Why redundancies/Furloughs are necessary

[Saturn]

After reading and researching the lastest, I think that this should be done. If we say CX needs to lay off 250 pilot's, this would include all DEC's and most if not all COS 08 pilot's. What this would force is that any future commands(They said this themselves) and any further promotions whether SO to JFO or JFO to FO etc,.. WOULD HAVE TO GO BY PURE SENIORITY.

Oh I see you want us to help out but forget & forgive all the past viloations of our COS and then sign yet another new COS and have faith that all the bad days are behind us. UTTERLY RIDICULOUS!

So many of us have been screwed whether out of a base, a command, an upgrade or a fleet change because of the nonsense. They gave the outsiders and those that quit a better deal. Man it is infuriating!

Either reward us for or our hard work or get stuffed. We should not let the company just have us forget and forgive what they have done.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Additionally, how about better benefits. P Fund-the choices are mininal and we have all lost lots of money.

Ticketing. It is disgusting how the company makes money off it's employees. FOC's SHOULD BE FOC'S!!! We should get upgraded if seats are available on our own aircraft. I have watched completely empty business or first class seats while we are jammed in coach. How about better priorty on ONEWorld (We are the bottom.) And how about ticket prices coming down (WAY DOWN). The price we pay is just way too much.

CX should REALLY show some good faith and we MIGHT do the same. Sadly NONE of this will happen.:ugh:

[badairsucker]

What I want to know is how many of the ex Oasis crew(GO etc) and the +55(MFL etc) posse are taking SLS.


A bit of a kick in the teeth for the rest of us if they don't sign up.

[Arfur Dent]

Nearly all +55 new contracts include a clause requiring them to take 6 weeks ULV minimum.

[Sqwak7700]

What I want to know is how many of the ex Oasis crew(GO etc) and the +55(MFL etc) posse are taking SLS.


A bit of a kick in the teeth for the rest of us if they don't sign up.

If you take SLS, then you deserve to be kicked in the teeth. Par for the course. :D

[markontop]

Weren't some ex Oasis chaps ex Cathay. ie Leave Cathay to join a rival and bank on Cathay's demise. That's great loyalty, but wait let's reward them.

[Fly747]

Furloughed pilots should obviously be the first to be recruited when things pick up again. Should they get their old job and base back though? I think they should only get back what their seniority will at that time hold. It would sort a lot of problems out.

[Harbour Dweller]

Fly747,

Well said!!

All promotions would return to pure seniority.

I wonder how many DEC's would want to return?

[markontop]

Some maybe even too old ( >65 ) for COS 08 to let them back in, again.

[iflylow]

After reading and researching the lastest, I think that this should be done. If we say CX needs to lay off 250 pilot's, this would include all DEC's and most if not all COS 08 pilot's. What this would force is that any future commands(They said this themselves) and any further promotions whether SO to JFO or JFO to FO etc,.. WOULD HAVE TO GO BY PURE SENIORITY.

I think this should be taken seriously. This would alleviate a lot of problems as mentioned above. Another one would be the BPP issue for S/Os, as the majority of DEFOs would be gone.

[Max Reheat]

Gentlemen and Ladies,

I take it that those of you advocating furloughs (ie to allow some of our fellow pilots to fall by the wayside in what is becoming an industrial issue) would use the same rationale when it came to supporting industrial action! And you would not put your own necks, income and welfare on the line to support any further casualties from another 'bloody nose.' Because that is certainly what you suggest on this thread.

I thought so.

Some of you are so full of cr@p it makes me weep. You have got yourselves so confused you don't have a soapbox to stand on.

Put yourselves in the shoes of the most recent second officers to join the company. Because there are some between the bottom of the seniority list and the DECs from Oasis. Unlike those of you who joined on the base and have chosen to stay there, these guys and girls have in many cases uprooted their families to come here. Now, if they lose their jobs there will be children to relocate and perhaps even mortgages in Hong Kong to pay. Would you want to be in those shoes?

I think not.

So decide what you want and support the AOA in it's quest to find an equitable solution.

[Sqwak7700]

...put yourselves in the shoes of the most recent second officers to join the company...

