View Full Version : Rumour - Unpaid Leave for CX Groundstaff
N1 Vibes
19th Mar 2009, 07:49
Rumour coming in from the brothers (and sisters) in cargo is that CX will announce unpaid leave for non-essential groundstaff on Tuesday 24/3. 6 weeks unpaid - 1 day a week for 30 weeks...
Bring forth your slings and arrows.
Regards,
N1 Vibes
6 weeks for "non-essential ground staff" so who decides which ground staff are "non-essential"
what's next? non-essential cockpit crew !!!
here's an idea.....get rid of all the "non-essential" extendees first, then come to the AOA, cap in hand, and we'll talk..
In these talks they'll need to PROVE beyond a shadow of a doubt the need for us ALL to take un-paid leave
AND prove ALL managers WILL 1. take un-paid leave and 2. not get the money back via other "special" payments ( back door )
the reo
19th Mar 2009, 13:50
"essential" extendees - There aren't any.
The airline won't be able to cope without them just like any other organisation until the day they aren't there.
And then "remarkably" like every other organisation in the world it will discover that others amazingly are capable of completing the same jobs thought achievable by only a select few of the profession
sisyphos
19th Mar 2009, 14:01
Shouldn't we wait until there are redundancies for real before we call for anybody to get fired first ?? :hmm:
slapfaan
19th Mar 2009, 14:03
Good one ACMS..
Oh..and only AFTER they get rid off all those KA,Oasis DEC's and recent DEFO's (last in - first out) then, and then only, can management even think of mentioning unpaid leave...:eek:
Latest rumour from the FA ranks: all 777-200's to be grounded within weeks,followed by all 747-400's and that will be followed by forced unpaid leave of 1 month for all staff..:uhoh:
Only one small obstacle with that though, and it's called: a union..:ok:
The ground staff, office staff and Cabin crew are all falling for the company spin, hook line and sinker.
With load factors up at about 77 to 82% and pax numbers around 50,000 per day I don't think we are doing badly enough to justify grounding 25% of the fleet.
Stranger things have happened though.
Anyone extended past 55 should go if times are that tough. Do we really need RF, PW and all the other oldies now? How can we justify keeping them on while the rest of us are forced to suffer a HUGE pay cut? God knows the 150 odd extendees have delayed upgrades long enough and now the young crew members have to suffer a huge pay cut as well.
We can't be that desperate for training captains surely?
The company wants to have it's cake and eat it too. They want to save money NOW but be ready for the next upturn. Well I'm sorry but NO.
If times are tough and we are going down the toilet then the over 55's can go, sorry to be blunt.
trident-too
19th Mar 2009, 15:36
ACMS, you obviously have some sort of problem-get a life first!It's not US(ie extendees who are your problem!)
( Flak jacket on!!!)
Not just me my friend, most of the guys I chat to day in day out think the same.
sorry.........
joejet
19th Mar 2009, 18:21
Oh..and only AFTER they get rid off all those KA,Oasis DEC's and recent DEFO's (last in - first out) then, and then only, can management even think of mentioning unpaid leave...
What is it with these comments. We may not like how some ended up in the lifeboat, but there are too many ready to throw out anyone they don't like just so they can get more rations. I'm assuming that people who post comments like these are not in the AOA because destroying someone else will not really protect them in the future either. We should all be looking for a collective solution to these trying times.
CX doesn't have a perfect system, but tell me one airline that does.
I'm not drinking the koolaid here but I'm not going to shove someone under the bus to make myself feel better.
Good Luck to all of us.....
4 driver
19th Mar 2009, 18:45
It's obvious that extendees should go first, but when does CX do what makes sense?
Many of the extendees are in the old boys club and will be protected by their mates for the "training" reasons.
I agree with ACMS but at the same time don't think any of his ideas are likely to happen. Been here a while and have seen similar before.......need a strong union and lots of guys won't sign up.
Apple Tree Yard
19th Mar 2009, 20:24
slaapfan....as usual, you prove yourself to be a congenital idiot.... :ok:
raven11
20th Mar 2009, 00:57
ACMS and his "friends":
Sorry...but you lads are about to experience a jolt. If you think CX are going ground aircraft and lay off Captains, so that they can then turn around and waste resources upgrading you guys to take their places....well sorry, you're dreaming.
