GC votes needed

[superfrozo]

AOA members,

please log on and vote for the latest GC nominee. Without >10% membership votes, no result will occur.
As the GC is undermanned at present, every willing participating helps.

:ok:

[CXpletive]

Judging by the result, I would suggest that the membership has voted!

[superfrozo]

CXpletive: true, but apart from the two recent "unsuccessful" nominees, there is another member whose nomination and manifesto may have been overlooked in the holiday season "noise".

I urge all members to login and review this member's manifesto and consider your vote, as the voting window closes shortly.

Democracy... it works b*tches ! :}

[BusyB]

superfrozo,

there were totally inadequate manifestos for the previous 2 applicants. No flying history or even details of current fleet:ugh:

[CokeZero]

I think they need 1 or 2 more freighter boys on the GC :ooh:

[AnAmusedReader]

His agenda or somebody's else?

I've seen lots of items on the agenda of outstanding issues listed in updates but nothing ever seems to get done. Can't blame CX for everything the GC hasn't done in the last couple of years.

And yes I do my moaning on the AOA forums as well.

[cpdude]

Thanks to the three elected "seniors" and the one employee (the union within the union), the HKAOA is doomed. Better duck and cover as things are going to heat up.

[AnAmusedReader]

Hey Dude, not sure it's doomed but if it is, so are we. What about the one employee's assistant? Does anyone know what he does or even who he is? The two of them are getting buckets full of expat package for nothing IMO.

[cpdude]

Get enough new GC members in the union to squash the not so fab 4 and it should recover! The employee we all need to worry about is DD.

[CX-HOR]

Oh thank you AOA for:
Credit free Reserve (Yeah they won't abuse that!)
Pitiful credit for leave (No workstacking I'm sure)
Our new Rostering Practises (who only wanted to work 700 hrs a year)
All the accomplishments of DD and JF, really see the value in these guys
RA65 without a 25 year housing agreement (thats not going to bite us in the future)
Basings disasters
Still not having the balls to say don't work on G days
Better stop getting a headache over all these improvements to my contract:D

[Fenwicksgirl]

From what I hear the current Freighter Captains on the GC are basically only interested in their own lot. Can't see much of the outstanding issues being sorted whilst self serving GC members only work on the issues affecting them. They are trying to get the numbers up due to them lacking votes.
I read their manifestos and they c,aimed they were keen to work on other issues etc, but alas if it ain't about Freighter guys coming to HKG on expat terms, they are not interested.
Done my time in the GC, it ain't easy as some of you all think. DD doing best he can with the tools he has. W need strong leadership from the Prez and by all accounts we don't have it this time. GD is good man and trying but I believe he won't lead us out of the current mess we are in. Good luck though GD and to the rest of the GC, but remember who you are all representing!!

[1200firm]

Agree. As far as I can work out FCN's relocating back to HK want expat terms AND to stay as Captains, even though there are hundreds of HK based F/O's that are senior to them. I guess the same might hold true for Freighter F/O's moving to HK. There are probably lots of S/O's senior to them.
The bottom line is that if you move to HK on expat terms then you get the fleet/rank that your seniority allows. END OF STORY. I've seen this issue being discussed elsewhere & the only question I had was; "why is it being discussed?".

[jacobus]

1200 firm..(you sure it wasn't 1350 smooth ?) Amen to that..

[cpdude]

There is so much to respond to I don't know where to start.

Fenwicksgirl...
I agree that a 6-7 year seniority Freighter CN should not receive CN expat benefits in HKG but should he be forced on terms worth less than SO benefits? We all cry about seniority being the basis then why doesn't the HKAOA fight to ensure benefits are awarded in accordance with seniority? IE. he should receive the package of benefits afforded to his seniority which would be FO's benefits at 6-7 years. This would be fair to everyone to reinforce the basis of seniority and those that oppose that are still looking for retribution which will continue to hurt any seniority argument in other issues.

CX-HOR...
JF hasn't been employed by the HKAOA for over 6 months now. It's entirely a DD show.

