The Air Hong Kong situation

[Saturn]

I have been reading with great interest all this about Air Hong Kong. It seems there were agreements made between CX and the AOA on this and CX is just simply ignoring the agreements made. Legal or Illegal, doesn't matter the intent and understanding was there, so some thought.

What will happen, who knows but A LOT of people are upset and interpret this as ASL part deux, The Wrath of Khan. So what does that mean exactly, well, for one, loss of faith in CX, loss of opportunities for current CX pilot's and DEC's again when CX pilot's could (and have been) flying those very aircraft.

I would say that some CX pilot's will take this personally and may have a vendetta against Air Hong Kong pilot's. What would you think/do if this was happening to you?

I also think a very hostile atmosphere may be set up during training and some T's&C's, may not be happy about this either. Ask some of the CX DEC's about their training and subsequent training/checks. Those DEC's are a bit nervous right now and a few did fail and more have recently failed and/or being watched. There have been some issues!

I would perhaps caution any Air Hong Hong pilot (particularly the 747 guys) to be careful in your decision in joining this company. It may very well get ugly, you may or may not stay employed and you may or may not get through training. I for one would be nervous about this especially if guys have enough resentment towards me.

I would also ask that you please think about what you are doing when joining Air Hong Kong as it is possibly being used as a tactic against pilots from CX. Is this something you think is just? Would you want it done to you and affect your career? Do you really even care?

Perhaps some unity would help and with that perhaps help getting guys on at CX with better T's&C's. Division will only hurt everone.

I ask you to kindly consider all the consequences. This is a dirty trick being done by CX. Perhaps you might not see it or agree but again there were agreements in place.

All the best in your decision.:=

[19weeler]

I'm sure you considered the same consequences Saturn when you joined cx as a B scaler!!!

When will we ever learn?

What a joke we are!!!

[cxorcist]

19 wheeler,

Assuming you are an A scaler, what did you do to stop the introduction of B-scales. I am guessing a lot less than what many of the B scalers are doing to protect our T&Cs against AHK, C scale, int'l cadets, etc. I realize "you've got yours", but get a clue!

Cxorcist

[tedwilliams68]

These 744s will be used for extra lift on the existing DHL routes. What problem do Cathay guys have with that? AHK is doing DHL express freight. If AHK were to get JAL 744s would that make it ok for you guys? If AHK were to order 777f to operate on existing DHL would that also make it ok for you guys? :ugh:

[bobble]

Good one Ted, fair points and aptly put. I see no problem with fellow pilots applying for jobs that have been advertised. Just because the AOA cannot get its poo into a pile you have to vent your spleen on individuals who have done nothing wrong. Now you fight fair or teep twyet.

[cxorcist]

These are CX -400s. Yes, they will be used for extra DHL express freight capacity, but do you really believe they won't be using them for CX bulk cargo at he same time. What will these airplanes do during the day? Sit there like the A300s? I think not.

We all know this is another attack on CX pilots. How does it make sense for AHK to bring on another type when CX (who owns 60% of AHK) already operates that type very efficiently and cost effectively. CX is attempting to outsource its regional freighter flying under the guise of AHK and it's legitimate DHL express cargo business. Why? Consolidation may be part of the move, but why not consolidate into CX rather than AHK? CX already flies -400BCFs. They could even paint them yellow and white and write DHL on the side. Perhaps this move allows CX to recruit new pilots for growth outside the failing int'l cadet program???

This is definitely an attack on CX pilots whom have paid dearly for the removal of freighter scales. The move destroys any resemblance of trust and respect between CX and its pilots. Outsiders, you do not want to put yourself between these two groups.

[joebanana]

Let's not forget that Cathay shut down the KA freighter operation because it was impossible to make money from such a small fleet. We had 8 aeroplanes at that time.

Thin edge of the wedge.

[19weeler]

cxorcist, I believe you have misinterpreted my post. Please read it again in conjunction with saturn's first post.

I am saying the exact same thing you are in your reply to me - although in a sarcastic manner.

