Nominations

[ALPHA FLOOR]

WRT ST's email announcing nominations:

WHEN WILL THE MESSAGE GET THROUGH TO DAVE THAT WE DONT WANT HIM TO STAND. HE HAS DONE A FINE JOB WITH S.T & THE OTHER DAVE GIVING US THE SHAFT!

AFL

[fire wall]

Alpha,
I guess Dave will get the message when you get the backbone to look him in the eye and tell him ............... which is about as much chance as a snow flake in summer.

[Fenwicksgirl]

I see NC has stuck his hand up for GC, good stuff!
By the way is candidate No 10 the very same new 4 bar DEC we heard about in the last DFO up date. Now wouldnt that be interesting!!!!!

[simplex]

Apparently First Officer Peter Hay has nominated for General Committee of the HKAOA. He is to be recommended for the post. Throughout his aviation career he has shown himself to hold close to his heart all of the values that the HKAOA now stands for.

[GE90115BL2]

You mean CAPTAIN Peter Hay?

Didn't take too long did it:=

Why don't these people retire and GET A LIFE.

If they want to keep working TRY KOREAN or SQ Cargo instead of screwing those of us that are still trying to get to retirement age with some sort of cash in our pockets.

Yes that means you RM, go to Virgin Aust for gods sake mate.

[simplex]

You can vote for who you like but they won't show any balls because they know you'll dump them if the going gets tough......just as MG and ST did the 49ers. Wasting your time (and money) chaps. Findlay sure appreciates it though.

[JoeShmoe]

NC has stood for the GC in the past but my questions to him are:

Have you ever finished a term that you stood up for?

Will you spit the dummy again and quit the GC if you don't like what is being tabled by the GC?

Will you quit the Union again if you don't like the direction of the GC?

Thanks

Joe

[Fenwicksgirl]

One can only wonder what the motives are for a recently returned retiree running for G.C, cant imagine it is to look after the careers of F.Os and S.Os!!!!!

[BenCLR8]

Would somebody please point out the initials of the recent retiree. I am trying to get as much info on each candidate as possible so that I can make an informed decision.

Thank you.

[Numero Crunchero]

SAD = Simplex = Cluin?? = JoeShmoe = CPU members????
Yes I left the GC before my term was up in 2001 - the official reason was my impending command. The real reason was that the AOA executive at that time wanted to continue on a path the membership no longer wanted to walk.
I would not give relevance or legitimacy to undemocratic leadership by continuing my membership of the GC.

Last year I believe there was a disconnect between some of the AOA executive and the GC. I could have remained on the GC but I saw no point wasting any more of my time or theirs!

To answer your other questions asked under your many handles, yes I do respect ST and still believe he is acting in what he believes is the members' best interests. It just so happens that he and I disagree on what path that should take! Yes I am unhappy with how the 49ers issue was dealt with but I really don't know what can be done about it now - any realistic ideas?

The past defines where you start from, not where you are going to. The future of our careers is in our hands - dwelling on past mistakes or mishandling serves no purpose. I suggest that all members and non members set sight on what can be achieved, not what 'shoulda' or 'coulda' been done in the past!

[Bwatchful]

Hear Hear NC

[Kitsune]

Anyone considering voting for PH should review his past (before 1999) actions with respect to the union ................... check the HKAOA records :eek:

[JoeShmoe]

Dear NC,

The past defines who you are and shows how you react to situations...which in your case as a GC member doesn't bode well for the unity and integrity of the said GC.

As for me being anyone else - nope! Not in the CPU either...just a Yellow AOA Tie Pin wearer....more than you can say.

I hope you can prove me wrong and actually finish a term that you get elected for.

Cheers

Joe

[FOCX]

NR: thanks for that, you beat me to the punch. Having just found out who NC is I was going to ask if I could pin-point where he was on the list as I feel he has a lot of support, now I don't have to.