Curtain Rod...
What you are suggesting is basically what's been attempted for many years. It's proven not to work but many continue to sing the same tune. Also, you make it sound like it's entirely up to the GC. Well, in one respect it is but they can't direct or control anything anymore.

I'll throw a question out here to everyone...
Why is it the HKAOA can't even sit down with the Company and discuss something as simple as Freighter PXing but the Canadians were able to negotiate an entire CA (COS)? Do you think a different approach was taken or do you think they slammed the company every opportunity they got to win their contract?

Many of you have been through a messy divorce. Did you accomplish more by taking an aggressive stance in courts or do you think the individuals who practiced reason and tried to stay calm came out with more than their shirts? It's all about human nature and respecting your fellow person even if you can't stand them!

The not so fab 4 haven't learned this and I fear they won't ever learn this tact. This is why relations with the Company are bound to get much worse for the HKAOA types rather then better.

As for the Canadians, the HKAOA needs to take a page from their playbook and learn to communicate without anger, frustration or threats. They need to rebuild the trust with the company and vice versa. Only then can issues be resolved and the threats from the GMA will subside.

CPDude

[BusyB]

CPDude,

Pray tell us all what the Canadians got?

Next, tell us what they gave away?

Then tell us what COS improvement we were about to get that they blew and prevented everyone getting?

The only reason they were able to sit down with CX is because they were using Canadian Labour Laws and the Aussies are talking because they are using Australian Labour Laws. If you can tell me what the HKAOA can use to make CX sit and discuss items I'll be really impressed.

We were promised by the CEO 18 months ago that there would be more working between the AOA and CX. Unfortunately he is not prepared to stand by his promises.

We are all a team of course!!!:confused:

[Sqwak7700]

If you can tell me what the HKAOA can use to make CX sit and discuss items I'll be really impressed.

That's easy, contract compliance.

[BusyB]

Sqwak7700,

Are you a management mole?

From the other thread
"Most people practice it already without shouting about it. Of those who don't, the ones that would change their practices are such a small percentage it will make sod-all difference.":ugh:

[cpdude]

Hi BusyB,

From what I understand "they" got a Canadian Contract which surpassed the onshoring COS08. Things like loss of license to age 65 instead of 60 and stuff like that. As for giving away, I'm sure someone will jump in with claims of huge giveaways but nothing that I have heard of was given away which is proven to be a loss!

As for what COS improvements "we were about to get but that they blew and prevented everyone getting?" I haven't a clue what you are referring to and what you feel they lost for us so please explain?

It is true the only reason they were able to sit down with the Company was because of the CLC requirements. This was necessary because the Company initially painted them with the same brush as the HKAOA and expected a hard nosed negotiation stance. Instead, they were met by an open-minded negotiations team which was willing to discuss needs and desires from both sides. I also heard this new style of calm was disrupted a few times by an individual "employed by the HKAOA" and he was then asked not to return. Could this be the spark which eventually led to the AOA break-up?

As for the breakup, do you know that the Canadians have been trying to communicate with the HKAOA but they continue to block their every move? This all along while the EXCO Prez continues to request jumpseats on flights to YVR operated by Canadian based CN's and I understand he has been rather successful. Good thing they don't hold a grudge like most of us do! Is this a possible learning point?

Communications is key to any relationship and more than ever we need a GC led by strong leadership willing to communicate in a delicate manner. Getting your propaganda posted in the local papers and being primed to attack at every possible moment is not going to get you anywhere with the company. Granted, the Company has had a bad record of being trustworthy but now is the time to extend the olive branch and turn a new page. What have we got to lose?

Sqwak 7700, if the HKAOA publicly endorsed contract compliance right now the lives of every CX pilot would diminish immediately. The company doesn't care how much it would cost to slam any such movement at this time IMO.

Jizzmonkey,
Not really sure why I even bother answering with a comment like that but if they were "moles" do you really think they would take the Company to court with a gross contract violation? Yes they did and they won! Try talking to a Canadian based pilot one day and you may get your facts straight unless it's more fun for you to continue believing a tall tale!