I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy and ignorance of saturn's post. He came here as a B scaler, and is now warning future AHK pilots to not join?

I say "we" never learn, and "we" are a joke. I include myself in this pathetic group of selfish pilots. As long as there are pilots amongst us who blame B scalers for the B scale and C, D, E, F, etc. scalers for their inferior conditions, We are doomed.
:ugh:

[Saturn]

Ok let me answer this. Firstly, I joined CX and B-Scales already exsisted. The B Scale was signed by a majority of the CX pilot's so I did not accept a new scale when I joined. Second, I could have come when ASL exsisted and chose NOT too. Third, I honored the hiring ban.

My point is that CX told us that they would NOT expand AHK past the A300's they already had purchased/leased.

It is not hypocrisy and ignorance as you say. I am pointing out that the situation is deception on the part of CX. I did not deceive nor was I decieved when I joined CX directly. If you think I am hypocritical what about the new cadets?

AHK is being used as a way to create a new carrier as is Air China. I am pointing out that there may be a fight against it and since guys were asking about it I wanted to post what was going on. I am NOT making this up and it is not being taken on by me.

[doogie8984]

Ted,

Sounds like you only have half the story. You need to dig a bit deeper into Cathay history to find out why CX pilots are so pissed off at Cathay’s attempt to outsource jobs.

It’s no secret, there is a **** loads of money in freight. Cathay is making a heap of money out of freight, and have said their expansion is only limited by capacity. With the dash 8 orders being delayed until the end of the year the problem is only compounded.

Why would Cathay give 4 freighters to AHK then? It is simple, AHK can operate the freighters a lot cheaper than Cathay can. With Cathay owning 60% of AHK this is easy money for them.

There has been a battle, for over 10 years, between the HKAOA and the Company. I don’t intend to go into too much detail, but there has been ASL, Freighter Commands, Oasis Direct Entry Commands, Dragon Commands. The list of seniority breaches goes on and on. Finally last year, the HKAOA, struck a deal with the company to say no more freighter commands- all new commands will be on Pax B scale in CX seniority. However, for this to happen, the first 3 years of Command Pay scale will be at a reduced rate in order to compensate for no more “cheap commands”.

Now 6 months down the track CX BCF’s are going to another company to be flown by cheaper pilots. This is after Cathay promised the HKAOA that AHK would only operate A300. It seems Cathay have well and truly outmaneuvered the HKAOA, there is very little the HKAOA can do, and I can see in 10 years all CX freighters will be operated by AHK on reduced conditions (c scale). To add insult to injury Cathay want CX Trainers to train AHK pilots on CX aircraft- effectively training themselves out of jobs.

While I’m sure the Cathay Trainers will be professional and cordial, the CX training system is notoriously still one of the toughest in the world. Many a job has been lost, and many egos have been crushed. If AHK pilots are going to train on a CX aircraft, and be trained to CX standards, they must be prepared for the wrath of the CX training system. With no exposure to the CX system, the failure rate will be high. This is not a threat, I’m just stating facts. Of all the Oasis Captains over 50% of them failed- all with at least 2 year on the 400, some with 20 years in BA. The 50% who passed were generally ex-Cathay Captains.

I do feel for the AHK pilots, through no fault of their own, they are unwilling entering into a battle that has been raging for 10 years. This is not the fault of the AHK pilots, but as this is a threat to the career of a CX pilot, am sure there will be at least some tension of the flight deck.

[Fly747]

JB, if you can't make money from a small fleet then why start another?
I agree that it is probably part of a plan to make the freighter fleet separate from "mainline".

[555orange]

Saturn, your situation and the air HkG guys are the same. Air HKG is just another form of the b scale you joined under. Air HKG existed when those pilots joined, and so did Cathay, and everyone knew about it, same as your explanation for B scale. The only way to fix this prob is for you guys to have solidarity and bargain with the company, and enforce with labor action. You guys could potentially even get your a scale back in these times if you could band together. Look at what dragon got last time. Beaten to death this... But had to be reminded.