JS: As to NC resigning from the GC when it goes in a direction he thinks is far removed from where the members want it to go, well, that's just what I'd want of a Gov. Minister and a GC member. I don't always agree with what he has to say, but from what I can see you know where he stands, and if I don't like it I can cast my vote elsewhere.

Don't know if this is the case, but I think it'd be a good idea if members could see how the GC voted, it'd give you an idea of where they stand on the issues at the time and what bias they hold and how it may effect their voting leaving you to vote at elections accordingly.

[simplex]

:SAD = Simplex = Cluin?? = JoeShmoe = CPU members????

Joe you're behind on your subs. CPU

:Yes I am unhappy with how the 49ers issue was dealt with but I really don't :know what can be done about it now - any realistic ideas?

Ross you're behind on your subs. CPU

[fire wall]

Can we please get back on topic.
I beleive the candidate for president along with GC nominations Numbers 1,2,3,5,9,12,16 stand for constructive change in direction to one of holding the company to account for transgression's to our COS, falling renumeration, rostering practices etc.
I am told # 11 did little in the past tenure so will not be getting my vote. I know none of the FO's and SO's but applaud them for "attempting" to have a say in the direction their career will take and as a result they shall also get my vote.
I am interested to hear others opinions of the candidates direction and ask that we keep it on topic rather than letting it drift into individual character assassination.

[Fenwicksgirl]

Totally agrre with you Firewall. PW will be a good change as Prez and as you said, great to see so many S.Os and F.Os sticking their hand up!!

[ACMS]

drift into individual character assassination.

Ahh......... pardon my ignorance but isn't that basically what this is about? They put forward their names so WE can pick who we want based on their CHARACTER

Discussing their relative merit based on their past character performance is very valid. If they can't stand the heat then they should get out of the kitchen.

[400 Jockey]

Well said ACMS :)

[Night Watch]

I encourage members to log on to the AOA web site and download the letters of introduction from the Nominees.

I have printed out the list of Nominees and so far have crossed out 2 names that I defiantly wont be voting for (8 and 10).

The ones I will defiantly vote for from knowing them personally or their introduction letters (so far.... not all introduction letters have been submitted yet) are 1,2,3,6,7,9,13,15,17,18,19,20,21.

Please have a good think about your vote and lets get a GC in that will actually do something to improve our CoS.

[Busland]

Like NW I also enourage everyone to get informed about each candidate. Currently I am voting for 1,2,4,9,12,13,16,20 more to come later as I learn more. Certain NO's are 8, 10 and 11.

[Fenwicksgirl]

At the very least No 10 cannot be voted in, this we must unite on!!! I am not having a go at the guy personally but the fact that he is a DEC, in the company 5 minutes and wants to join the GC so as to push through R.A 65 whilst remaining chummy with management!!
Not what we need at the moment!!!

[SAD]

10 was kicked off a GC for breach of confidence and he got about 18 votes while running for president. I am voting for everyone except 8 10 and likely not for 14 as I am not sure he will stay the course, he has left the union completely and then came back, been on the GC, then left midterm and now wants to come back again. I am not sure about him but he makes this site more interesting good or bad. NC/Ross I don't know you, I am not in the CPU and I am none of those other people on here you suggest. Do I feel for the 49's? Yes, obvioulsy more than you do.

[Cumguzzler]

Not voting for:

6, 8, 10, 11, 14, 18, 19

[fire wall]

ACMS, it is just a matter of semantics.
'Assassination' is the terminology I wanted to delete from the discussion.
Character by all means
Please continue

[BusyB]

Well, I'm very disappointed in you all. I was desperately hoping for the chance to vote for those that have the answers to all our problems.:}:}

[JoeShmoe]

Just read PH's write up for his nomination on the AOA website. What an arrogant prat!! "....just trust me!"....that always goes down well:yuk:

[tiger321]

PH looks like a clown if you compare his nomination "speech" to the rest of the candidates. I wonder if his resigning and then coming back on crappy terms as a DEC is what he means by his "more life experience."

