EK Raises New-Hire Bond to 5 yrs / $45,000 USD [Archive]

MerAir80

8th May 2014, 19:25

Thank you guys for your thoughts. Much appreciated.
I am living a situation which doesn't either give too many options or too much time for deciding. I have 8 years of RHS all spent on MD80. For almost all companies it's not important how many hours you have on it (5500 in my case), they are all just looking for either Boeing or Airbus rated pilots.
In the past years, I saw colleagues working in the same company I currently work, who got interviews and job offered with the same experience I have. Now, instead, it's not as likely as it used to be, at least with my experience.
I do understand you, guys, when you say "think twice", the fact is that I am in a quite unstable situation so I try to pick the best, or the less worse, among the options. In my company, I used to complain about colleagues paying for their own type rating to be hired. Now things have a bit changed for me as well as my prospective.
However, I think it won't be that bad working in Dubai, which seems to be the most open-mind city in the ME; having some stability, which is now an issue for me.
I think 5/6 years, it is the time frame I have planned to stay. Then God knows what is gonna happen.
Thank you again for your advice.
MD

Vortex Thing

19th May 2014, 16:27

Good, personally I wish it were more. Not enough people are willing to commit to anything these days.

It costs a huge amount to get us all out here so why shouldn't they bond us its not exactly for long.

If you are hesitating to come because of the bond, then great moves me up the seniority list faster as some of us were/are happy to commit.

I completely agree with 777x. If you want a short term fix this will or at least should put you off. GOOD that is the intention.

Only come and live out in the sandpit because you want to be here and if you don't there are always contracts that will fill your coffers whilst whatever you do desire becomes available.

Outatowner

19th May 2014, 17:06

Why would that move you up the seniority list faster if you're already here?? Doesn't makes sense...

All in all a fairly shabby wind up but I hope you get a bite or two as it's been pretty quiet lately.

BigGeordie

19th May 2014, 17:33

Having to increase the bond is indicative of how much less desirable the job has become. Fact is they shouldn't need to bond people to get them to stay.

cerbus

20th May 2014, 08:08

Exactly! None of the "good" airlines Bond their pilots because they and everyone knows that they pay well and are treated right.

Old King Coal

20th May 2014, 09:04

BigGeordie & cerbus: Hear, hear!!

They pulled that stunt over at FZ. The first group of guys were not bonded, but then, 6 months down the line (i.e. when people had moved their families and taken out loans for cars and advances payments for accommodation, etc), FZ whipped out this bond 'for training' (at least that was the excuse they gave) it was $24,000 USD regardless of prior experience and / or prior qualifications and with a very much "sign it or else!" mentality (or perhaps that should say 'menace' ?)... needless to say, once it was signed, that's when all the **** & attitude really kicked in!

nakbin330

20th May 2014, 20:06

The bond cannot be enforced outside the UAE, so what's the issue here? At least, after serving 5 years, one can take their B fund with them.

lospilotos

21st May 2014, 02:55

The bond cannot be enforced outside the UAE, so what's the issue here? At least, after serving 5 years, one can take their B fund with them.

One can always take the B fund (your own 5% contribution), after 5 years you get 75% of the A fund (company contribution)

nakbin330

21st May 2014, 05:57

Ok, thanks. I always thought it was 5 for the B and 7 for the A.

lospilotos

21st May 2014, 08:21

After 7 years you get 100% of the A-fund as well.

Vortex Thing

21st May 2014, 10:28

Outatowner

it wasn't an attempt at a wind up it was me phrasing it badly. You are of course absolutely correct. It will not move me up the seniority list per se. What I meant was that it will make me more valuable to the airline. That increases our Ts and Cs in the long term.

To that end I think it makes people think about coming here and committing rather than just giving it a go which is a practice I personally don't think the airline or anyone else should have to pay for.

I fly frequently with people who tell me how terrible life is here, I frequently think what an easy life they have had.

I'm not saying life here could not be better very easily for little effort, I am not saying that it is without frustrations but it is better than pretty much every where else on the planet for me and my ilk. So if someone cares about how much the bond is with the Ts and Cs on offer i.e they are worried about being able to leave in the first 5 yrs of being here then let them stay at home.