[bobble]

There is no 'hiring ban', the AOA has been silent on this issue, no one has been laid off to create the vacancies at AHK, the aircraft could as easily been shunted off to another CX subsidiary, etc etc Consequently those pilots who wish to accept whatever the terms are at AHK are doing nothing wrong. If there is an issue between the AOA and CX over the set up as being organised then get on and fight the company. But, as usual, you won't and will instead like a pack of childish bullies attempt to intimidate the new joiners at AHK.

[404 Titan]

bobble

You obviously have no idea what is going on behind the scenes. If you did you would realise all AOA members received details late last week of exactly what CX is doing and how it is in contravention of deals made as recently as last years. If you or anyone else wants to get in the middle of that fight you do so at your own risk. History is unfortunately repeating itself and you will only end up being the meat in the sandwich.

[tedwilliams68]

But don't worry Bobble. If you end up on just the A300 you'll be allright.

[bobble]

OK so the AOA have registered their complaint with CX management, this is as it should be. Nonetheless, the individuals who apply to an advertisement and then get selected should not be targets for abuse and villification. The AOA needs to do its job and convince CX that they are heading in the wrong direction. That is my point.

[cxorcist]

Gents,

Good debate. I think all have valid points. FWIW, I think the AOA does have its "poo in one pile" and is addressing this issue appropriately. How much force used will be determined by the membership and remains to be seen. I hope all the CX pilots view this issue as worth while because it is. This type of outsourcing could easily occur with Dragonair or some other acquired pax carrier. Imagine what would happen if CX decided Oz was too much hassle to onshore and decided to use KA or some other pilots for Australia services.

For those that think there is harassment of AHK applicants here, I do not see it that way. I see an education. They have a right to know what is going on here and whether or not they want to insert themselves into that. Right or wrong, they will not be treated very well by those at CX, especially by the -400 training department. Claims to the contrary are without precedent. I would want to know if I were joining a carrier growing specifically to undercut another pilot group. Personally, I would steer clear but can also see why some piston driver from down-under might jump at the opportunity.

IMO, it is perfectly valid to discourage new-joining when those being hired will be used as industrial pawns in the future. I have loudly discouraged international cadets whom will one day live in HKG on an SO wage without housing. Not a wink of sleep lost over having done so. In fact, I would lose sleep if I did not speak up.

This AHK plan to expand into the -400 is devious at best. At worst, it is illegal and may have to be determined in court although I would prefer a well-timed round of CC by the AOA. My guess is that we will have a plethora of issues to be upset about once the non-pay negotiations start up later this year. The AHK expansion will just be icing on the cake. Any good will from the pay deal has been used up. Might as well turn up the heat early for the next round...

[missingblade]

Jizz - It is obvious to all of us that the AOA strategically chose not to address the AHK freighter issue UNTILL the pay deal was through - If they started kicking up a stink about the freighters a few months ago the pay deal would have failed. So their plan was get some cash and then pick a fight.

I think this is one of the reasons they pushed so hard for us to take the deal - there are several big fights coming and no pay deal will happen during.

[Fly747]

Imagine what would happen if CX decided Oz was too much hassle to onshore and decided to use KA or some other pilots for Australia services.

cxorcist, you hit the nail on the head there. I've heard that negotiations are not going very well dahnunder!

[Joker's Wild]

From today's SCMP,

Simon Parry
Feb 08, 2011

Cathay Pacific (SEHK: 0293) is facing another potential showdown with its pilots just weeks after reaching a pay-rise agreement with them. This time the dispute is over the company's plan to change the basis of its leasing of cargo planes to Air Hong Kong, ultimately cutting Cathay Pacific pilots out of the operation.

The pilots' anger is prompted by their fears that the new arrangement may cost jobs and could lead to the airline's entire cargo operation being outsourced.

Cathay Pacific wants to "dry lease" four Boeing 747 freighters - meaning just the aircraft without crew - to Air Hong Kong, replacing an existing arrangement whereby Cathay Pacific pilots fly the Cathay 747s on Air Hong Kong services and use an Air Hong Kong call sign (known as a "wet lease"). Cathay Pacific owns 60 per cent of the airline, which handles DHL express deliveries, while DHL holds the remaining 40 per cent.