Uhh, hate to punch some holes in your argument, but it is very flimsy. Not a single SO will be furloughed if redundancies are handed out.

First of all, they are very short on SOs. Check the long haul flights and you will see that many are going with 3 FOs and some with 2 CAs and 2 FOs. They are quite short on SOs.

Second, SOs are based in HK, which means they can use them in any ULH, which is not true for based DEFOs.

I don't think the company is in any position to furlough any pilots, they are simply too understaffed to make their situation worse. Even if nobody takes SLS, they still have many weeks of contractual leave they need to award.

They should do this before asking for handouts, and it is our job to keep them to this. At least those of us that are willing to do something about our futures. :hmm:

[Harbour Dweller]

The numbers that make up the bottom 250 pilots on the Seniority list are:

76 SO's
136 DEFO's
38 DECN's

[sirhcttarp]

Put yourselves in the shoes of the most recent second officers to join the company. Because there are some between the bottom of the seniority list and the DECs from Oasis. Unlike those of you who joined on the base and have chosen to stay there, these guys and girls have in many cases uprooted their families to come here. Now, if they lose their jobs there will be children to relocate and perhaps even mortgages in Hong Kong to pay. Would you want to be in those shoes?Standard CX rental contract allows the tenant to break lease with 2 months notice. CX will also pay for repatriation.

If that person chose to buy it's a risk they take and they can't blame anyone but themselves if they lose their job but were too blase about the risks of a 10 year mortgage. Buying is not a "me too" decision but a carefully considered process and if that process was not given due diligence, I'm afraid it's bad luck. Point to note is that this "me too" attitude is what got the world into this mess to start with.

So in conclusion max reheat, you would have to come up with better reasons than that to justify your arguments against redundancies.

[Max Reheat]

RTFQ....!!!!

I was merely using housing as a supporting fact.

The point I was making if you had taken off your crimson coloured spectacles is that you are advocating colleagues losing their jobs.

I expect to see YOU at the front of the queue sacrificing yourselves when the time comes to support the next tranche of 49er style victims.

The trouble is, I don't think you have the b@lls.

[sirhcttarp]

RTFQ yourself!

i was merely questioning your supporting fact and how it cannot be used to support your argument.

I still don't see your reasoning.

In fact if all COS08 guys were made redundant (hypothetically speaking and only quoting from this thread), and all that's left are COS99 guys, it makes our hand A LOT stronger against the company!

[Max Reheat]

No,

You still don't get it do you?

I am questioning the loyalty or otherwise of people who argue that we should allow some of our junior colleagues to lose their jobs, whilst at the same time hankering after a bit of industrial unrest.

In which case, how could the rest of us possibly trust their commitment to anyone who was subsequently to be fired or otherwise rendered jobless.

They can't have one without the other. It' really that simple!

Do you geddit now?

[Flap10]

No max I don't get it either!

Redundancy is a fact of life, we all know the risks involved when we take employment at the bottom of the seniority list. I've been made redundant before with another airline, and such was life, there was no discontent toward the seniors, and this was an airline where almost everyone was a strong union supporter. Just because Cathay has never had to make people redundant in the past that doesn't mean it doesn't happen elsewhere.

Having said that, you're not that naive to believe the bit about SLS will ensure people are not made redundant?? How long have you been with Cathay???

[Fly747]

I don't want to see people being made redundant anymore than you do. I agree with the company that we need the pilot workforce for the upturn. What I do object to is paying from my salary well over $100,000 to keep someone else in work. I particularly object to the "voluntary", with veiled threats, manner in which SLS is being sold. Many of us are happy to take UPL in amounts convenient to us and if that is not enough then the company must either pay to keep people or decide how many redundancies are required.
Pilots are not a cohesive body as is evident from these pages. I have never met most of those we are talking about and if I did then I might not see them again from one year to the next. We are not like the office wallahs who go out for lunch together and who would miss someone who leaves an empty desk. We are not work colleagues in its true sense.
We are talking about pilots who have been in the company less than a year, they are not my responsibility.