BigGeordie Having to increase the bond is indicative of how much less desirable the job has become. Fact is they shouldn't need to bond people to get them to stay.

I disagree, I think the bond is indicative of how unreliable and how unwilling to commit, and how much less professional pilots are becoming.

I think it should however work both ways. I.e We sign our contracts and guarantee (financially) to stay for 3-5 even 10 yrs as the airline wishes. If we leave they get money back however if we stay and fulfil time X then we should get a suitable bonus for being loyal pilots. The reality is though I don't really get why someone would leave here voluntarily and as such don't really see it as any great hardship and signed my bond quite happily when I arrived a few years ago.

BANANASBANANAS

21st May 2014, 10:41

I disagree, I think the bond is indicative of how unreliable and how unwilling to commit, and how much less professional pilots are becoming.

There are 2 ways (at least) of responding to that statement.

The first response is to state that, as a DEC in EK, the F/Os I have flown with so far were, almost without exception, some of the best I have flown with in over 33 years of professional aviation. Keen to learn, good stick and rudder skills, sociable on layovers and generally trying to make the best of whatever the sand pit throws at them.

The second is to say that if standards are dropping overall - well you gets what you pay for!

The reality is probably somewhere between the two.

Vortex Thing

21st May 2014, 11:17

Bananas

You misunderstand my main thrust. My reference in pilots professionality is not implying pilots ability to operate in any shape or form. I also do not refer to their ability to party/ be sociable. I refer to their ways of doing business.

Some pilots think it acceptable to take a type rating or command and leave at short notice. Some pilots like above in this very thread are asking about how they can be pursued or not outside of UAE.

You get to read the contract before you sign it. If you think the conditions too onerous then don't sign. Now I accept that the discussion is not about that per se it is about reasonability of EK to go for a 5 yr bond.

My take on this is it will put off the uncommitted, i think lack of commitment to your firm is unprofessional. The right candidate will want what is of offer and thus will have no issue signing.

If there is then a shortage of the right applicants then I think agrees with your second point and makes my point. They will have to make the Ts and Cs better for us all.

VT

BigGeordie

21st May 2014, 11:33

Well, the company is getting $45,000 of our loyalty over five years. When do we start getting our "suitable bonus for being loyal pilots"? Unless you think getting to keep the company's donation to our provident fund (which is supposed to be part of our package anyway) after 7 years is a generous 'bonus'? Or are you hanging on for your free watch after 20 years?

And don't get me started on the fact that a reasonably large group of pilots aren't bonded at all and have no problem leaving when they feel like it, sometimes straight after a command course.

fliion

21st May 2014, 11:41

Vortex,

Admire your positivity and your like for the job, but it it reflects the fact that you have not been here very long.

You see we also signed the bond and the contract and during that three years here is what happened to my contract BUT my bond stayed the same.

1) they increased the OT threshold from 78-92 hrs - massive pay cut.
2) they imposed a DEWA limit (unenforced until they decide otherwise - but nonetheless disgraceful considering it was in contract)
3) they cancelled my ALT destination in the US and made me pay for my family from Co. destination to my home city.(this alone is a 20,000dhs hit because I cannot book these until roster publication to maximize time at home - during peak a last minute ticket is huge, if I book early and change - the change fees are exorbitant & yes I get charged $100s for bags)
4)they made me pay for a UAE ID work visa for me and my family even though it's mandatory & work related

I'll say nothing about the tone deaf Comms received throughout & punitive disciplinary culture.

During recent times for bonded members they have changed the Staff travel (for the worse) & decreased manning on ULRs for the worse.

Do I like my job? Yes.

Would I like my contract respected - most definitely. Because the only 'union' I have to enforce my rights is that piece of paper - which if you review points above - can and will be changed at the Co.s whim.

Your whole premise is based on reading contract & signing. I did and it didn't work.

Just sayin.

f.

Vortex Thing

21st May 2014, 11:51

I fear sadly that however much we study hard, work hard, etc the law of supply and demand will always win out in a firm seeking profit.