Cathay Pacific pilots have been asked to help train Air Hong Kong pilots to fly the Boeing 747s, a situation the Aircrew Officers Association (AOA) warns may lead to tension on the flight deck as pilots train crew who will "take their jobs".

In a circular to members, the AOA says it believes the dry-leasing arrangement is a step that might ultimately lead to Cathay Pacific's entire cargo operation being outsourced to Air Hong Kong, whose pilots are paid less than those at Cathay.

The airline currently has a fleet of 24 Boeing 747 freighters flying to 38 destinations. The circular warns pilots that the dry-leasing deal would have "serious long term effects on your career". Air Hong Kong has a fleet of eight Airbus A300-600 freighters and serves 12 destinations.

In a letter to the airline's Director of Flight Operations Richard Hall, signed by AOA chairman Peter Vinna and his counterparts from offshore Cathay pilot bases in Australia and Canada, the AOA calls for the plan to be scrapped.

The letter says the dry lease would be in breach of a 2003 arrangement for Cathay Pacific pilots to fly the Boeings for Air Hong Kong, and that the union believes management has an "ulterior motivation" for the step.

It says the training of Air Hong Kong pilots by Cathay Pacific crew "raises the distinct possibility that tensions will exist on the flight deck while these duties are being performed since our pilots are being asked to train crews that will take their jobs".

In an apparent reference to possible pilot action, the letter says: "What is most unfortunate about this whole situation is that it has the potential to completely undo any goodwill that we were able to achieve by reaching the current pay deal."

A Cathay Pacific spokeswoman said Air Hong Kong wanted to operate the aircraft itself and lease further planes "to meet the demands of its business".

Cathay currently has 10 new freighter aircraft on order. "All these aircraft will be operated by pilots who currently work for or will be recruited to work for the airline," she said.

"Opportunities for progression and promotion on the rapidly modernising fleet of aircraft have never been better."

JW

[FR8R H8R]

A few points if I may.

First of all, the AHK new joiners or wannabes are pretty obvious. Yes, ted and booble, that would be you. Not exactly a beehive you want to poke your carrot into at the moment but thanks for the input.

Next, why can't pilot's (sic) ever figure out how to use an apostrophe? It's pilots. Not pilot's. Sad. (Grammar police have been notified).

The CX "spokeswoman" spewed the standard drivel. Upgrades for all and rapidly expanding yadda yadda blah blah blah. I think I threw up in my mouth a little.

Now, on to the AHK thing. Of course CX is looking for a way to save themselves $$. That's not a shock. Every company in the industry is looking for a regional, a LCC or some other avenue of outsourcing work to save a buck or two. Europe, Oz, USA, take your pick. It's been done before and will continue to do so.

Whether or not AHK takes over CX freight remains to be seen. Who actually knows the percentage of DHL on the wet lease flights to and fro SIN? That would give an idea if there will be a plan to fill the 744 with CX cargo or if it's legitimately DHL business inside.

Hard to say whether the trainers will have a short or long cattle prod during the AHK training. (BTW, when does this training begin?) It would be nice if they could hold personal feelings out of the equation but we all know that human beings have a difficult time doing that. Good luck to the first batch of AHK Boeing recruits.

With 4x744, what will happen to the A300s? (Please note: no apostrophe required here) Will they be spares? New destinations? Take over CX cargo from lightly-loaded destinations? Where will the 744 operate (besides SIN)?

How will the AOA handle this battle? Is it really worth a huge ****storm for 4 horrid, noisy, beat-to-death airframes? Maybe. Why not the stink about the Air China operation? Because it's not on the same ramp? How did Lufthansa pilots fare after their showdown over Jade? I'll have to look that up but it couldn't have gone too well considering they're part of Aero Logic now too.

Time will tell how this plays out. Until a yellow 744 shows up in CLK, it's difficult to get all the panties bunched up.