[mephisto88]

Max, excuse me for throwing my 2cents worth in, but what I believe one of our colleagues sirhcttarp was alluding to, was I thought, invoking one of the clauses in our contract, that being the 'Last in, First out' aspect. His comment wrt being in a stronger position is also not really that wide of the mark, but I don't believe he was advocating industrial action.

Whether retrenchment is the correct thing to do in the current circumstances is however somewhat academic.
Firstly until the company comes up 100% squeaky clean with the facts, as opposed to the statistical spin we have seen to date, and secondly when or if that becomes an option for individuals to vote on, only then may it become something that crew would be obliged to consider. Historically however, consultation on similar matters has not been seen to be the Companies strong point, so I don't suggest you all hold your breath whilst waiting to be asked an opinion.

Also Max, as we all know, unlike many or possibly even all the other CPA staff groups, we do have that clause/protection in our contract, and if now is not the correct time for it to be invoked, I am interested in your view as to when is the right time?
Personally, I question the Companies motives for the SLS money grab, but if, and only if, it were really necessary, I would have though a 2 weeks plus $6000 donation from all staff levels would be more appropriate, bit like a profit share of old!! Not to mention 3/4 pay for GM's. 1/2 pay for directors, and a big fat $zero$ for CEO's, just an old fashioned thought about leading from the top! anyway I digress(as usual - sorry)

When one joins at the bottom of the list, it is clearly prudent to take note of one's vulnerability with regard to the tenuous attachment to that bottom rung of the ladder that many others have taken years to climb, and schedule one's financial commitments in that light. That many fail to overcome the "must buy a house in HK now' fever that grips so many, may work well for some , but for those at the bottom in times such as these, it may also develop into a most undesireable state should they become redundant under that clause. For those that took the gamble, I applaud and hope that things work well and that their gamble pays off.

However, in the unlikely event that the Company really is up to its @ss in crocodiles, it may well be that the Company will unilaterally impose such redundancies in the prescribed order, and were that to happen, only then would I become convinced the Company has actually hit the hard times they are currently bleating about, but until that time, I agree with many others on here, that it's all smoke and mirrors.

So until that happens, keep your eye on the big picture and remember who your colleagues are and who is surreptitiously slipping his hand in your back pocket whilst dangling shiny fake goods in front of you.

Brgds to all

[AeroBoss]

Please Max, no insults, just trying to discuss in a democratic grown up manner:

For the company, redundancy means severance pay, retraining because you end up with overcrewed on one side and undercrewed on the other side, and an immediate dismissal of the (unfortunate) guys that are elected for flight safety issues. You don't want a guy about to lose his job to be flying an aeroplane full of pax! Unfair, maybe but life is unfair sometimes.

So redundancy=major headache+lots of $$$$. Plus its double edged: if they get it wrong and rehire the guys they've just sacked, before it is worth sacking (typically 1 year), then they look bad (I know...:ok:) or even "badder" because their assesment of the business was flawed and now it is out in the open they are inept. Furthermore, the shareholder is p!ssed off because the company has lost all the severance pay for nothing.

THAT IS WHY IT IS A TOUGH DECISION unlike SLS, and they'd better get it right... Redundancy is only worth when the company is struggling financially. WHICH CX IS NOT. I am not saying business is good at the moment, but by starting SLS, we open the floodgates to oblivion.

Where do we draw the line...
Big question is, today they want 1/2/3/4 weeks from me. If next year they want you to go 50% part time, maybe you can survive, I cannot.

I stick to my 7 year cycle. DO NOT GO TO THE BOTTOM of a (ANY) seniority list (from) 7 years after a downturn in aviation (9/11)

BTW, I am not talking out of my backside, I have been there, like most people who have been in the industry for more than 10 years. It is part and parcel of the aviation industry. Now is the time were I would like to rip the benefits of having made the right choices and enjoy a bit of protection.

I would love to keep the juniors and your generosity/altruism is commandable, I just don't think it is practical/applicable.

Any time you change airline, you take a risk. The GFC was created by people who took risks, and now I am going to pay tax through the nose to make up for it. Sick and tired of bailing people out...

Anyway, we are mere pawns in a game of chess. And sorry NR, people will talk about it in the flight deck because it is our families you are affecting, not just a number on a bank account. To you guys up there, money is a game, we do not have that luxury.

