Accountability

[Apple Tree Yard]

Time for us to hold the company accountable. After all the 'give-backs' to the company over the past two years, it is time they were accountable to us on the singular issue of pay. If they want a solution to their crewing problems, fine....settle the pay issue. The recently rejected offer (thank you GC) was an insult, particularly in light of the coincident record half-year profit declaration. We all need approx 15-20% just to bring us back even with inflation.....never mind currency protection! After that has been addressed, in a seperate and finalised agreement, THEN, and ONLY THEN will we authorise the GC to start negotiations on the other issues such as Freighter, ASL, DEFO and finally....retirement. If the company wishes to treat us with the usual contempt....well, no negotiations on ANY issue will be entertained.

It is also time to hold each other accountable. Make sure the mates you know personally are each held to account for G day flying, and anything outside of the box that would undermine our position.

The company has had it all their way for over a decade. If we do not use the opportunities that we now enjoy, effectively a proper career is never attainable. Remember...the Swire management of this airline enjoy LARGE bonuses at OUR expense. Remember that the next time you are struggling to pay a bill.

[Liam Gallagher]

How are you going to hold the company accountable?

If I fly on a G day... what rules have I breached and how are you going to hold me accountable...??

... or is this just another person who has discovered how brave they can be when they sit anonymously in front of their keyboard :rolleyes:

[CruisingSpeed]

You have breached rule No.1, which is to show a backbone when it comes to preserving your career and professional status.

You are a Swire shareholders dream :E

[Apple Tree Yard]

....oh, I'm sorry.... I guess we should have taken the companies offer then. I am really angry with the GC for not giving me such a great opportunity....

[cpdude]

The problem with CX is it inhibits a culture of low EQ. Totally manageable by Swire and the top EO's if desired. I'm just not sure if it's a lack of desire or understanding that motivates them to act as they do!:confused:

They have however sold me on the idea of leaving. :ok:

Try not to beat on each other and play into the hands of CX management.:=

[Apple Tree Yard]

Liam,

For the first time in a decade...the company is being rapidly boxed into a corner. All we have to do is....nothing! If they want the issues they put forward in the proposal, then they will eventually need our agreement. Sit tight until the pressure becomes unbearable. If you feel there is NOTHING that we can do (or not do as is the case), then I suggest that you, and others like you pack your bags and leave. That will accomplish two things: one, your negativity is taken out of the work place, and two, your leaving helps up the pressure on the company. Go on, be a good boy then and run along..... :E

[Liam Gallagher]

Apple Tree Yard,

People come on Pprune all the time talking it up large; but without any substance or dealing with the realties of working for CX..... armchair warriors.....BS merchants...call them what you will.

I am not suggesting that there is Nothing that can be done. However, one of the realities of CX at the present is the company are holding a "if you don't like it leave" line. Ironically, it is you that are suggesting doing Nothing as a, in my view, legitimate industrial tactic. However, to work people will need to leave to such an extent that aircraft are parked. Again, the BS merchant are saying this is happening.... I have never seen the evidence and the company pulled a huge "bluff" by offering such a derisory offer in the recent negotiations.:rolleyes:

The flip side of the "don't like it.. leave" is people are looking after themselves by trying to improve their pay/lifestyle, working G's, Office Jobs, going into C&T...etc....... like I said... how are you going hold me "accountable" for trying to improve my lot...?

Care to answer the question??

[Apple Tree Yard]

Liam, you make good points. I think the best tactic is to sit on our hands. Perhaps a bit slow....but it will eventually require a response from management. I am more interested in the underlying strategy the company is attempting to deploy. It seems to me that the management must have known that the package offered had almost no chance of being voted in. That being the case, one wonders why they wanted us to go ahead and vote? Is it so that they would have a triggering event to blame the pilots for 'endangering' the company again, thus allowing them to 'impose' whatever they like...? I really don't understand what the point of COS 08 was...because it was so derisory to guarantee it would fail. I am sure the company knew it was not going to be accepted....so what was their plan thereafter...? Something tells me that their answer is not long in coming.... (regardless, they can't control the sentiments and public knowledge of our discontent like they used to. the world is watching.....and who really believes that this airline offers a proper career anymore..??) :yuk:

[Liam Gallagher]