To all a good night.

[bobble]

Good post Freight, pity about the grammar lesson though. And, by the way, I most certainly am not a potential employee of AHK or an actual one.

[I'mbatman]

A point has been brought up that I also have been wondering. Why the big deal about just AHK? What about Air China as well???? It is the exact same thing. CX is seriously outsourcing flying. I'm ready as usual to stand behind an AOA recommendation. It will be interesting to see what they recommend. Can we 'grieve' this ala US unions, or do we need to literally sue the company to prevent this. Does anyone know the exact documents that are supposed to prevent this scenario? And are the legally binding or just some fluff written between the company and the AOA?

IB

[BIG MACH]

As the 747-8s arrive the BCFs will go. The BCFs were only ever an interim measure and an engineering exercise to help CX sell its ex Pax aircraft when the time comes. Most of the pax aircraft will be converted into freighters and sold on to freight operators with whom we currently compete.

AHK will eventually operate those BCFs on their own AOC. CX is retaining control in the short term in case there are further delays to the -8. For the same reason the departure of BCFs to Air China was delayed longer than planned.

The BCF is less than ideal for the CX operation. It is heavier than a dedicated freighter by about 4 tonnes, it is nearly 7 tonnes light in its landing weight and the ZFW is short by 12 tonnes. It cannot do a cost effective job on CX routes. In 12 months most of them will be gone. If AHK wants to compete with CX on CX routes it will not be able to do so using BCFs. CX operated certain routes on behalf of DHL, but these were never CX freighter routes.

There is nothing to stop AHK, under the terms of its own AOC, buying -8s for itself. What are we to do then? Go head to head with CX management because a rival is expanding?

There is a case to be made for not training another operators crews on CX aircraft. But trying to stop AHK expanding in the long term is a non-starter.

[jonathon68]

The "big deal" with AHK is that it is Management agreed to limit the operation to narrow body freighter aircraft with the exclusion of the A300F. The 744 breaches that agreement.

There is no issue with Air China Cargo, just the usual grumbles.

[Steve the Pirate]

jonathon68

Management agreed to limit the operation to narrow body freighter aircraft with the exclusion of the A300F.Where can I find a copy of that agreement?

BIG MACH

There is a case to be made for not training another operators crews on CX aircraft.Is this allowed or not?

STP

[xdc9er]

The agreement had a use by date.(expiration)
X

[Forward CofG]

xdc9er,

The Widebody scope clause is in effect. There is no expiration date.

[Steve the Pirate]

Forward CofG

BIG MACH states:

AHK will eventually operate those BCFs on their own AOC.If this is the case, does the clause that you refer to apply or not?

STP

[MD330]

There is nothing to stop AHK, under the terms of its own AOC, buying -8s for itself. What are we to do then? Go head to head with CX management because a rival is expanding?



Absolutely correct! Especially with the ex CX General running AHK. Its a buisness world my friends! ;)


The 744 breaches that agreement.



Agreements, contracts, promises etc are all in paper or verbal, all to be or subjected to negotiation. History repeats! :ok: Go back to the colonial days and remind ourselves.

Lets see what the AOA can do. :ugh:

Good luck!

Happy landings

[Che Xindamail]

The AOA can and will do nothing.

They lost the fight with CX management the day after the 49-ers were fired. If the fleet had been grounded that day they would be in a totally different situation today. As it turned out, all flights departed, operations were normal, because the fear-factor entered the equation.

Battle lost, management won. And they will win the war.

To resist the AHK situation is futile. Management will get their way, CX trainers will do as they're told and train AHK new-joiners on the -400.

Why? Because fear is factor for all of us.

[Saturn]

Sadly, that is quite correct. Market forces is what will drive the future. Again, sadly, this is no longer a career airline. Why would anyone stay now? Double tax, no more bases, no pension. It's almost as if they want people to leave. The AOA had a real chance here recently and did nothing.

[Captain Dart]

Che, you haven't got your facts right and I question your motives for your post.