If paycuts come, and I hope they don't. It will be across the board. So be very careful wishing ill on others....
bobrun
20th Mar 2009, 01:58
I don't think anyone wishes for someone to go through the drama of losing their jobs, but I also don't think anyone is naive enough to accept unpaid leave (totally on a voluntary basis for cockpit crew by the way) unless:
1- As a prerequisite, we see the "real" accounting numbers, proving it to be a necessity (don't hold your breath for that one!).
2- Extendees, which would obviously not be needed anymore if unpaid leave is required, retire.
3- SOs get their bypass pay
4- DECs from other sources than CX or KA leave.
Why would anyone voluntary give away tens of thousands of dollars unless the above conditions are met is a mystery to me. Maybe some are wealthy enough to part with a big chunk of cash without noticing it, but I suspect most will probably be reluctant.
slapfaan
20th Mar 2009, 01:59
apple tree yard...
.. and as usual, you don't comment on what's rumoured, but prefer to attack individuals, which makes YOU the idiot here:eek:
.. and the rumour has it that announcements will be made within weeks, so you can keep your clothes on for now, don't get too excited yet!!:ok:
Asian airlines worst hit as demand for top cabins falls 23.4%
Posted On: 20 Mar 2009
Airlines are finding it tough to fill first and business class cabins as the global economic downturn continues to hit demand.
Travellers downgrading or just not flying led to so-called premium traffic sliding 16.7 per cent industry-wide in January, compared with the same month last year.
It was the worst showing in more than 20 months, and Asian carriers like Singapore Airlines (SIA) and Cathay Pacific are bearing the brunt of the slump.
The weakest premium travel markets are those associated with this region, according to new data from the International Air Transport Association (IATA), which represents about 230 carriers.
Within Asia, premium traffic fell by a higher-than-average 23.4 per cent. Trans-Pacific premium traffic took a 24.7 per cent hit.
Falling fares and fuel surcharges are also alarming carriers like SIA, which earn almost half of their revenues from top-tier travellers.
A recent American Express survey found business class fares out of Singapore fell 3 per cent in the last three months of last year, compared with the July-September period.
IATA estimates that revenues from premium passengers industry-wide were down at least 25 per cent in January.
The overall drop of 16.7 per cent in the premium segment compares with a 5.9 per cent decline for air traffic across the board.
IATA said: "What started as a financial crisis in the Western economies has now become a manufacturing crisis, hitting the export-dependent economies of Asia hardest."
To survive what has been described as the worst crisis in decades, airlines are taking tough measures, including slashing capacity, parking planes and cutting jobs.
SIA, for one, plans to cut 11 per cent of its total capacity in the next 12 months. But with demand falling at a much faster pace, industry experts have warned of tougher times ahead.
Last month, SIA carried 1.18 million passengers, 20.2 per cent down from the same month a year earlier.
The steep fall came despite a 8.5 per cent cut in capacity.
Across its network, the airline filled just 69.7 per cent of available passenger seats, down 7.1 percentage points from a year earlier.
Cargo volumes also slipped, down by 16.9 per cent to just below 80 million kg, with SIA filling 56.7 per cent of available freight space. This was down 5.5 percentage points from last year.
SIA, which unveiled its performance data yesterday, said: "The prevailing global economic crisis has significantly dampened travel demand, translating to weaker uplifts."
This was in contrast to the performance in February last year, which was supported by the Chinese New Year holiday peak, the Changi Airshow and the additional day in the leap year.
The airline said it will continue to monitor traffic movements and make the adjustments to its route network where necessary to match capacity to demand.
Wires
N1 Vibes
20th Mar 2009, 03:55
It's always so much fun to draw out the cockpit CEO's and CFO's. I suppose you either take the info you are being fed - or spend your next HKG-JFK whinging about how you would run the company better.....
I guess then in your world - there would be no unpaid leave during an economic crisis - tight?
Or perhaps being so close to the pax, they live behind that door on the flight deck you know, you actually spend your rest periods on-board going round and ask the pax how much they actually paid for the upgraded business class seat....$2,888 London return - making a lot of profit on that ticket then.
Maybe my head is firmly inserted where the sun don't shine - but I guess by following the instructions of the glorious leaders some of us might save a little of the salary bill and therefore still be employed in aviation next year.
But of course when backed by a union - and working for a company that could eventually lose a lot of money - that you personally WILL be treated differently - some advice my friend - GET REAL!!
If there ain't no money in the pot - then heads will roll.
Regards,
N1 Vibes - pointy stick in hand!