Apple Tree Yard,
The company had an obligation to discuss Pay with the AOA following the Housing, 49ers, RP talks... so they obliged. They were never going to be generous as we are but 2,000 of a work force of 20,000. (expand your 15-20% over the entire company and the profit's gone...)
COS08 seemed an amazingly complicated package that attempted to be all things to all people, but lacked the financial grunt to sway anyone but an A Scaler aged over, say.... 53... The company knew that... and they know how to live with it.
From the company's point of view it's all expectation management. They have kept the lid on things immediately before and during the protracted negotiations. That achieved another 12 months of flat costs within Budget.... bonuses allround. For the next 12 months they will hint that deals are in progress, perhaps a modest pay rise here or there to meet local needs. However, if someone whinges about pay they will spin the figures and say they offered 11% and the GC turned it down... best you vote in a new GC... A 55 year will be given C or B- scale and told "well.. if it weren't for the GC you'd be on A Scales .... dont take it out on us.... new GC may agree the deal..." the carrot is dangled and the 55 year old signs..... All this buys them another 12 months of flat costs..... bonuses allround....
In 12 months... who knows there could be a downturn, the 55+s are thanked for their efforts and given 3 months notice, the boyz are grateful for a job and NR is a hero.... bonuses allround...
The company would like to have DEFO's flying both Freighter/pax on C scale... but can live without.... Current 400 pilots not flying the freighter.... they haven't even opened their box of tricks on that.... Flying age 55/60/65 is happening on their terms... any legal challenge will dealt with when and if it happens.... that's years away..... in the meantime we are all working on a salary last reviewed in 1999.... bonuses allround...
Your plan of doing nothing is often floated and has much merit if you believe the company are bluffing. Equally, it could guarantee Nick's bonus for may years to come if he's not bluffing........................

[Apple Tree Yard]

Liam, I tend to agree with you. CX management have always looked at the pilots as a problem to be dealt with, instead of an asset to be worked with! I'm sure in their small mindedness they will refuse to see the overwhelming level of discontent that exists, and instead treat the refutation of COS08 as a personal affront. Will be interesting to see how they respond.... I predict your claims will be pretty close to the truth. I have always believed in aviation that you take ANY improvement that's on the table...then go after the next bite. My guess is that CX will now throw a tantrum and blame the GC...and attempt to divide us even further. Don't think it will particularly do the management any good....but will probably make them feel better for a while... No doubt they will wait and see what continues to happen with recruitment and retention. Overall, you are right to suggest that the only real issue that will get their attention is if many more pilots leave. Ironically....I think managements forthcoming reaction to the latest will help catalyse many more resignations. Interesting times...:ooh:

[Apple Tree Yard]

Do you think the company will do another 'rostering' deal and just offer the same package again....?

[Numero Crunchero]

Our contract already has mechanisms in place for the company to offer RA65 and DEFO positions - bypass pay. Unfortunately for CX though, every pilot they extend will incure bypass pay for an FO REGARDLESS of where he lives so based FOs will be partially recompensed for the delay to command.

DEFOs have already been recruited - about 20 so far. I believe for the last few years new joiners sign a "I will fly the freighter if asked" clause so there is no reason that I can see why the DEFOs can't be forced to fly pax and freight no matter their salary.

A scales weren't offered out of generosity. CX must see the need from a legislative need or an expansion need (less likely IMO). So presumably in due course A scales will be offered - don't hold your breath waiting though.

The 'up to 3 year' delay to command I often quote is dependant on uninterrupted expansion. Any SARS, 9-11, Asian Contagion or other worldwide economic downturn will exacerbate the delays. Why?

OK, here goes - time to let loose on numbers. Over the next 10 years approximately half of the commands needed were to replace retirees. So IF(?) all pilots stayed till 65, then we have just removed the requirement of any commands at all for retirees. We will need about 60 new CNs a year for expansion at current growth rate. We would need over 110 per year to replace retirees and cover expansion. So if growth rate halves, we need about new 30CNs a year. With 1350 FO and SOs how does that make command time look!

Realistically, I expect that most guys will extend a little and some a lot so probably close to 100% retention until about 60. On what basis do I state this....none, just my observation of people near 55 'just needing a little more'. How else can you explain people accepting C scale extensions at this time. There are 40+ on extension versus probably 60-80 that have had the chance to retire over the last 12-18months. Offer them A scales and lets see how many stay!

So I think it is fair to say that in my 'command delay' model, it is sound to assume 100% retention to say 60th birthday and then maybe 0% after that. That will allow for some extending 10 years and some extending not at all. So the biggest impact will be felt over the next 5 years -2008-2012.