Anyways, making accusations like that is neither helpful, accurate or even true.

CPDude

[BusyB]

CPDude,

How about "Return of Seniority" for those who lose their licence & then regain it. Not as good as, but similar to, the Air Canada condition that has seen two of our Sim Instructors return to AC as Captains. This was all teed up when AOAC said "we're not agreeing to that as we can do better" and got nothing!!

How's your scope deal compare with that of the best of the CX contracts?

I can't imagine what an "olive branch" consists of when CX won't discuss anything unless forced to.:confused:

[cpdude]

BusyB,

So the entire contract is crap in your eyes because of a condition which may possibly effect 1 or 2 pilots? Also, when and where did a scope clause ever standup in court if the company declares a financial necessity? Or, maybe I should just ask you if these are your two top issues with CX today over EVERYTHING ELSE?

If the HKAOA allows individual complaints like the two you suggested to drive the HKAOA then the stalemate which we are experiencing will last for a VERY LONG TIME! There are many other more pressing issues IMO.

[BusyB]

cpd,

Just examples of the deceipts emanating from AOAC. As you well know
the claims that joining with Oz & HK would compromise you were also fabrications.

A pressing issue was to stay united but you reneged on that so why should anyone believe you again.:confused:

HNY

[cpdude]

BusyB,

You are one angry guy! You keep saying "you" as If you are blaming "me" when we're on the same team or so I thought. I suspect the attitude you are displaying and the tact that is missing in your post is all part in parcel to why WE are having so many problems.

[BusyB]

cpd,

Not angry, just pragmatic. AOAC have shown management that divide and conquer is a worthwhile strategy and AOAC then blames everyone else for not being united. The lack of talks with CX seems to date from them getting AOAC to sign up or is that just a coincidence.

I didn't know this was being discussed on the AOA Forums but I'll look.

[cpdude]

With all due respect BusyB, I don't think we can blame anyone else but ourselves for a lack of talks for the reasons I suggested earlier. As for discussions, it was an old argument when the split was occurring.

[BusyB]

cpd,
HNY

[cpdude]

HNY BusyB.:ok:

[White None]

Maybe get a room guys? :)

[BusyB]

Gosh, you're funny:bored:

[White None]

Bit of New Year levity, you know it makes sense?

Iif you went to the Headland you could PRUNE away to each other on the new free WiFi - living' the dream just keeps getting better. :ok:

[AnAmusedReader]

Nothing to do with AOA A; it was HKAOA that spat the dummy.

What about the farce with AOA Australia then? HKAOA has kept quiet about that.

A huge number of dollars paid by HKAOA to lawyers in Australia who go and mess up the registration process so after 2 years or so they have to cancel all the work that's been done and start again. AOA Australia (hopefully!) after many more dollars to be paid by HKAOA and more time, will become Australian AOA. If the HKAOA wait until that's signed and sealed we'll get no negotiations with CX.

HKAOA has made a huge mess of onshoring Australia and Canada and, as always, blame the company for the all the mistakes.

At least AOA C paid their own way and are registered - despite the HKAOA trying to stop it.

[Fenwicksgirl]

AAR you are so wrong in what you say about AOAC and pretty much everything else you rambled on about.
AOAC was paid for by the HKAOA funds as was AOAA. Whoever is feeding you this rubbish has an agenda, or is it you?
The HKAOA never tried to stop the AOAC getting registered at all, that happened quite early in the piece. What the HKAOA tried to stop, was AOAC ignoring basically every agreement they made with the "Federation" just to suit their own needs, in some cases it was pointed out they were signing inferior contracts. This did not stop them and they decided they wanted to make their own decisions,once their contract was closed, you could not open it unless both sides agreed. One of the reasons the HKAOA paid all this money was it felt it could benefit from bargaining rights from the on shored unions. This theory is fine if that union wants to play ball, AOAC had other ideas!
AOAA have not had to start again although there were many mistakes made along the way, but AOAA (as well as AOAC did) have been duly paying back what they can.
The whole on shoring process as you call it, was very messy but it is unprecedented in aviation union history so maybe you can cut the HKAOA some slack in trying to keep up with the company's decision to onshore.