Raven.............wake up mate.
1/ There are plenty of experienced Capatains that could ( if paid correctly ) become training Captains.
2/ There are plenty of S/O's and F/O's with more than enough experience and ability AND desire to be upgraded by those same training Captains.
We don't need MFL, PW, RF or ANY extendees now.
The company created this mess and WE SHOULD NOT HAVE TO TAKE AN 8.33% PAY CUT TO HELP FIX IT.
I like how so many are ready to hack off the bottom to get the DEFOs and DECNs from Oasis etc., given that there are a significant number of DESOs and Cadets trying to follow the system properly in that mix right to the bottom. Is this becoming a "eat the young to save them (but mostly us)" scenario? If you are so passionate about this system, then this should propose a significant conundrum. I don't like that those guys from Oasis, BA etc. are here either but the sh*t is in the pudding now. We shouldn't have been allowing those guys to be hired like that in the first place.
So now I think extendees go first. Then we have to share the sh*t pudding and all maybe (read if completely necessary) take some UPL because we allowed this to happen. If it sucks then DONT LET THEM HIRE THROUGH SO MANY EFING DOORS NEXT TIME!!:mad:
bobrun
20th Mar 2009, 07:54
If there ain't no money in the pot - then heads will roll
There is no need for any DESOs or DEFOs to go. If the numbers I hear are correct, there's about 150 extendees in addition to about 30 DECs. Total, that's 8% of the pilot group. That's likely to cover most of the needed redundancies.
(Not saying layoffs are justified just yet. Just saying why we should say NO to UPL)
yokebearer
20th Mar 2009, 08:15
You are all in lala land.
The company will rather force all to take 2 months unpaid leave so we can subsidise their extendees that way - and they will be here ready for all the training to be done when the upturn comes. That is the reality. Get out the vaseline - you will be contributing to the survival of the over 55's. The pain will be evenly spread.
bobrun
20th Mar 2009, 08:27
You forget they cannot "force" unpaid leave. It can only be asked on a voluntary basis.
trevfly
20th Mar 2009, 08:57
I think some of the KA DECs are sweating, esp those who are still stuck flying in KA. Seems though that their magnanimous nature has not yet extended to taking any unpaid leave. They will no doubt leave that to their more senior CX buddies. The guys who got to the RHS on merit, not through the back door.
And lets not hear all that twollop about time in the group. By resigning from KA and grabbin all they could at Cx, they accepted a common joining date at the BOTTOM of the CX list at the time.Fair do's.
Whats the point of a redundancy list if no one is prepared to apply it?
Dont take unpaid leave, fight it, and what will be will be.
You may wake up and find the DEC problem has been resolved:D
trevfly
20th Mar 2009, 08:59
Maybe there's no redundancy list @ CX as such , just DOJ?
WeakForce
20th Mar 2009, 20:57
How many days of unpaid leave will the DFO of Cathay Pacific Airways be taking? Let me guess - not too many - his bonus is predicated on convincing suckers to take lots.:D
raven11
20th Mar 2009, 22:05
Kitsune...What???
I didn't say anything regarding seniority! LOL all you want.
What I was attempting to say was that if people like you and ACMS think you are going to escape this unscathed you're dreaming! If people think that they are safe because they "need to sign any changes to change to their conditions", then their dreaming too.
Just ask those who've been through this before. It will be a "sign this" or you will never get a base, sign this or you will never be promoted, sign this or you will be transferred back to HKG......neither of these three items are guarateed in your "contract".
The Company feels it is in survival mode. You may disagree, but that is their perception. They will then act accordingly.
My whole point was that people should be careful wishing ill on others....
Survival mode!!!
let me see.......capacity up by 13% on last year, load factors still up around 80% ( even after cancelling 80 flts last week ), pax numbers around 50,000 per day, fuel price low meaning SAVING around 15 to 20 BILLION over the year ( more than wiping out the hedging losses ) and you think we are in Survival mode!!!
More like "lets get the staff terrified, and at the same time make them take a big pay cut" mode
Get a grip and don't believe all they spin.
I've been here 16 years and this is not the first downturn I've seen.
Remember KB after the post SARS 5.5 Billion HKD profit "we weren't expeting such pent up demand for travel"
If I had a dollar for each time CX complained about forward bookings I'd be a rich B scaler!!
chill fellas and sit on ya hands.