He is also the only candidate that feels it necessary to include his title - Captain - in his sign off. That alone tells me more than I need to know. I wonder if he feels it necessary to wear his 4-bars when he goes out to dinner!

By the way shouldn't that sign off read DIRECT ENTRY Captain.

[coded_messages]

WHY are the AOA allowing No. 10 to even put himself up for nomination?

[stillalbatross]

Because he's an A scale captain. For the same reason the AOA is spending gazillions to get A scale age 65 through and not a cent on anything else, in the heirachy of the AOA (lots of A's and no B's in that title) their vote is worth a dozen B scale.

[stillalbatross]

A scale's like the Mafia, you never really leave...................

[ACMS]

yep, they seem to be members in that club for life, a membership we will NEVER get.

[MAX]

How many 'A scalers' are are left?

Surely they must be the minority by now?

MAX:cool:

[simplex]

ACMS the problem is the majority B scale group are unwilling to fight for better. The Company/AOA has far more B scale than A scale members. Let's remember it was a B scale President who gave away rostering before discussing pay and it was a B scale President that recommended C scales for new hires and them did nothing when the Company canceled the freighter crewing deal. ACMS there is no chance of improvements while our B scale majority are damaging and giving away the conditions we already have.

[Westcoastcapt]

Wasn't it the B scale that said they would do our jobs for less money?

Regards

[coded_messages]

Aired my dismay recently to the AOA at No.10 being up for GC nomination. The answer I received was "He's an AOA member and therefore entitled for nomination"

[stillalbatross]

Wasn't it the B scale that said they would do our jobs for less money?

No. you're thinking of the ex-oasis A scalers coming back as a DEC on C scale pay. The company never offered to slot us in ahead of you because we were so cheap..................

[ACMS]

oh............I see Simplex..................thanks for correcting me d:mad:


NOW TAKE OF YOUR DARK GLASSES.

[flyingkiwi]

yes it was, but it was also the A scale that said they are happy to retire at 55 as per there contract.

[Lying Rock]

Do not vote for 6, 8, 10, 11, 14 if you want the AOA to move forward. Priority order for the No votes 10, 8, 11, 14 & 6. I hope the FO's/SO's who have stepped up are willing to do the hard work, it is nonetheless encouraging to see so many of you standing.

To the junior guys when you get elected do not be affraid to let the rest of the GC or the company know what you think and fight for your rights, you are the group who have the most to loose in the coming years.

Guys like 4, 9, 12, 16 & 20 will work for ALL the members. I do not know 9, but have heard good things about him. I also think 1, 2, 5, 19 & 22 might fit in with the other good guys, but I am not sure. I will read their profiles & those who I do not know at all & make a decision while also asking around.

Best of luck to all of you! This will be an important vote for the future of the AOA.

LR

[Apple Tree Yard]

flyingkiwi....I believe it's also YOUR contract that has YOU retiring at 55. Of course, as soon as you make Captain, you will suddenly see the light...:mad:

[Dragon69]

flyingkiwi....I believe it's also YOUR contract that has YOU retiring at 55. Of course, as soon as you make Captain, you will suddenly see the light...:mad:


How can you possibly see any light when your head is shoved up your @ss...moron :ugh:

[iceman50]

"The Management" and the real management must really love reading this thread it fits their argument very well as to why they do not need to give us a pay rise. There are a few mental pygmies around.

We have the "new" dreamers who think they are going to change the world - nobody has tried it before and we are going to have a really strong union because of the new GC they wish elected. The sad people who just continually blame the "A" scalers - and before anyone asks I am B scale - and obviously spout off without getting their facts correct. Just the sort of new commander we want - goes off at a tangent with blinkered ideas and views.

The pilots that think they are the only ones that have been disadvantaged and that anyone that does not have his retirement sorted by the time they are 40 is a looser. There are a lot of Captains and Senior First Officers who have already had their careers disadvantaged and would like the chance to recover some of their losses. So for those that might have their career slightly disadvantaged - but will have the extra years available to them to recover - stop whining - get over it - it is called LIFE!!:ugh::ugh:

[jed_thrust]

How many 'A scalers' are are left?