Yes we the drivers are the profit heads and everyone else the cost heads but the reality is we still need them more than they need us.

When the market becomes candidate driven i.e just take a look at China $350,000 per annum and retention bonuses at 3,5 etc yrs then we will see the playing field level.

Until then I earn more than a BA pilot, my children have good enough schooling and I live in decent villa and have access to 5 star beach resorts. Doesn't affect me now Im here but I would have signed a $ 100,000 bond and a 10 yr contract happily.

Re the non bonded pilots. They signed their contracts we signed ours. Be honest though do you think that the guy who just valeted his Lamborghini in front of you at the beach club got that because he went to school, did very well and invented the longer lasting light bulb/ cure for cancer or in fact even went to university.

Ooor is it that perhaps life isn't fair.

nolimitholdem

21st May 2014, 15:18

Vortex,

Your statements are contradictory and naive in the extreme. EK has zero, I repeat ZERO commitment to their employees. Pilots are a cost unit, a number, an expense to be kept to the bare minimum. Nothing more. Which is their prerogative, but you are delusional to think otherwise. Yet you state that it is unprofessional for a pilot to have lack of commitment to their "firm". What is this, 1952?

You are a mercenary, nothing more. Selling your services for whatever price you can get - that supply and demand thing you mention. Do you think you earn "more than a BA pilot" because you deserve it or EK is feeling kindly towards you? Wake up! You're just an assembly line worker, who happens to live in a country that has no income tax (yet) and a endless pool of cheap labour nearby. Make a mistake, you will be replaced in an instant and no one will shed one tear or give a single thought about your "commitment" or "professionalism". Nothing personal. Just business.

Yours is just another variation of the same old tired arguments. You state that EK "is better than pretty much every where else on the planet for me and my ilk", so, that means it must be good. Much like a small child, who assumes the world revolves around them, in isolation. Good for you, that it's a better deal than whatever crap country or job you left. Let that villa and beach club help you believe you're living the good life now, baby - that's fine. But to suggest that the longer bond is due to pilots lack of commitment to an entity that cares not one whit about them, is ludicrous. Things like commitment and respect are a two-way street. And earned, not demanded.

There was already a pretty stiff bond in place, so no, there were not people taking type ratings and leaving. EK's increasing the bond smacks of desperation more than anything, to try and force increased retention. The conclusion isn't too hard to draw. Going back to those poor BA pilots, what are the terms of their training bonds again?

Better pray you never have an incident on or off the job that forces you to look outside your bubble. Or heaven forbid, find that you change your outlook at some point in your many bonded years. You might be glad the bond isn't your desired ten years or whatever. Geezuz.

Kapitanleutnant

21st May 2014, 17:26

Nolimitholdem…

BRAVO!!!!!!!!!!!!! Spot on as we say here!!

Kapitan (EK Part number 35482!)

Alconguin Crusader

21st May 2014, 19:05

There should be no Bond at all. Does that upset your apple cart Vortex?
As have been previously posted Bonds are illegal. What other airlines do you see Bonding pilots? Yes that is right, crap airlines. If airlines paid Industry Standard wages no pilot would leave. Isn't that the Free Market? Vortex you want to entrap pilots to stay in a undesired state. That just is not right.
Look around at the type of pilots we are getting. Narrowbody LCCs and since Emirates is having a hard time finding quality pilots they have just lowered the hours to 2000!

JAARule

21st May 2014, 20:20

Oh and by the way, Vortex, if you get yourself sacked, the bond will STILL apply. The bond is not only for those leaving of their own accord but also includes the Sacked. It's all in the contract. I don't wish you the worst but you do need to wake up and smell the camel dung and get over your love affair with management and this airline because they are well and truly over dealing with you before you even set foot in the place.

Algonquin, I suspect your perception of legality is somewhat skewed regarding what is and isn't legal here in the sandpit. The bond has been proven to be insurmountable here in this country on numerous occasions when it has been challenged by the foolhardy. Insisting that it is "illegal" is simply misleading the uninformed.