I'm not saying ( and never have ) we wont escape this unscathed, all I'm trying to say is don't believe all you read from CX ( Swire ) They love to take advantage of situations like this to change their staff's COS packages.
Maybe they will "force" unpaid leave down our throats with threats, possibly as they've done that before.
If things are really that bad then anyone "not on our seniority list" should go first. ( ie the extendee, part time, temporary Captains call them what you will )
Until I see CX giving them a DCM I wont believe we are doomed.
FlexibleResponse
21st Mar 2009, 05:37
I'm no expert on running an airline, but would they really want to deliberately scare the s*#% out of their investors by continually making statements about our financial situation if it wasn't really bad? Would they do that just to try to cut our T&C
Oh yes...it has been done before. Some silly Director tried that once before on the staff, but his scare tactics reached the media and shareholders. Said Director was then forced to make a retraction and explain that the memo was meant only for staff consumption and had no basis in fact.
Deadly virus may force Cathay to ground entire fleet - Business Analysis & Features, Business - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/analysis-and-features/deadly-virus-may-force-cathay-to-ground-entire-fleet-594484.html)
CNN.com - Cathay: No plans to ground fleet - Apr. 15, 2003 (http://www.cnn.com/2003/BUSINESS/04/13/cathay.sars/index.html)
Svengali
21st Mar 2009, 07:06
ACMS & FlexibleResponse
Good job, for reminding the boys of the spin that comes from T.T. and N.R., The new guys have not been through all the history that we have.
No, I don't believe the company is "raking it in" either.
I believe we are in a pretty bad economic environment, no doubt about that. My arguement is that the company are "making hay while the sun shines"
( although they would say the sun is not shining, it's just a bright moon )
Taking a golden opportunity to screw down the COS of their staff for the future and making us ALL take an unnecessary 8.3333% pay cut now.
Cathay keep mentioning the drop in First and Business class and they are probably correct. We are,they say,relying on Economy pax to keep us running through this "difficult" time. So, why don't we expand our Economy network a bit? go out and flight for the tourist seats and operate to Honolulu, Guam, Maldives and Mauritius. In the past they said they didn't go there because "there is no business market, no big profit margin".........Well? now the games changed around we should be out there grabbing every opportunity. Economy it seems is better than nothing.
Just a thought....
fly123456
21st Mar 2009, 10:15
We should all take unpaid leave! On the same day. No, no, don't get confused, it's not a strike, it's just to help the company out.
Then we'll see if they still find it a good idea to force people taking unpaid leave :}
raven11
21st Mar 2009, 16:17
ACMS
I don't know why, but you seem to have a hard time reading my posts. For goodness sake man, I feel as if I'm arguing with my wife.
I didn't say "I" thought the Company was in survival mode! I said:
"The Company feels it is in survival mode. You may disagree, but that is their perception. They will then act accordingly."
It doesn’t matter what you and I think, only what they think.
You've been here 16 years, and I've been here 18, so we've both been down this road a few times already. I've been at the receiving end of several past downturns, as have you. I guess that's why I agree with just about everything you said in your last few posts (except your misquoting me).
What gets up my nose is the perception that some of us are gleefully anticipating that some among our ranks will lose their jobs, while they on the other hand will sail happily along. There's just something creepy and dishonorable about the tone of some of the posts I've been reading. However you candy-coat it, whether it's from the bottom of the seniority list, extendees, whatever....something about the tone of some posters gets my back up.
I believe the AOA is in a no-win situation here. It can please the junior pilots, or it can please the senior pilots, but it can't please both. Who do you think wins in this environment? Unless we pull together...it won't be any of us.
Do I have the answer to this dilemma? No. But for the time being, my personal strategy is to support the AOA, as I always have, and hope they can find a solution.
Oh, damn...I think I can hear my wife calling me..."OK honey, I'm almost done. I'll be right there..."
GlueBall
21st Mar 2009, 19:28
......."capacity up by 13% on last year, load factors still up around 80%..."
That's hardly a relevant measure of the company's financial health, better known as: "Operating profit!"
Grossly discounted air fares can easily generate 80+ per cent load factors, and yet the company isn't making a dollar. Besides that, the fuel hedging snafu will eat $1billion of the company's revenue over the next 18 months, . . . unless the price of oil were to magically rocket above $139/bbl.