Surely they must be the minority by now?

Yes, Max they are in the minority. I figure about 380 of them, and about 1700 of us. Looking at the nominations, 4 A scalers nominated (which works out at about 1%), leaving 18 out of about 1700; again about 1%.

I haven't broken down the numbers for each rank, but maybe someone can..


Given the overall small numbers of pilots putting their hands up for this, should we perhaps consider increasing the size of the GC? I mean, it seems crazy to vote two guys out when in reality we should be thankful that people are even interested..

[flyingkiwi]

my point is that A scale argue that we accepted the B scale package when we joined.. well thats fair enough but they are the ones complaining about retiring at 55 when that is the package that they accepted when they joined. You cant ague both points, either stop telling us B scalers that we are wrong to want the same deal as you or stop complaining about having to retire at 55. Going to 65 affects our command timing and if someone joined last year the effect would mean they would have to work to 65 only to earn the same as if they reitred at 55 with the current command time.

[SAD]

FK

A scale has had three paycuts up to 28% since 1999. No payrise since 1994.

[Max Reheat]

Hey Dragon69,

Perhaps you could enlighten us...

Why is ATY a 'Moron' just because he has a different point of view to you?

Perhaps you need to get your head out of your a$$ and realize that there are people out here who are just as entitled as any other to a point of view.

I sincerely hope you are in a position to retire at 55. That said, I'm sure that once you have your command your stance will move a little to the right.

[Fenwicksgirl]

We cant afford to alienate any of the pilot fractions. Whether A/B/C scales, local pilots and freighter pilots, we must all pull together or else we will never have a hope of taking on this company. If we dont band together PPRUNE will continue as our whinging forum forever!!!
There definitely seems to be a change in the air with the new President and most of the GC, we have to give them all a chance and get behind them.

[Frogman1484]

A scale has had three paycuts up to 28% since 1999. No payrise since 1994.

Yes and you are still 20-30 % more than B scales. And now you want A scales to 65.

Quick question here: When ASL was introduced were you pissed off with them because your command got delayed?
Did you not see ASL as a Direct entry Captain deal?
Did you miss out on bases because they were going to Freighted pilots instead of Passenger crews?

If you have answered yes to any of these, do not expect the a B scale pilot to buy you a beer when you extend to 65.

[Dragon69]

Max Reheat,

How many that want to extend to 65 are actually doing it because they do not have enough to retire on. I guarantee you the majority that want to extend have more than I will ever hope to have when I turn 55. It has nothing to do about not having enough money, and all about being Capt. Smith as opposed to Mr. Smith. :yuk:


I sincerely hope you are in a position to retire at 55


That's all relative isn't? If you are trying to equal Mr. Gates well you're never going to have enough are you?


I'm sure that once you have your command your stance will move a little to the right


And what makes you think I don't have my command???

[Max Reheat]

Dragon 69

And what makes you think I don't have my command???

You don't write like a Captain, that's all.....!

[Cumguzzler]

You don't write like a Captain, that's all.....! I noticed the same thing. Although, I'm a having a hard time pin-pointing if he is a simple JFO or just a lousy SO. Well, they will straight his a$$ out during his command course!!!

[jonathon68]

I am not an A scale pilot, however I am very happy to have them around so that they are a much juicier target for Management when the next round of pay cuts eventually comes along!

When the A scale guys have gone, us B scale pilots will be perceived in the same way as the A scalers are now, by both Management and junior pilots.

The real issue is that CX have got us all working harder and for less than ever before. We don't need a bigger slice of the cake, we need a much bigger cake to go around.

BTW.

Cumguzzler, didn't you used to be Cumgargler? If so why the change?

[Hellenic aviator]

The real issue is that CX have got us all working harder and for less than ever before. We don't need a bigger slice of the cake, we need a much bigger cake to go around.