ManaAdaSystem

21st May 2014, 20:43

Nothing upsets a EK pilot more than a fellow EK pilot who is happy.

And that 5 Dhs salik...

Old King Coal

21st May 2014, 22:00

nolimitholdem: Spot on and well said ! :D

DannyTanner

22nd May 2014, 05:46

Is it getting that hard for them to find pilots right now they are really raising the bond and dropping the requirements??? What's the reason for the exodus? Working conditions getting bad? Just another interested pilot always keep my ear to the ground...thanks for your input.

Visual Procedures

22nd May 2014, 06:34

DT, the reality is that the guys hired to the 777 a couple of years ago are now realising the promises of 3-4 year commands sworn to them by the deputy chief at their 6 month round up are going to be more like 7-8, with anyone hired since needing more 77W orders to get one at all through expansion..

Without any announcement for or against the 350 coming, and the retirement of the 330/340 fleet and 40 odd 777's between now and 2020, commands for new hires today are blowing out to 10+ years unless you get a spot on the 380 in the next year or so..

No more quick commands means they don't need 4000 (2500 glass) hour pilots anymore because the new hires will get plenty of time in the EK right seat before upgrade. Lowering the hours to 2000 is an indication the they're not getting 4000 hour guys applying anymore, which they don't need, so its just business..

As far as upping the bond goes, they're just setting their target audience. Young guys with 2000hrs who are planning on coming to and staying in the sandpit for a longer amount of time.

BigGeordie

22nd May 2014, 06:36

Danny, got it in one. The constant erosion of benefits over the last few years is really getting to people. Anybody looking at joining now is also looking at a relatively long time on an F/O salary and the cost of living in Dubai is beginning to rocket again.

Calmcavok

22nd May 2014, 07:16

Where is the 2000 hour requirement advertised?

The careers website still says 4000 hours (with 2000 jet) or 2500 modern (I assume still 55t+) jet. A380 3000 hours (inc 1500 AB). That's the same as its been for a long time, or is it an informal drop in requirements?

Vortex Thing

22nd May 2014, 17:30

NOLIMITHOLDEM

My statements are neither contradictory nor naive. Me not sharing the same view as you does not make me naive.

I do not for a minute believe that EK gives a tuppence for any pilot or employee or views anyone as anything other than a cost unit. EK are aware that pilots are profit heads and the the REMFs are cost heads. They pay whatever they can get away with paying. So I am not delusional I just don't care as every firm in the world does the same thing!

Re is it 1952? no but I will still hold a door open for a lady, still was willing to serve and die for queen and country and perhaps I'm a dying breed. I would rather live a life by codes such as these than an existence of "being a mercenary" and ducking and diving. I am not an east end pearly king! I think there nothing wrong in maintaining honest business practice whatever the firm would like to do. I do not, should not and have not had to lower my standards just because an HR team lowers theirs.

I am also acutely aware that should be involved in a prang with someones Bentley on the SZR, even if I was sitting stationary. I could be gone in days.

The "crap country" I left is called the UK. However some of the crap jobs that I have done mostly involve working in countries where you are lucky to get paid, lucky to get fed and business is done by whosoever happens to have the most armorlites that week.

Personally I am happy as a pig in **** not to have to eat grass cutter billed as chicken on the menu, get paid on payday (anything at all is good much less what is written in the contract which took some getting used to), not be loosing my home, not have bailiffs knocking on the door and be able to feed mini VTs and Mrs VT not only food today and tomorrow but for at least the next few weeks without wondering which of my friends houses we would have to go to when we ran out of food.

I do not for a moment think that the world revolves around me, quite the reverse (hence why I advocate putting firm/queen/honour/duty /etc and everything else way above me.

Commitment and respect I am afraid are exactly as you state. The reason HR wants longer bonds is because people keep letting them down. If BA don't need bonds good for them. BA also has 14-18yrs to command and no meritocracy.

