened already (SARS).
Things won't improve.

[shortly]

So SARS was Gods punishment to the company for so nastily firing the 49ers - pity its the employees and not the company hurting. Bit like Aids and shirt lifters I suppose. The 49ers, so I am reliably informed, all had disciplinary or misconduct letters equal to or greater than a chosen number on file. And of course their dismissal was unnecessary, unfair and a direct result of the increased industrial action by the AOA. It was as if the AOA felt it could do anything it wanted to - work to rule, no notice sickouts, the 'maximum safety' campaigns and slandering the company in the press - with no possible retribution. The current antipathy felt by the Swire King and his Princes goes back to the time when the Airbii were grounded and the company asked for help. The AOA response ----- another epic example of crass stupidity by amateurs in a professional world. RIP AOA.

[sigma]

Retribution can come in many forms- direct and indirect. Unpleasant Collective karma brings about greater retribution.
The karma sutra.
Of course the company was hurt, they nearly had to cease operations completely. All I would like to stress that what cathay did was wrong, ruining the lives of its employess, some with children and babies. You cannnot just do something nasty and get away with it. I hope cathay has served its punishment but I am not to say.

I shall not get involved in your manipulation of this thread to undermine the AOA for your self-interests.

[shortly]

Of course Sigma but it's ok to manipulate the thread to bash the company? The points in this issue are:
1. Increased industrial action led to a company response.
2. That response was the legal (under HKG industrial law) termination of 50 odd contracts.
3. They were not chosen randomly.
4. This was the end result of many years of ineffectual action against the company by the AOA.
I could go on, the company action was heavy handed and at the least immoral. But totally predicitable and a 'normal' management tool used in these cases. The 49ers are martyrs to amateur union ineptitude and no amount of time will change that. Collective Karma, that's a beauty, so what will Gaia do to the terrorists then those naughty rapscallions.

[sigma]

Shortly, its obvious that this post will be a tit for tat.
I shall not pursue this further and I don't want to let this undermine our friendship.
Since you are familiar with Vipassana, I shall let you answer your own question.
You take care Sir and my best wishes and regards to you, see you in Cathay.

[BusyB]

Shortly,
If your memory keeps playing you up like this it will be best if you go at 55. You are the person who repeatedly complained about the 49'ers using the legal system yet you now claim that CX were right to do it because it was legal. I think you'll find that the lies told will mean it was illegal and as I've said before I'll wait for the courts decision.

[shortly]

Dear Busy B,
I accept that my memory is not what it once was - if it ever was. However, at least I can read and my comprehensive skills are as high as yours are low. I fail to see where 'heavy handed and at the least immoral' indicates any agreement with the company action. But I do say the action by the company was easily predictable, a standard response to increased union action and a direct result of union ineptitude. I also categorically state that those chosen were not on a random basis. And once again, to correct your comprehensive shortcomings, my posts on the legal action made the points that:
1. Any union success in the courts would not bring back the 49ers.
2. Any union victory would, at best, result in financial payment only to the 49ers.
3. Any union victory would make things worse not better for the rest of us.
4. The only winners of the court action being the blood sucking lawyers.
Remember I also told you that as far back as the middle ages they said there was a special place in hell reserved for lawyers.

[jtr]

You know shortly, I may have finally seen the light.


Any union victory would make things worse not better for the rest of us

I think you may be right. I believe I will just roll over and take what I am force fed, being the pathetic spineless excuse for an individual that I am.

With friends like....:rolleyes:

[shortly]

jtr do you really want to go back to basics? The AOA in the spirit of self benefit rolled over and played dead with:
1. No assistance (of any value) to the flight attendants during their dispute.
2. The introduction of B scales - I'm alright Jack.
3. The introduction of ASL - ditto.
4. Lets not forget the Airbus fiasco.
During this period they mounted ineffectual campaigns one after another with the 49ers being the result. The company rightly realised that they were dealing with a self interested, amateur incompetent bunch of moaners. The more modern Union understanding is that you must maintain negotiations and accept whatever compromise that stops the company forcing a decision on you. But being more inclined to the Arthur Scargill school of Unionism well there you go. There is no effective pilot union now, the company could do almost whatever it pleased. Until we get a more enlightened group to lead us we are in deep doodoo. So whether you roll over or not you may not affect the outcome.

[Truth Seekers Int'nl]

the final straw was the "joining ban" (AOA prefers to call this a recruitment ban).

[BusyB]

Shortly,
The only thing proved by your listing of real or imagined failings is that anything can be improved. However, if everyone was like you and prepared to accede to any maltreatment I can assure you that YOU would have been worse off in many ways over the last 15 yrs.

Proof of your total moral failure are your statements that if CX loses court cases we will all be worse off and that 49'ers wouldn't be better off with a financial settlement!!

Are you really living in the same world as eveyone else or are you still in the middle ages when "might is right" was the order of the day.

[FlexibleResponse]

It is interesting to note that quite a few management sympathizers (dare one say sycophants or Freehills' consultants?) have suddenly started crawling out of the woodwork again to put in an appearance on PPRuNe.

Could it be possible that some of the 49ers' legal cases are due very soon?