Good luck to you all. But please, agree to disagree and stick together.

PS: Make it kown to other staff that CX is giving us nothing less than an ULTIMATUM on things that have got nothing to do with SLS

[volarecantare]

Would you be opposed to me taking a hit of 100K hit in order to keep you in a job if this were the scenario? I bet not. It could be you tomorrow, remember that.

[Dragon69]

Actually Volarecantare yes I would be opposed, even if it meant saving my job, so long as first in, last out was respected.

[volarecantare]

Ahh so its the "principle" of the matter and you would happily be made redundant for that "principle". If thats so I commend you and your very supporting wife and kids.

I would have more respect for this stated principle of yours if you were in fact on of the 250 lambs at the bottom. Mind you I see you are possible one of our KA brothers, in that case you may well soon be nearer that bottom than it seems.

Now honestly again, should one be, for say personal reasons wanting a redundancy package to suit their own personal lifestyle decisions (eg wanting to get out of HK and cash in the chips) they can hardly claim "principle" to be their reason, it is still self serving.

NO ONE should have to loose their job if they do not wish to when a few weeks SL from their colleagues could save them. Sometimes people need to rise above principle and do what is right instead.

That said if indeed there are people wishing to leave then this should be addressed first by the company offering voluntary redundancy packages.... maybe they fear the exodus ;)

[Dragon69]

volarecantare

I think the real issue here is whether SLS is really needed to avoid redundancies. Most people do not think so, despite what the propaganda machine is pumping out. After years of dishonest conduct, years of underhanded tactics, there is now a bona fide distrust toward our managers or anything that is offered by them. If the reason behind SLS was genuine, you certainly would have seen the pilot body be first to volunteer to save colleagues.

[volarecantare]

I agree that it is important to look at the real issues. However some of the postings and comments here on the sites are ill informed, puerile and damaging to the group as a whole.

However what you said above is clear an important point in itself, that you would prefer to loose your job within seniority rather than have colleagues take unpaid leave.... is that a sincere comment or are you egging in a roundabout way for a redundancy package?

As a matter of interest, how many people would take voluntary redundancy?

[Nullaman]

As a matter of interest, how many people would take voluntary redundancy

Me........If it was pro-rata to time served.

N

[Grivation]

I see CoS08 has a 6 month redundancy payment rather than the 3 on CoS99.

Who's it gonna be cheaper to get rid of?

[Fly747]

VC you got me humming it all day!
Of course I wouldn't mind you taking a hit to save my job, but we are working in HKG, the land of the fast buck, model capitalism in a communist state. I am not a social security system, nor a means of funds for a company that wants to hedge it's bets on redundancy. I believe we will be seeing redundancies anyway, maybe announced not long after the SLS scheme closes and probably using the Swine Flu excuse. Then how will we all feel?

[Busbert]

I think that the general consensus in Hello Kitty City is that the pilots would be happy to see the last in first out rule applied to get rid of the DECs DEFOs and the 'scabs' that came in during the recruitment ban.

That would improve the seniority list for the whinging lifers that are so aggrieved by RA65 and DE officers.

It all goes to show the lack of brotherhood amongst the pilot communities, and it shows that the values of fraternity are pretty weak in the CX flying community.

[Exiled Aviator]

Trevfly.

You need therapy, move on or get your facts right.

[volarecantare]

You are an annoying little ****! Have you still not gone to seek help for your embarrassingly obvious bitterness issues.

What you are screams so loud its impossible to hear what you are saying...
Your disgusting little rants against people who had either the courage or the foresight to take what was a very lonely and risky decision to move DEC to CX and your relentless attempts to worm around this site trying to evoke an attack on them is vile. Its obviously you had neither the passport nor the spine to have taken such a decision and you are still seething.

When you are the bottom of our list, shivering in fear you will be one person who deserves it and lets hope the rest of us have some more integrity then than you seem to have now.

You are a disgrace to your colleagues and uniform.

[AeroBoss]

Crossbones:

Thank you for calling me a genius.

Words fail me as to why even on an issue as complex as this, people need to insult each other or call each other names.