I don't believe there is a lot of pressure on the company right now. Thats just my opinion though. I think it will take people leaving/not joining to put pressure on salaries. Again, just my personal opinion.

Clear as opaque glass?

[Apple Tree Yard]

....so NC, would you assume that the recently offered pay raises were all that we 'were' going to get? Seems to me that the company has never been very good at offering improvements to pay and benefits under 'percieved' pressure from the aircrew...?

[Numero Crunchero]

Good question. I think yes, that was the best likely to be offered over 'perceived' pressure. Look at EK. Their work rate was horrendous and their pay significantly lower than ours. But when you have 100% of your training resources tied up dealing with a 10%+ expansion, the unexpected loss of 5% of their pilots last year increased the training requirements by 50%! Suddenly they get a 17% payrise this year! And a very generous profit share system.

Here is another view on the numbers. The salary bill in 2001 was around $1.7billion (salary+PF). Now it is around $2.2billion. We have gone from 1500-2100 pilots and exchange rates have inflated based salaries.

The July 2001 A scale cuts saved just over $30million a year versus the 2001 B scale rise costing them $10million a year. We had around 650 A scalers then versus just over 400 now. We had around 850 B scalers then vs almost 1700 now. Given the B scale increases and the A scale decrease in numbers, by my calculations, the 3 A scale pay cuts have covered the B scale payrises since 1999.

So the last time a payrise actually cost them anything was 1998 for B scales. Last A scale payrise was 1995.

A scales are currently at 1994 levels. B scales are currently on 1991-92 A scale levels.

So no I wouldn't be too hopeful based on past payrise history.

[Apple Tree Yard]

I concure with your assessment of the situation. It would seem that the only factor that will 'move' pay upwards is an unsustainable increase in the training task. I would assume that the only way to achieve that is if they were dealing with high attrition as well as increased expansion. My guess is that most CX pilots are too shy of the unknown to risk moving jobs. What would you surmise the companys response to the COS rejection will be?

[cxflyer]

One thing should be clear to us all. This is no longer a career airline, not a real one. Lets all stop hoping and dreaming. Get yourselves set up in life with what you have, don't over extend. Every "extra" item ie boat, new sports car etc, you buy represents more labour you must give to CX. The best way to deal with them is to get to a point where you are totally independant of them and in fact don't need them. Getting set up for some (B scale) might be getting hours and qualifications and looking to a more stable career path at an Airline at home. For others it is getting your fiscal house in order as soon as you can. CX has painted themselves into a corner. Lets just do are jobs and NOT talk about ANYTHING else except pay. If they don't want that fine, lets see how long they can go patching things over.:E

[Liam Gallagher]

NC
I agree when you say...."Our contract already has mechanisms in place for the company to offer RA65 and DEFO positions - bypass pay. Unfortunately for CX though, every pilot they extend will incure bypass pay for an FO REGARDLESS of where he lives so based FOs will be partially recompensed for the delay to command."

However, let's say there are 40 extendees; that should mean 40 FO's and 40 SO's get by-pass. With commands running at say 10 per month, you should get by-pass 4 months before you start your course. In the past year I have asked guys coming up for their command course if they are getting by-pass; to a man I have got a blank stare........ I remain unconvinced the company are paying by-pass to the extent that we believe they should.....

Absolutely true when you say.. "I believe for the last few years new joiners sign a "I will fly the freighter if asked" clause so there is no reason that I can see why the DEFOs can't be forced to fly pax and freight no matter their salary."

However, I am certain that buried in the FACA/COS is a clause preventing anyone on Freighter pay flying the pax aircraft.....

A question for anyone... is there anything in our COS preventing CX recruiting an over 55 year old?

ATY....You said..." I have always believed in aviation that you take ANY improvement that's on the table...then go after the next bite.".... so why not take COS08?.. after all there were pay rises in there for some....

[Truckmasters]

The company had an obligation to discuss Pay with the AOA following the Housing, 49ers, RP talks... so they obliged. They were never going to be generous as we are but 2,000 of a work force of 20,000. (expand your 15-20% over the entire company and the profit's gone...)

This is true, however you are also assuming that other workgroups have a claim to this size of increase also. If you stop for a minute and talk to other categories you will find some of them have had payrises in the last 6-7 years.
At the end of the day the company really wasn't offering anything. It was a classic we'll take, you do all the giving, but don't expect it to be reciprocated.