The propaganda preparation so far has plumbed new depths of credibility. We even have someone saying that a Union victory in court resulting cash payout for the 49ers would be a bad thing and that a Union victory in court which stopped the management from sacking members "for no particular reason" would be bad for the members!

[shortly]

Dear FR, awake are we? Doesn't seem so really. The point is that even should the AOA win the court actions the 49ers at best will receive a financial settlement, not re-instatement. Dear goodness man just quote fully and try to make sense of sentences instead of picking out clauses. And, should victory in OS courts put pressure on Hong Kong Industrial law what do you think the company will do? Finally I never used the noun 'members' in stating the obvious effect to the cause of the previous sentence. I was talking about the rest of US not YOU pinhead. BusyB. The actions of the AOA could have been improved - that wouldn't have been very hard even. But now alas it is too late. Do they still have, even with their dodgy figures, 50% of the pilot body as members? Maybe, but only just. As a point of order - that you won't like, I have not been maltreated in any of my years with the company. When I was sick they were great and very helpful - that was recent. When my parents sadly passed away over a couple of years one with lingering sickness - they were great, sympathetic and helpful. When I ran out of compassionate leave one of those you love to villify said 'don't worry about it just go, we will sort it out'. And they did with no hit on my rec leave even after extending my time away causing disruption to the roster. Am I a company man, of course I am. Do I find the AOA ludicrous, of course I do. Do I want an enlightened Union run by grown ups to represent the pilots? Of course I do. I just laugh when you clowns call me a 'sycophant' or a 'Freehills Consultant' it just shows your childishness for all to see. By the by, are we going to be blessed by another visit from those brilliant folk from the good old US of A any day soon? They must have more ways to help (and I use the word very loosely) the AOA members in their honourable struggle against the big, bad and nasty company management. Have a nice day folks, on duty today be back late tonight hope you are still up.

[VR-HFX]

Shortly has presented the reasons why the company attacked the AOA. I have not seen any sound rebuttal of these facts.

The only thing he ommitted was the fact that they flagged their intention , if not their methodolgy, well ahead of time.

As with the 1989 fiasco in Australia, the consequences of what followed destroyed friendships and created animosities that will outlive us all.

The AOA now represents between 49% and 51% of the aircrew.

As a result of hostilities, the company has become less tolerant and actively seeks to get rid of people who are 'unhappy' rather than help them work out any issues they may have.

The SARS crisis has, IMHO, shown that the company does still care about ALL its employees and this is appreciated at all levels within the company. It is time to build on that goodwill and move on.

The simple fact remains, CX is a better employer than those airlines with which it is so often compared such as SQ and EK. You only have to look at the log book on Shearwater or at Cheung Sha and the list of schools attended by offspring to realise that some of the intangibles are used and appreciated.

The victim mentality is in many ways comparable to the Japanese psyhce on Hiroshima. Noone denies that Hiroshima was a terrible tragedy but to ignore the reasons why it happened is to use selective amnesia as an excuse for gross miscalculation and incompetence.

And no, I am not in management nor do I work for Freehills, but if independently analysing the facts and the big picture over many years qualifies me as a sycophant then so be it.

[BusyB]

Shortly,
Your cage seems distinctly rattled.

"company man" is a meaningless phrase if you're supporting actions that bring the company into disrepute. Are you claiming that sacking the 49'ers didn't bring CX into disrepute? I would have thought trying to improve a company's reputation as well as doing your job to a good standard would be a better definition of "company man" and I think that applies to most pilots AOA or not. I don't think it applies to all of our current management.

I'm happy to hear that you have been assisted by the company, that's as it should be, but can you say that your contract has not been broken since you worked for CX, I can't. Unfortunately any assurance, promise or contract given to us has been worthless up to the last court case.

Your sudden rabid attacks on the AOA after they have done what you and management (beginning to wonder if there is a difference) asked for only makes me wonder if you know that CX is again going to stop talking to the AOA and start again trying to breach COS and contracts!! Are you expecting more disputes, please tell.

[jtr]

Shortly, I quote you, and not out of context..I have not been maltreated in any of my years with the company
This leads me to believe either a) you have been here two years or less, or b) You have willingly accepted the contractual changes which have been generously shoved at the crew over the years. Giving you the benefit of the doubt I assume you fall into group b. Thus placing you in the small category spearheaded by the likes of Pitot Hey. If you like having the 543 rule pulled apart, or your leave chopped by 2 weeks, or honestly believe that a sign or be fired option... is an option, then I pity you, and sadly cannot engage you in a sensible debate. I shall however continue to ridicule your sycophantic ideals for the brainwashed bullsh1t that they are. There is the childish name calling just to keep you happy.

HFX again I quote in context...
The SARS crisis has, IMHO, shown that the company does still care about ALL its employees and this is appreciated at all levels within the company

WHAT THE **** ARE YOU SMOKING? You know as well as I do that anyone who dared not sign for SLS was going to have there name placed in a very special place.
You search for sound rebuttal against the companys reasoning for attacking the AOA. Mate if you dont know that by now, then scroll up to Shortlys response, and read on from 'then I pity you.