But anyway, I will reply in a calm and collected manner.

All I was implying in my post is that it was MY own rule and when people have come to me in the past for advice on changing airline that is what I have told them. I am not saying it is an exact science, but so far it has worked!

As far as redundancies is concerned:

I certainly don't like them anymore than you do. I did suffer the consequences once upon a time. My experience is that more often than not companies get it wrong, knee-jerk and make people redundant and hire them back the next month. (A friend of mine was given the boot on the Friday (after 9/11), got a phone call on the Monday to pick up his original roster. Walked away with all the severance cash (and stress of course I grant you that!)).

That is why when you join, the first few years, you sit tight and hope for the best.

I don't know how bad this thing is going to get, and I just wonder now where we are going to draw the line. Not everyone can afford to take "voluntary"SLS. I know some will sign out of fear but with the track record of CX, who can blame them. A job is better than no job.
I am all for voluntary UPL to save jobs, that is what I thought I was doing.

I would be quite useless at running an airline at the moment (or anytime in fact:uhoh:) but I don't think the way CX is dealing with this crisis on FOP side or this whole SLS thing is necessary (signing of a contract that does not exist yet etc...). Having said this, they have what they want: clans forming with people ranting at each other.

And by the way, even with Cos 08, it looks like we are still going to have freighter guys, UFOs on bases out of seniority etc (not blaming anybody personally: we all take what we are given). All of a sudden, nothing changes!

Like the sentence about small willy syndrome stuff.

This is just discussion. No need to get so wound up if you disagree. Never forget we are colleagues not family even if 99% of us get on like a house on fire:ok:

Look forward to flying with you;)

AB

[volarecantare]

I hear you Fly, but "what if" discussions are ..well.. just that. I am just saying if one can afford take SL for ones own good (some of us need a rest) and it helps save a few jobs its a good thing. That is within our control...if the scenario you outline below happens, or a worse one, well that's a whole other discussion and we may have more to worry about than just our jobs.

As for the hummin.....check this out...enjoy...note 00.38 seconds...oh yeah.... better than watching pprune :ok:

YouTube - Dean Martin - Volare/On an Evening in Roma (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YtKrXbGEAd4)

[MACH.88]

Quote from GRIVATION-"I see CoS08 has a 6 month redundancy payment rather than the 3 on CoS99."

I just had a look at COS99 and came up with this...

Everyone gets a "Redundancy Termination Benefit of six months' salary.

So we are all in the same boat on that accord. I looked at CX COS99, Veta COS99, and COS08. So redundancies would be from the bottom up.

Hope this helps to keep the info accurate.

MACH.88:cool:

[happy nightflyer]

:sad:Forgive me for being naive but please could one of the complaining (5 years or so with CX) wan***s explain why CX who are trying very hard to get the entire pilot body onto COS08 would make the only pilots who are currently on COS08 redundant!

[Flap10]

Volare,

Your gesture of giving up $100k to save the jobs of those who have been here less than a year is noble. But may I remind you that people weren't willing to pay 3% a month to support 49 senior employees against an unfair dismissal. For some new B scale Captains with four kids, $100k is going to be quite a pinch. Everyone has different financial requirements. Maybe for you $100k will not have a great impact, but for some it will.

Furthermore, the company has already stated that they cannot guarantee 14 consecutive days off, let alone 28, so I am afraid don't expect to be lying on a tropical beach listening to Volarecantare (great song BTW).


I am a DESO from a Uk airline



So hide behind your small dick pseudonyms and chant every man for himself


So Crossbones, you left a UK airline to come to Cathay, was this decision made for our benefit, or purely for your benefit??? When you leave one airline for another, you knowingly accept the inherent risks that that move brings.

Does anyone have a threshold, or quantified the amount of pay cuts they would have to endure before they say enough is enough???


I was at Balpa before this and even in the worst of times no one ever wanted redundancies.


Not wanting redundancies and not being able to avoid them are two different issues. Most pilots in the US take pay cuts to ensure the survival of the company, not to avoid redundancies.

Crossbones, would you take a four week pay cut to allow Cathay to keep recruiting new pilots????