[cpdude]

Fenwicksgirl,

Your post is a complete fabrication created from bits of truth into a tall tail. This probably created by the propaganda created by DD.

It is true that the HKAOA PAID for the initial setup and expenses over the first year or so but AOAC was also paying monthly dues exceeding 20K (not HKG dollars) per month. After the first year AOAC was paying back (IE contributing more than costing) per month and by the time they split had repaid THE ENTIRE AMOUNT that was SENT TO AOAC. Now HKAOA then tried to up the actual cost of AOAC by saying that they now owed a portion of staff, lease etc etc but when you add up all the bills sent to the HKAOA from AOAC the final amount was paid.

In the end, AOAC was contributing over 20K per month of net revenue to the HKAOA coffers and this is the investment that HKAOA tore up when they cancelled the service agreement.

With AOAA, it is true this was fully funded by the HKAOA and I believe the tab is over 500KAUD. That is something we should focus on and ask DD why he allowed this to go on so long.

AOAC's publicly declared mandate was to get a Canadian contract. That mandate never changed and they now have that. The only thing they refused to do was hand over control to the likes of DD. After his failure with the AOAA and communicating with the company, I would say in hindsight it was a good play!:ok:

[BusyB]

cpd,

Yes, AOAC has paid back all its setup expenses. The 20,000/month is irrelevant, no-one is going to accept "members" who's reps don't stand by their agreements.

AOAA is repaying its expenses which are more than AOAC's because the laws are more complex. They are of course already reaping the benefits of Long Service Leave etc so no-one is complaining.

I suspect DD is seen as a "fall guy" for AOAC.:ok:

[cpdude]

BusyB that may be true but the records need to be set that in the end there was NO FINANCIAL cost to the HKAOA members from AOAC and the onshoring and negotiations of the Canadian contract.

It's difficult enough to ever find a middle ground to bring our pilots together again without having false statements being made by those with more frustration then facts.

[Fenwicksgirl]

Cpdude. You criticize my post for fabricating but only go on about payment back to HKAOA. I did point out in brackets in my post that indeed AOAC had been doing this, so I don't know what you are on about.
Your attack on DD has AOAC agenda written all over it. DD does not approve any payment to any organization, in fact he doesn't vote on anything! He is staff and staff don't vote!! AOAC took offense to DD as he was the mouth piece at the time for the rest of the Federation, they did not like what they heard but make no mistake, he was OUR voice and if AOAC was peeved at him, they were actually peeved at us. The ego maniac that was the AOAC Chair did not like anyone telling him how to run things, in fact to get his way I heard he even related the HKAOA to a Communist entity, I.e the Chinese government. Although he never took offense to receiving any money from this communist related entity!
At the end of the day, everyone would wish this never happened and maybe in hindsight things could have been done better but as I mentioned in my previous post, this on shoring of unions was unprecedented and am sure all on both sides did what they thought was best.

[Thunderbird4]

So that's it then. The pilots of CX are resigned to an endless war of "he said, she said," rather letting bygones be bygones and get on with joining forces to resolve issues that affect all. Face it, each Committee did what they thought was best for their members at the time. Maybe it was right, maybe it was wrong, who cares, get over it. Lets try again.

I propose that the three Presidents sit down with a neutral moderator and clean sheet of paper to forge an agreement that benefits all. Rule #1: Any party that brings up past differences will be excluded from further proceedings.

[bm330]

Second the motion

[AnAmusedReader]

F...Girl

I don't have an agenda and I'm not in AOAC. But I do have mates who are. So after listening to their side of things I am sympathetic I admit.

You wrote "AOAA have not had to start again". Sorry, they ARE having to start again. They have dumped their lawywers and appointed new ones. They will stop the current registration process and start a new one, with a new name - Australian AOA. It's you I'm afraid who is so wrong.

AAR

[cpdude]

Tbird,

I totally agree with you however from what I hear, the recent advances made by AOAC have been rejected by the HKAOA Chairman.