....and now with the announcement of limited baggage weights, increase of our subload tickets to account for the increasing fuel costs, somehow I don't see anyone 'baking the cake' sooner.
:hmm:

[Cumguzzler]

Cumgargler? That's disgusting!!!!!:yuk::yuk::yuk:

[Busland]

How depressing when a thread on Nominations go this way and has less responses than that of a thread called Cathay Girls. Just proves to the rest of the world how stupid pilots can really be. I guess no one wants a union instead just keep slagging it off along with anyone and everything else. Soo much for a constructive thread.....

[stillalbatross]

So for those that might have their career slightly disadvantaged - but will have the extra years available to them to recover - stop whining - get over it - it is called LIFE

In the space of a day commands have gone from 8 to 20 years due ASL/oasis/RA65. There is no way on gods earth that the average F/O who joined the company at age 30 and is still an f/o at age 50 can recoup even 30% of that by working to 65. The irony is that A scalers say they will drop out due medical before they reach 65 while b scalers will have to work to 65 medical or not. I spent an afternoon with my financial advisor and no matter how you swing the numbers if RA 65 comes in B scalers get poor and A scalers get rich.

Even with a 28% pay cut an A scaler going to 65 retires with over 4 times what a B scaler retires on. As always I'm happy to look at any spreadsheets that show it really ain't that bad.

[Apple Tree Yard]

stillalbatross. that's right...keep flogging the A-scale horse. Any other airline you care to mention has a 65 retirement age. No matter where you go, that will be the reality. Why don't you grow up a bit and realise that your only hope of a 'proper' career depends on you convincing/coercing the company to provide you with proper pay, benefits and working conditions. Trying to prevent your fellow colleagues from working to a sensible age is not going to achieve any of those things. The 65 debate is over....65 has won throughout the industry...won't be any different at CX.

[stillalbatross]

your only hope of a 'proper' career depends on you convincing/coercing the company to provide you with proper pay, benefits and working conditions

If only it were that easy. How am i supposed to do that when 'my' AOA tells me that RA65 won't make a lick of difference to command times? How am I supposed to do that when I show the union a list of a half dozen airlines who's change to RA65 has increased command times proportionally and they laugh it off as irrelevant?

Ahh, because the AOA isn't my union, it's yours.

Maybe the company could offer the local package DEC RA65 to anyone with a rating and experience so they wouldn't need to pay A scale above 55 and throw in Command basing slots too for the same package. Then you'd be on the receiving end just like us............

[Numero Crunchero]

I guess B scalers will keep flogging the 'A scale horse' whilst A scalers tell them "tough, thats life" or, "it's industry standard" or "you can work to 65 like us to make up the shortfall".

The vast majority of us joined on a contract that had the terms clearly explained. We knew what we would earn in each rank but we had no promises of when we would upgrade. There was never any doubt that retirement age was 55 - the legal age for flying was higher than that in many of our recruitment markets for quite a while. In spite of the difference in the CX RA and our national RA we joined anyway! We joined as the lower RA would lead to a faster upgrade time!

So where is a B scaler vs A scaler today? Well if a B scaler joined the same day as me and was on the same career path (with the exception of remaining HKG based throughout) he would be about $5.9million worse off (after 15 years). If I was still in the old PF (CPALRS) he would be $11.2million worse off. As we move forward from this date he still needs over a 20-25% increase in salary and PF to keep the gap from increasing. I have ignored investment return on the excess - it is purely the cumulative nominal difference.

So unlike some PPRUNE posters I am finding it a little hard to justify RA65 as just 'tough luck' and 'industry standard'. CX has wanted RA60 since at least 2000. That was long before any supposed legal pressure at outports. They didn't introduce in 2000/01 as the then AOA President pointed out that they would have to compensate everyone affected and basically everyone is affected - we are all affected in terms of delayed seniority in staff travel, basing availability, roster bidding etc.

RA65 will be the norm in CX one day. Whether it is now or when the first CoS08 comes up for command is up to us to determine as the contract cannot be varied without our agreement. Last summer CX wanted to blackmail FOs into signing onto new 'based contracts' that would have included RA65 and waived their right to bypass pay. That was probably the main reason the GC voted against presenting the deal to the membership.