N1 Vibes
21st Mar 2009, 21:54
Gentlemen/ladies,
referring back to the original title of the thread and in response to a certain amount of optimism here amongst some of the front-end CEO's and CFO's:
- 2009 - Global Economic Downturn
- All Groundstaff - unpaid leave - 6 weeks - RUMOUR
- 1998 - Asia Crisis
- 800 Groundstaff made redundant - FACT
I too have been here a number of years and seen the things that went on during post-911 and SARS. Some of you may have been (at the front end) here for 16/18 years unscathed (relatively), but spin or no spin, if the man at the top wants to trim his bottom line by having some unpaid leave or rolling some heads among the GROUNDSTAFF - then that's just what he will do.
Equally if he determines that he wants to trim his bottom line by losing a few front-end wallahs via redundancy - then I guess he get's his wish doesn't he?
Oh, and forgive my ignorance (and my very sincere apologies to those affected) aren't some front end people going to be leaving the company as a result of the Classic retirements? What would you call this - a holiday.....
Regards,
N1 Vibes :ouch:
N1 Vibes...........sorry I wasn't meaning to take your comment out of context.
I kind of meant my reply as if CX had said they were in survival mode, which is kind of what they are alluding to.
The Classic Captains I speak to have been given course dates for conversion to the 400.
Glueball.........CX is flying 50,000 pax per day at around 80% with the fuel prices down as they are then surely we must be making an operating profit. If not then the "inmates are running the prison".
N1 Vibes
22nd Mar 2009, 06:57
ACMS,
I didn't mean the captains - the classic has 3 seats up front...I hear today that these positions and people are lost forever.
Regards,
N1 Vibes
Kitsune
22nd Mar 2009, 09:44
The cost of fuel could be zero per gallon, if you have hedged to pay 50 bucks for that gallon, it costs you 50 bucks......... :ugh:
yeah, so?
CX is paying current market rates ( about $50 barrel ) for 50% of the Jet Fuel and $70 barrel for the other 50%.
There IS a combined saving of about 15 to 20 BILLION on LAST years fuel bill if the price says about the same. ( no reason to think it will go up much any time soon )
The first five or six months of calander 2009 MORE than offset the WHOLE hedging screw up, the rest of the year is bonus, thus helping offset the lower revenue stream for the year and producing a fair result overall.
So it all comes down to how cheaply we are selling the seats, does the significant oil price drop match or exceed the price we drop the seats?
N1 Vibes........not much we can do for our Flt Eng I'm affraid. The F/O's on the seiority list below the age of 55 should be ok. The Captains over 55 on extension on the other hand should get on their knees and kiss NR's bum. :ok:
Kitsune
23rd Mar 2009, 08:36
Qantas set to axe more jobs
By Peter Smith in Sydney
Published: March 22 2009 22:11 | Last updated: March 22 2009 22:11
Qantas, the Australian flag carrier, will this week make public a restructuring plan that includes a second wave of redundancies after an examination of the airline’s business under Alan Joyce, its new chief executive.
Staff and unions will be told the job losses are needed to match reduced capacity requirements as passenger revenues have deteriorated.
Qantas will also announce the restructuring to the Australian Securities Exchange in the coming days, two people with knowledge of the situation said. Qantas declined to comment.
Airlines worldwide are being hit by the mounting crisis in aviation. Air France-KLM and Lufthansa, the two leading European carriers, recently announced more capacity reductions. A rising number of carriers is also seeking to defer delivery of new aircraft, undermining the outlook for jetmakers Airbus and Boeing.
The Centre for Asia Pacific Aviation, an industry consultancy, last week warned that airlines in Asia could only be weeks away from grounding up to 10 per cent of their fleets as they contend with weak revenues, falling passenger loads and excess capacity.
Singapore Airlines last week reported a more than 20 per cent drop in passenger loads in February, one of the airline’s biggest monthly drops on record, while Hong Kong-based Cathay Pacific this month reported the biggest annual loss in its 63-year history.
Qantas axed 1,500 jobs in July 2008 and has since introduced an “accelerated leave” programme to cut staff numbers. Many of this week’s cuts are likely to be made in senior and middle management. The fresh job losses continue Qantas’s strategy of reducing its workforce.
The airline announced the departure of David Cox, the executive in charge of engineering, on March 19. Qantas employs 37,000 people according to its latest annual report.
It reported last month a 68 per cent drop in first-half profits and reaffirmed guidance that full-year profits to June 30 would reach A$500m ($344m), down from 2007-08’s A$1.4bn.