The company anticipated much of the fleet to be grounded when the 49ers were fired; they could then tear up contracts due to an 'illegal' strike and rehire on their own (reduced of course), terms; a 'lockout'. CX, or its consultants, may have 'read the manual' after a mass resignation by Australian domestic pilots in 1989 which resulted in a very similar situation which in that case eventually worked in management's favour.

CX was embarrassed when a strike wasn't called, and the boys sat at home on Reserve while our passengers flew in the dodgy chartered aircraft that had been pre-booked.

With the ongoing legal costs, compensations, bad press, ill-will etc CX are still paying the price for this ill-advised action over a decade later. Subsequent legal action by based 49ers led to foreign tax authorities investigating CX's basing structure and costing the shareholders more money.

Further publicity about the infamous 'Star Chamber' hit the press, coincidentally, after the illegal flypast by a management pilot in a CX B 777 with passengers on board on its delivery flight. There's also a book about to come out on the 49ers which will again bring some public attention to the whole disaster. I'm sure that it will sell reasonably well in Hong Kong. Hardly a victory for Cathay Pacific, Che.

The AOA emerged smaller due to 'quitters', but the remaining core financially assisted the 49ers for years and became the basis for a much stronger group with no illusions as to the scruples and competence of who we work for.

And what's more, many CX pilots are tired, pizzed off, are suffering dreadful rosters and disruption due to crew shortage, and there are more and more alternate jobs out there; there have been 12 resignations from Australian FO's alone with, anecdotally, many more to come from North America. Response to CX's rip-off 'fast track cadet' scheme was distinctly, and embarrassingly, underwhelming. They are supposedly attempting damage control, but once your swimming pool has been pooped in, it takes a long time for your friends to come back to it after it has been cleaned; further crew shortage.

Many CX crew feel that there would be nothing to lose with taking a hard line regarding the AHK issue. Prospective AHK joiners should do their research thoroughly as to the real situation and who they will be working for. Rant over.

[boxjockey]

Dart,

Very well said!!

box

[Fly747]

Dart, best post from anyone, except Toss, for some time!

[Flap10]

The company wanted the fleet grounded when the 49ers were fired; they could then tear up the contracts due to an 'illegal' strike and rehire on their own (reduced of course), terms; a 'lockout'. CX, or its consultants, may have 'read the manual' after a mass resignation by Australian domestic pilots in 1989 which resulted in a very similar situation which in that case eventually worked in management's favour.

CX was embarrassed when a strike wasn't called, and the boys sat at home on Reserve while our passengers flew in the dodgy chartered aircraft that had been pre-booked.WHAT UTTER CRAP.......by a membership that was too scared to do anything so they come up with a sorry ass excuse as to why nothing was done. :yuk::yuk::yuk::yuk:. Half the membership were too scared to participate in MSS....and you actualy believe not going on strike was a tactical decision???? Give me a f#@*ng break!!

You do remember how we all got new contracts and were told sign or be fired right?? They don't need us to go on an "illegal strike" to reduce our CoS.


The AOA emerged smaller due to 'quitters', but the remaining core financially assisted the 49ers for years and became the basis for a much stronger group with no illusions as to the scruples and competence of who we work for.


Yup the same members that eventually sold out the 49ers because the extra dues were becoming an inconvenience..

Che's post is spot on!

[Captain Dart]

OK Flap, seeing you know so much about it I've edited the first part of my post to more general terms; it was my opinion, having been involved in the 'lockout' scenario I referred to.

I assume from your language and use of multiple vomiting emoticons, very easy to post on an anonymous forum, that you feel very strongly about events of that time. I take it that you supported the 49ers all the way to the courtroom steps, were or are an AOA committee member or volunteer, and that you harangued the non-members, quitters and MSS non-compliers to their very faces. Funny how I don't recall a motion for a strike ballot from anybody, which would have included yourself; or had you written everybody off even then? And I'm sure that you will be buying the book as your token of ongoing support.

Relevant to the thread, I look forward to hearing from you what YOU are prepared to DO about this AHK situation.