The way forward - we have about 1400+ pilots who joined prior to CoS08 who are FO/SOs - they should receive compensatory bypass pay above what is required of CX now. Those payments need to be far more transparent and rigorously enforced unlike the arbitrary distribution that occurs under 'Company Policy' - its in the contract, it should be paid accordingly.

Any work beyond 55 should be on the same T + C's as existed prior to RA55.


Until we get a fair and equitable solution CX can continue to extend on whatever terms people are happy to work for and CX will occasionally incur bypass pay commitments for those it can't 'back door' through a myriad of basings options - I didn't even know HKG was a base until recently!

[Frogman1484]

If we are going to go to 65 , we must all be on one scale. Why should you be on A me on B and the rest on C?

One airline one pay to 65...that is fair!!!

[flyingkiwi]

amen to that!

[jed_thrust]

If we are going to go to 65 , we must all be on one scale. Why should you be on A me on B and the rest on C?


Of course we should all be on the same pay scale!

But it isn't going to happen until (and if) all CX pilots manage to unite on a few matters.

I love reading about B scalers complaining about A scalers who want to extend on A scales, ie, their own contract.


Surely all B scalers will want to extend on their own contract - B scales, or are you going to be happy to extend past 55 on the next cheapest pay scale, as you seem to expect the A scalers to do?

[water check]

....basically this is the most pointless of arguments. 65 is going to happen very soon. The other world airlines have already set the bar. CX will follow in turn. get used to it...get over it, worry about how you are going to improve the other issues that we are dealing with.

[Dragon69]

You don't write like a Captain, that's all.....!


I noticed the same thing. Although, I'm a having a hard time pin-pointing if he is a simple JFO or just a lousy SO. Well, they will straight his a$$ out during his command course!!!


Max Reheat and Cumguzzler,

You two idiots make Inspector Clouseau look like a genius with your deductive skills! :D FYI I joined early '95 so take a wild guess what rank I'll be! So please enlighten me exactly how a Captain is supposed to write.

[katana]

Shame no LEP's have put their hand up for nomination. Apperently there are 365 amongst the pilot body, yet no representation in the AOA.

[M89speedtouch]

Well put NC thanks.
Retirement age at CX has never been about AGE it's about MONEY.

[Max Reheat]

Dragon69,
TDK says it all really. The abuse should stop.
However; since you ask... any officer worthy of his rank would not call a colleague a Moron for merely having a different opinion. I guess an apology to ATY is out of the question, eh?

[Fenwicksgirl]

How about a new "Real" Unified Pay Scale.
Increase B scale by at least 10%, A scalers can go to 65 as long as they sign up on new pay scale. Any A scaler not wanting new scale can stay on A scale but retire at 55.
Manage the introduction (somehow) to minimise delays to command up-grades to junior pilots.
But we are getting off the thread....back to the nominees...
By the way, just on CNN, United to cut number of a/c by 100!!! Mostly 73s, and job cuts!!! We need to strong Union more now than ever!!!!

[fire wall]

Again, can we please keep to the topic of discussing the manifesto's of those that have nominated for the GC. This topic is too important for it to descend into the A vs B vs Z scale bitch slapping at dawn. If you want to winge then go down the Gay bar and do it but stop hijacking this thread.

[iLuvPX]

Just like any other smart and handsome man, I love a good A-scale bashing...those dirty bastards wanting to hang onto CX's devil money..shameful.

However, I dont really understand why they are to blame? They "let" B-scale happen? What were they to do?

B-scale let C-scale happen. C-scale will let D-scale happen, etc.

Everyone let the one-off, completely separate, never to be integrated with CX seniority, ASL scab bastards back on the the list, termination of the FACA, DEC's, DEFOs on bases, the list goes on.

Point is there is a lot of blame to go around. Everyone should look at what happened on their watch and realistically think of what they could have done.