Re my bubble, that will be the world full of the ****holes that I lived, fought and worked in for the last pretty much 15 years of my life until I came to Dubai 3 years ago. So I'm sorry if being in the top 5% of earners on the planet gives you worries right at the top of Maslow's triangle of wants and needs. I am sorry if starvation, death, famine, war, pestilence, rape, pillage and looting are not something that you have had to work around but frankly I wake up in the morning happy, go to sleep happy and to have even had this for 3 years has already made it all worthwhile. I even fill the car up without wondering if I just spent the children's lunch money!

If someone takes it from me tomorrow because of an argument over the children taking dates from their palm trees in the front garden. Then I will go back, with a better CV then I arrived with an eek out an existence somewhere somehow.

I know exactly what respect is, respect is me having my opinion and not having to agree with yours without being called names. Oh and should I change my outlook or mind. I am not entirely sure that my piss poor planning, inability to deal with a commitment I signed or any other reasons makes the airlines problem.

It's really simple work comes first everything else comes second so how something could cause me to wish to leave when my career is the primary motivator and controlling issue is beyond me. Perhaps for you it isn't perhaps rather like things that move quickly in the periphery, falling from heights and the dark it sits in your mind alongside a great fear.

Perhaps the naive one is one who believes that they should be given such opportunity at no risk to the employer whilst living such a privileged lifestyle as we all do here.

You may well think 3 years bond was sufficient I may think more is. I'm not entirely sure that I am not entitled to be called naive because of that or entirely sure that you have the point here.

I am not suggesting EK entrap people here I believe was quoted below. I simply think that bonding is not unreasonable, I don't care for what a union would do, I don't really care for what you feel is reasonable. If you don't like it then don't come. If you think life is not fair, it isn't! If you want life to be fair then who is naive here?

I once got told that there is one rule for the rich and another for the poor. This is completely untrue.

There is one rule for the poor and no rules for the rich. If you don't like it, then it is life you are fighting not my happiness.

Westin anyone?

Alconguin Crusader

22nd May 2014, 21:47

BigGeordie

23rd May 2014, 09:06

Oh Lord, that is twice I've had to agree with Alconguin Crusader. I'd better have a lie down.

Seriously though, bonds are a fact of life in this profession, and inflation will mean the size of them has to go up- but not the length. What would have been wrong with 45K over 3 years?

Looks to me like EK anticipate some retention problems coming up over the next few years.

hunterboy

23rd May 2014, 10:45

Give a Brit a uniform and he will do the job for free.....

greybeard

23rd May 2014, 12:40

Singapore
In 1993, the bond on the L-31 was 40k, not deposited just there if you left, reducing daily over 3 years
Cadets of all persuasions, up to 700k over 7 years, reducing ANNUALLY, no pro rata.
I changed to the main fleet after 5 years, deposit 43k for 5 years, no "credit" for previous toil.
Allowing for inflation, do the sums.

Current deal, I am not sure, must be some ex SIA people in Emirates

You have the early leavers to probably thank for the process, damn them and people who sign for less than the previous pilots.

I am glad I am out, what a sad state the industry is in, my peers and I saw the best of it.

:ok:

Dropp the Pilot

23rd May 2014, 12:46

'deposit 43k for 5 years, no "credit" for previous toil'

Now that is a bond. There is no bond at Emirates.

I may have said this before

Pointer

23rd May 2014, 13:30

too bad its become a slugging match once more..

my five fills worth? they are going to raise the money (hence the delay letter by TCAS) and subsequently don't want situations like some time ago, Vikings on "loan" even though they said they had resigned.. so now commitment more in line with future pay?

… or is it me just wishful thinking??? :8

Pointer

donpizmeov

23rd May 2014, 17:01

Heard some newbies talking about the new bond recently, and stating its only an 6k extra. They didn't look too happy when I explained its only 6k extra when they join, its an extra 9.6k after 1 yr, and an extra 13.2k after 2 yrs, and an extra 16.8k after three years. Is math testing included in the compass test?

The Don

nolimitholdem

24th May 2014, 08:05

Vortex Thingy,

Engaging in these sorts of exchanges is about as fruitful as sending an email to Staff Travel, IT, or the Boeing Fleet Manager. But I feel I should clarify a couple of things you seem hazy on.