[VR-HFX]

JTR

Your soliloquy is duly noted.

I leave Shortly to defend himself as he is far more adept at the cut and thrust of Hyde Park Corner than I.

My reference to SARS and the duty of care that I believe the company has shown is genuine sentiment I have heard expressed from San Francisco to London. This company is much more than flt ops, a point often overlooked in our little world.

As to daring not to sign the SLS, let me throw it back at you.

Perhaps you can explain why you felt under particular duress in signing what was at the time a plan to save jobs, share the pain and prolong the life expectancy of a company under a serious and unquantifiable threat .

It was certainly cobbled together in haste and had some flaws in implementation but IMHO the principal on which it was founded was fair and reasonable for all.

You paint quite a Machiavellian picture of a CX Gulag. If that is indeed your view then perhaps you might be happier elsewhere.

I, for one, still think I am working for a better company than many of my countrymen at SQ (well not so many anymore!),EK and all those on contracts at Korean, China Airlines, Skymark, Air Japan and host of other 2 year career airlines. And look what is coming down the Mascot turnpike.

Finally, perhaps you could explain to me why you seem so surprised that the company struck out at the AOA after flagging that it would and why it would. My view FWIW is that the AOA did not share the risk factor with the rank and file and blindly continued its beligerent bluff with a pair of fours against an open and declared flush.

Noone could take any satisfaction from the end result but I think sheeting the blame to the company alone is a gross distortion of the facts.

[shortly]

Defending myself is a wasted option. Obviously I am not a newbie as I have been posting from here for longer than two years. This is a great company to work for and I have worked elsewhere. The 'good old days' of meetings in the Aviation Club Hangar with guys - only guys in them thar days - voting to accept pay cuts based on management numbers, and then fighting over who buys the kegs; are very sadly behind us. How I wish they could come back but alas they never will. Why did it change? Yes we grew and faster than either company management or the AOA could cope with. The crux is where do we go from here? Forward or back? The issues are never black and white, it seems obvious to me that the wrong folk got in charge. Read that any way you want. CX is going to grow further yet, China, trans Atlantic etc. Wouldn't it be good if we had a management that could work and hold dialogue with a pilot union body representing us with maturity and with the common ideals of benefit to shareolders and employees alike. Yikes I dream. But I know who puts the cream in my coffee and I always have. Arthur Scargill was, you know, eventually forced to resign from his union by the union. As we are at the anniversary of the BofB maybe a Churchill quote 'jaw jaw not war war' is not inappropriate. Good luck all.

[jtr]

Its like stepping into the blue oyster by accident with you two! Every time I turn my back someone is sticking another one in.

Chronologically...

H. Clearly you are talking to different staff to me! Lets think about it on the larger scale. There were two likely outcomes from SARS
1) What is happening now/has happened to this point.

2)SARS takes a huge grip, kills off who knows how many, and CX crumbles

I have excluded a smaller version of the CX we now know, as that is statistically less than likely

By forcing, sorry offering SLS the company has both options sorted i.e. get their pound of flesh either way. If they were so frickin worried why didnt they delay orders? Ohh no,financial penalty for doing that. Well arent we better having a small financial penalty now and hedging our bets for a possible collapse later. Ohh no, the situation is not that dire yet. WELL WHY THE **** DO YOU WANT MY MONEY THEN?
How happy do you reckon the fr8t boys are. No SLS, working their asses off, new A/C arriving, no sign of SLS in this year, and the pr!cks wont allow O/T to enable any one to take their SLS.
And in case you are wondering, Yes I am dissapointed that the AOA agreed to it. Perhaps a bargaining chip move.
I am happy here, and do also think it better than SQ, however let us not allow it to descend to the lowest common denominator.
To answer your closing, I was not surprised at what they did, however it was entirely OTT, and I hope that all involved are served justice. 'I was just doing my job' is not going to cut it I am afraid.


Shortly, overall a well presented address, aside from a small error in line 2. Change is to was. 4.


Gentlemen.... always a pleasure.:ouch:

[VR-HFX]

I take your points. Sorry you feel like a pin cushion. Perhaps my views would be different if I were a decade younger.

Yes, I probably have been 'listening' to a different cross-section of staff. The ones who go out of their way to help me when I need a favour and expect nothing more than a thank you and a smile in return. The ones who have to deal with the ten percent of grumpy pax with excess baggage at the check-in counters and the guys who run around the tarmac in the stinking heat.

Unfortunately airline management the world over is striving for the the lowest common cost denominator. A fact of life and a trend that no union can arrest or public/government sympathy influence (read lack thereof). As you would have noticed in your time here, management needs to do very little to turn us into a bunch of cannibals.

I will predict, now, that you will get your money back early next year if things stay on track. If not I will willingly acknowledge that I have been smoking the funny stuff.

While the AOA may see agreement to SLS as a bargaining chip, there was really no choice at the time. Noone likes to hear the cold truth but the AOA in its current form will not be able to claw back any significant influence over company policy.

OTT, certainly, but as I said, entirely predictable, except by those who were gambling with your livelihood.

Perhaps we can agree to disagree and hope for better wx in 2004.

All the best.