Fenicksgirl,

You don't have to have a have a vote to be influential and DD's USA style of drum banging tactics isn't getting anyone anywhere! As a matter of fact, it's making the company more reluctant to do anything the union wants done.

[Thunderbird4]

I have to make a correction. It is not the pilots of CX that are resigned to this endless swinging of handbags. It's a select few individuals (we all know who they are) and it seems they are doing this on their on personal agenda's that in no way reflect the desires of the general membership.

I have another suggestion. How about each Association put out a questionnaire to its members and ask a simple yes or no question. One that is not baited by agenda's. The question could be: Do you want to see the Chairmen of the HKAOA, AAOA and AOAC sit down together with the intent of reaching an agreement on how to move together as a united body?

Or better than that: Do you want to see the Chairmen of the HKAOA, AAOA and AOAC sit down and have a few beers together?

[Fenwicksgirl]

Yep fully understand DD packs some influence, BUT it is the GC that votes, ultimately it is the GC who has to take resonsibility.
Thunderbirds, wishful thinking as it had already taken place for 18 mnths to no avail, however, new generation of GC's may be able to take history asside in the hope of going forward. (Yes i vote for Federation of course!)
Problem example 1.
Company offers a deal at RPs which says Canadian pilots get at least 20 days off per month, however, rest of us have to make up for shortfall of work, thus giving us less days off.
Federation says, no way, we work together to get a better deal for all. AOAC says umm hang on, we represent only Canadian pilots and MUST get the best deal for THEM, and besides you can't tell us what to do. AOAC votes Yes.

Maybe overly simplistic but, this is what i believe essentially is the problem. You can't run a Federation when one group says we will play ball unless we can get a better deal for our guys and gals.

[Liam Gallagher]

Whilst we all agree the sentiment behind your post, perhaps we need to ask ourselves some searching questions.

The Federation was the first and seemingly obvious concept to manage the "global AOA". However, with hindsight, was it the best way of organizing ourselves? Was it right that the HKAOA sought leverage from Canadian Labour Laws, when it would be the Canadians (solely) that would suffer if the company pushed back? Were/are the Canadians and Australians being open and honest enough with their HKAOA counterparts?

Perhaps all of this is just symptomatic of the growing pains of "The AOA" and we, the members, need to sit back and let the leadership get on with it and keep our eye on the long game. Whilst we all may disagree with various positions taken by various AOA Leaders, some other posters have chosen to demonize certain characters, which is both uncalled for and highly counter-productive to our collective long-term interests.

In 5 years, this will matter not. Canada and Australia will be fully on-shored and some form of working relationship will be forged between their Unions and the HKAOA, because ultimately there is more that unites us than separates us. In the meantime I suggest us, the members, tone down the vitriol and spend a bit of time listening and learning.

To that end, it might be an opportune time for the Leadership of both AOAC and AOAA to put out an update addressed directly to the HKAOA membership. I think they owe the HKAOA members an update at least. In return, we need to "park our prejudices" and think the long game (or at least, until the next pay review:} )

[AnAmusedReader]

Good post Liam.

HKAOA would never agree I suspect. The one-sided message sent to their members castigating AOA C merited a right of reply but AOA C could send it only to their members.

I'll eat my hat (if I could find it) if the HKAOA leadership agreed to your idea.

Management must be laughing their heads off at the separate AOA's.

[Liam Gallagher]

Regarding AOAC and AOAA speaking directly with the HKAOA membership, anything they say will eventually end up in the public domain, so they may as well strip out the sensitive details and post it on here!! I think we can "join the dots" and understand (if not accept) their positions.

[AnAmusedReader]

Saw all the interested parties together in the HH at lunch time today. Perhaps there's some good news on the way?

[cpdude]

From what I hear, it didn't go well. Apparently the HKAOA GC is not interested in anything the AOAC has to say. Not good. :sad:

[Thunderbird4]

Looks like I got my wish. Unfortunately one of the parties involved acted like a spoilt brat and pissed on the extended olive branch.

[AnAmusedReader]

That's what is going around and it wasn't AOAA or AOAC.