I did not refer to you as naive because we do not share the same views. I did so because you seem to not have one iota of how things work at EK, and “naive” was the gentlest word I could think of. If you have truly been at EK for three years, “ignorant ” should not really be a viable adjective.

Specific to the bond. Do you think that previous joiners all did so on a gentleman’s agreement and a handshake? Is that why you feel they have “let HR down”? Everyone joined on contracts with defined conditions. Those have been changed, to the substantially worse. What has attracted the vitriol is that you approve of this.

I am not opposed to a company attempting to recover their investment of training costs. That is expected. It could be examined as to why such urgent need to do so, if an employer is so supposedly desirable, but regardless, I am not opposed to reasonable cost recovery. But as has been mentioned, the real issue isn’t the increase in the dollar amount. It’s the length of time. And yes, of course people have the choice ultimately to accept or reject the terms. But that is a separate issue from actually applauding the length of commitment increasing, as you do.

I can understand how if you had come from such a dark place as you portray, bravely trying to fend off the bailliff while the missus and little ‘uns cower inside, that the warm embrace of EK and the many delights of Dubai life would have immense appeal. It does seem you’ve had a rough go of it, what with the starvation, death, famine, war, pestilence, rape, pillage and looting and all. Certainly, it does make a little bad BO on the Metro pale in comparison.

But do realize, that when you espouse even more contractual enslavement to your employer, that these changes don’t only affect you.

It's really simple work comes first everything else comes second so how something could cause me to wish to leave when my career is the primary motivator and controlling issue is beyond me. Perhaps for you it isn't perhaps rather like things that move quickly in the periphery, falling from heights and the dark it sits in your mind alongside a great fear.

I do also hope that the EK clinic is able to find a combination of meds that work for you.

Best,
NL

BANANASBANANAS

24th May 2014, 08:12

Singapore
In 1993, the bond on the L-31 was 40k, not deposited just there if you left, reducing daily over 3 years
Cadets of all persuasions, up to 700k over 7 years, reducing ANNUALLY, no pro rata.
I changed to the main fleet after 5 years, deposit 43k for 5 years, no "credit" for previous toil.
Allowing for inflation, do the sums.

Current deal, I am not sure, must be some ex SIA people in Emirates

In 2005, the B744F bond in SIA C was SIN$ 142k, of which SIN$56k had to be deposited up front and the company could take whenever they wished. The bond period was 5 years and 8 months, reducing pro rata from the end of 8 months of training and, at the end of 5 years and 8 months (5 years from completion of 8 months of training) you got your SIN$56k back plus a little interest minus the substantial bank administration charges.

Dropp the Pilot

24th May 2014, 08:51

"of which SIN$56k had to be deposited up front and the company could take whenever they wished"

Another excellent example of a bond. Emirates does not have a bond.

I may have said this before.

Instant Hooligan

24th May 2014, 18:04

Vortex works at FZ from the posts he's written on the fly dubai employment thread.

JAARule

25th May 2014, 05:31

Don, you lost me with your arithmetic. Good thing I got in before the compass test. So what's with your numbers??

Dropp, a quick examination of the employment agreement shows that they specifically refer to a bond using the word, "bond," a number of times.

Here's a definition easily found on the net:

An "employment bond" is a method commonly used to reduce staff turnover. Typically when a person begins their employment, the employer will require the employee to sign a bond. It is a paper that has the employee agreeing to work for the company for a certain length of time in exchange for company provided employment related training.

Here's another:

The Employment Bond is an agreement which the company and the employee enter into which among the other terms contained therein states that in consideration of the training given to the Employee and the money spent by the company in imparting such training, the Employee will remain in the services of the company for a particular period. In case the Employee breaches the provisions of the Agreement, the Employee will be liable to pay a certain sum of money, be it the expense incurred by the company in training of the Employee.