The A$500m figure is vulnerable to a downgrade, however, possibly lthis week, as Qantas grapples with depressed demandl.
Mr Joyce, the former head of Qantas’s budget carrier Jetstar, lhas made it clear lhe wants the group to avoid la loss during his first yearl.
However, Mr Joyce has also signalled he wants to take a more conciliatory approach to negotiations with Qantas’s 16 unions than Mr Dixonl.
A lengthy and bitter dispute with the Australian Licensed Engineers Association last year cost Qantas A$150m. However, the dispute which resulted in flights being cancelled for often small technical problems also damaged Qantas’s brand image and its reliability record.
Qantas is one of the ore profitable airlines and, though it was recently downgraded by Moody’s, is one of the few to retain an investment grade credit rating.
In February, Qantas said its A$500m full-year profit guidance was “subject to no further significant change in market conditions and fuel prices”.
Yeah Kitsune?
Now read this thread too.
http://www.pprune.org/d-g-reporting-points/367011-qantas-axe-100-senior-execs.html
I'm sure CX would have no trouble finding 100+ deadwood managers at Hello kitty city.
If life's so bad here then it would be a good start.:D
Kitsune
23rd Mar 2009, 12:36
Are there any JSS extendees.......... :}
Kitsune
24th Mar 2009, 17:34
Airline industry in ‘intensive care’
By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent
Published: March 24 2009 13:59 | Last updated: March 24 2009 13:59
Airline industry losses this year are expected to be nearly double the level forecast in December, as carriers are hit by steeply falling demand from premium passengers and by record falls in cargo traffic.
“The state of the airline industry today is grim. Demand has deteriorated much more rapidly with the economic slowdown than could have been anticipated even a few months ago,” said Giovanni Bisignani, director general of Iata, the airline industry trade association on Tuesday.
Relief from lower fuel prices had been “overshadowed” by falling demand and plummeting revenues, he said. “The industry is in intensive care.”
Net losses are forecast to reach $4.7bn this year, up from the $2.5bn forecast in December, as global economic conditions rapidly deteriorate.
Iata also revised its estimate for airline industry net losses for last year from $5bn to $8.5bn, as carriers were hit by the sudden and sharp fall in demand from lucrative premium passengers, where most network carriers generate the bulk of their profits, and from cargo.
Premium passenger numbers fell by almost 17 per cent in January year-on-year, while cargo traffic fell by 23 per cent.
Airline passenger traffic volumes are forecast to fall this year by 5.7 per cent with cargo demand dropping by 13 per cent, as the aviation sector suffers a much bigger slump than forecast as recently as December.
Airlines are facing one of the biggest ever annual falls in revenues in 2009 with a drop of $62bn or 12 per cent to $467bn. By comparison, industry revenues fell by only 7 per cent in the two years after the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.
Mr Bisignani said the industry’s continuing deep losses combined with the airlines’ total debt of $170bn meant that the pressure on their balance sheets was “extreme.”
Consumers are benefiting from the plunge in demand for air travel, as airlines are forced to cut fares in order to try to stimulate traffic and to bring in cash. Iata said yields or average fare levels were expected to fall by 4.3 per cent this year.
The industry is shrinking in response to the slump in demand with capacity forecast to fall by 6 per cent this year, but actions to cut flights and ground aircraft are still not keeping pace with the fall in demand.
Iata said airlines in the US were the only region to have been able to shrink capacity in line with the fall in demand, and they were forecast to turn large 2008 losses into a small 2009 profit. However, airlines in all other regions would find the deep recession causing significant net losses, with Asia Pacific carriers the hardest hit with forecast net losses of $1.7bn.
Mr Bisignani said weak consumer and business confidence was expected to keep spending and demand for air transport low.
“The prospects for airlines are dependent on economic recovery. There is little to indicate an early end to the downturn. It will be a grim 2009. And while prospects may improve towards the end of the year, expecting a significant recovery in 2010 would require more optimism than realism,” he said.
As airlines are forced by the recession to defer and even cancel orders for new aircraft, the makers of commercial jets, Airbus and Boeing, would suffer a sharp drop in production, said Iata, with deliveries set to fall by around 30 per cent by 2011.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
blah blah blah
I'm not convinced CX is THAT bad we need to take unpaid leave.
I mean, how much extra time does 1 month's pay accross all of CX save the company? BUGGER ALL in the scheme of things.