Answer is, nothing. Why? Cause we have a crap AOA representing us. They have been the common failure point in all of the degradation of conditions we have experienced.

So I would nominate any of those Brits, with there notoriously small hands and commensurate testicular orbital diameters, to the GC. That way, it wont hurt as much when they inevitably bend us over at the company's behest.

Give yourself a 1-3% raise and get out of the dysfunctional AOA.

:yuk:

[Westcoastcapt]

With statements like the above, there is little doubt why our contracts keep going backwards.

Let's remember, that the AOA is only as strong as the people that it represents. If it only represents a fraction of the pilot body, what can you expect. Moreover, if they approch the issues like many do on these forums, there is little wonder it has little credibility. If the pilot body was truly interested in a strong union, we would be voting from a field of at least a half dozen potential presidents. Not giving the job to someone by acclamation.

Reading the drivel on these posts, one has to wonder why anyone would join in the first place. Everyone is blaming everyone else for their problems. Looking at the events of the past, I saw many of the most outspoken individuals turn and run when the chips were down.

The sad reality is until people stop taking our jobs at lesser pay and benefits, your, mine and everyone elses pay will not rise. It is the simple law of economics. What part do you not understand?

And to many of you useless mouthpieces, before you slander the A scale pilots, tell me what you have contributed to help solve the problems at hand.

My guess, probably nothing!!!!!

[AnAmusedReader]

Shame no LEP's have put their hand up for nomination. Apperently there are 365 amongst the pilot body, yet no representation in the AOA.

They fell for PC's line about a Local Pilot Forum being in their best interests - a classic union busting tactic. And what has their reward been? Sweet FA.

Yes LEP's are discriminated against but until they join in with the rest of the pilot body they won't get anything except more bitter.

[BusyB]

Just because they haven't stood for GC in no way indicates they fell for PS's line. Exactly the opposite for most of them.:ok:

[Lying Rock]

I can't believe where this thread has gone. No wonder the AOA is what it is today.

I am quite surprised not all nominees, including current commitee members standing for re-election, have not posted their manifestos yet. I thought there was hope - Guess Not! Everyone is to busy bashing/complaining here on PPRuNe and in the cockpits to come up with anything constructive, much less act in a such a way. The company must be laughing their socks off. The Irony of "The Management" is becoming truer by the day.

LR

[MACH.88]

I don't know about manifestos, but if you log onto the HKAOA website you'll find most candidates have a one or two page write up about them.

MACH.88

[BusyB]

MACH.88
A few people think the world revolves around them on this forum:}

[Night Watch]

Back to the topic.....

I just submitted my vote.... Have you?????

I voted for 14 out of the 22 nominated. Please take the 30 seconds it takes to vote and Vote. There is no excuse other then laziness not to vote.

I am choosing to remain optimistic that we will elect a GC that will listen to the members and effect some change! I realise that there are others out there that believe it is a lost cause, but please vote anyway.

[Busland]

BusyB Is leaving the GC finally and NW I hope you are right and there will be a representative GC for once.

[Nullaman]

When do the results get published?

[AnAmusedReader]

Are you waiting to find out if you've been elected?

[Buttie Box]

I love this:

"Meetings With Company Management

14.6. Meetings should be attended by at least two Principal Officers or a Principal Officer and the General Secretary. A summary of the meeting should be forwarded to the Committee as soon as possible. The Approved Admin Staff or General Secretary must be informed when meetings are arranged in order to ensure that a report is made.

14.7. Committee Members meeting with management on a personal level should make it clear at the outset that they are not representing the HKAOA at that time."

Does that mean once ST is out there will be no more comfy fireside chats with NR?

The Box

[broadband circuit]

All this talk about comfy fireside chats sounds a little Brokeback to me Buttie. :=

[Pogie]

D.G. and P.H didn't make it -- the rest did!

[ALPHA FLOOR]

Reasonably happy with the GC -

Thank %$#k the 2 Daves are gone, may they enjoy there twilight years with their only friends ST & MG.

AFL