Our monthly wage bill is a drop in the bucket.
If things are that desperate then we need more than a pay cut to save our sorry souls.
Kitsune
25th Mar 2009, 07:27
At last ACMS has seen the burning bush!! :cool:
volarecantare
25th Mar 2009, 07:27
Trevfly, you are really a little gem of a psycho are you not? You are KA, and spend your whole time on this site trying to stir things in CX. Have I not advised you before to seek assistance with your resentment and anger issues?
As I said to you on the other thread. You yourself will pasted on beneath the CX list very soon, so be careful what you are wishing for.
You must be a pleasure to fly with!
No, not a burning bush.
It's all smoke and mirrors.
Open your eyes
Kitsune
27th Mar 2009, 11:57
Airline traffic falls steeply
By Kevin Done
Published: March 26 2009 23:11 | Last updated: March 26 2009 23:11
Global airlines reported on Thursday a 10.1 per cent year-on-year fall in passenger traffic in February, as the industry slides into deepening recession.
The year-on-year decline was exacerbated by February having one day less than in the leap year of 2008, but the drop still reflected a further deterioration in trading in the airline sector and followed a decline of 5.6 per cent year-on-year in January.
Air cargo volumes, a leading early economic indicator, were 22.1 per cent lower in February than in the same month a year ago.
Giovanni Bisignani, chief executive of Iata, the international airline trade association, said, “gloom continues. The sharp drop in February passenger traffic shows the broadening scope of the crisis. Freight traffic, which began its decline in June 2008 before passenger markets were hit, has now had three consecutive months in the minus 22 to minus 23 per cent range.
“We may have found a bottom to the freight decline, but the magnitude of the drop means that it will take time to recover.”
Mr Bisignani said airlines had made their most aggressive cut in capacity in February since the crisis began with a reduction of 5.9 per cent, but this could still not keep pace with the fall in demand resulting in 30.1 per cent of seats flying empty.
Passenger traffic volumes declined by 12.8 per cent year-on-year in the Asia Pacific region in February, by 12 per cent in North America and by 10.1 per cent in Europe.
Iata said Europe’s long-haul markets to the US and Asia had been particularly hard hit reflecting negative economic sentiment including in Germany, where business confidence hit new lows in both February and again this month.
The collapse in international trade in goods and much lower shipments of components by manufacturers had led to “extremely weak” demand in all air cargo markets.
The priority for airlines around the world was “survival – conserving cash and adjusting capacity to match demand,” said Mr Bisignani.
“This means resizing and reshaping the industry to deal with the $62bn fall in revenues expected this year – a drop of 12 per cent. Airlines will be making some tough decisions to stay afloat as we head for industry losses of $4.7bn in 2009,” he said.
He called on governments to repeal the $6.9bn in new taxes put on the airline industry in 2009 to help pay for banking bailouts.
Governments “must replace the mindset of taxing aviation as a luxury or a sin with a strategic approach that recognises and fosters the industry’s critical economic role in connecting people to business and products to markets,” he said.
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2009
This rumour is not dead yet, looks like the bad news is set to come out after Easter.
yeah we are really hurting bad.
load factor a couple of days ago was 89% and we carried 55,000+ pax in CX alone.
ass:mad:
mairyhinge
31st Mar 2009, 04:35
Any truth to the rumour that the managers accepted their bonuses recently ?? (Sorry if its already been stated)
Good luck getting me to volunteer for UPL if thats the case....
bobrun
31st Mar 2009, 04:49
flights not only have good load factors, some are also over booked!
UPL? Not only all extendees leave, all managers refuse their bonuses, SOs get their bypass.
goingdown
31st Mar 2009, 05:26
on overtime this month...go figure!
Bow Inn
31st Mar 2009, 08:57
on overtime this month...go figure!
Is that to cover the chaps on unpaid leave?
As difficult as things will be (for my family) if we have to make financial concessions, I will go along with it if it can be proven that it's necessary - it would be nice if we could all keep our jobs.
If the managers have indeed taken their bonuses, then I am truly insulted that they would even suggest financial concessions from us.
"The bonus is part of my package" rhetoric doesn't cut it, I'm afraid. If that's the case, then full 13th month is part of my package.
Lead by example please gentlemen.
I just heard from an AOA GC insider that the company are spreading the rumour amoungst the ground staff of LWOP PLUS a PAY CUT.
They must be taking the piss, surely?