You seem to have it in your head that "bond" means something else however the rest of the international pilot body (and your employer) seem to disagree. Time to stop playing that broken record.

http://i2.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/010/692/19789999.jpg

pilotrob23

25th May 2014, 05:38

Did you just reference "The Princess Bride"? Should have went with Andre The Giant reference, but well done.

donpizmeov

25th May 2014, 05:52

JAA the 36000 bond reduced by $12000 per year over three years. The new $42000 bond reduces by $8400 per year over 5yrs. So those that joined in Apr might only start by being $6000 worse off than those that joined in March this year. But in subsequent years the difference increases as shown. After three years the March joiners are free men where as the April joiner still needs to cough up $16800 for his freedom.

The don.

JAARule

25th May 2014, 06:17

Yes I see. One could also argue that the monthly rate has dropped from a grand a month to $700 but the reality is simply that anyone "unable" to pay off the bond is stuck here longer than before if and when he realises he's being regularly shafted and decides to leave.

Vortex Thing

25th May 2014, 06:54

Vortex, has management contacted you for a position in their ranks yet or are you typing from the 3rd floor already.
I have not seen such a sorry excuse for a pilot. Are you really a pilot or a management lackey? Everything you espouse goes against the pilot. It is obvious you have had a crap career and couldn't get hired by BA and now Emirates has hired you in their desperation to fill their slots. You should be on bended knee every night thanking your lucky stars and the EK pilots are so much better we have a man like you destroying the profession from inside.

First thing first, I have never applied to BA. Why would I apply to an airline where command takes 14-18 yrs? Emirates hasn't hired me as Instant Hooligan correctly points out I'm an FZ pilot.

So about my crap career if university followed by HM forces officer and being a military pilot folowed by becoming a civvy pilot is a crap career. Then hands up I'm sure I am as billed.

Likely however I just haven't been lucky in some firms ( we can't control bankruptcy of a firm can we) or made the wrong decision one or twice career wise but the reality is not that I have some sad sob story or that I beleive that the world owes me a living. How is my seeing reality destroying the industry? We're worth what we are worth if everyone agreed with you no one would sign the new bond. Guess what they do, so the voting with the feet thing suggest that I am right as EK is not shrinking it is growing. There is no press gang to my knowledge.

Nolimit I did not say and do not support anyone one on either side of the contract changing anything. A contract is meant to be an equally constraining document from both sides of the agreement, if terms change and you sign a new contract then that is fair as you have a choice. If terms change and you do not agree to them that that is yes of course unfair and likely illegal ( granted it doesnt make much difference here). I am not sure what that has to do with the bond they are unrelated in my eyes. If a contract has been breeched by either party and either party considers it repudiated then they can act accordingly. So if you feel that the bar has been moved without mutual consent and to your detriment enough then why are you still here? Is it because like me you see that it is worth it?

As for having seen hardships and lived through some myself, yes life experience does that to you and funny old thing your experience of life shapes your thought process. I think we are all lucky to have a job in current climes and you all talk of contractual enslavement. No one is holding a gun to your head! If you don't like it stop bitching and leave. If as you state you joined and then things change, well ain't that life. You have a choice, if you want to see contractual enslavement go to a labour camp and ask them where their passports are.

I am not implying that two wrongs make a right here I am just saying that life here is pretty good for all and if you don't see that then perhaps you should invest your energy in finding that utopia you see elsewhere.

Do I realise that these changes do not affect only me? Errrm yes, sorry not getting your point. A long as 'these changes' affect us all and we all accept them then it is fairly applied. So no I don't care if I sing a 3,5 10 yr bond and I really don't see why anyone entering a job anew would be uncertain of committing for so short a time.

JAARule

25th May 2014, 07:02

Yes, that was from The Princess Bride. Not a bad flick however I couldn't find any Andre the Giant quotes to use.

Shame about Andre, may he rest in peace. Apparently he once drank 125 beers in a single sitting.

nolimitholdem

25th May 2014, 19:06

Geez Vortex if you'd been a little more upfront and mentioned you don't even work at EK, I wouldn't have wasted the time to reply.

Do get in touch with FZ management and relay your desire to voluntarily sign a longer bond, I'm sure they'd be touched by your positive attitude and quite open to the idea, given their own issues with pilot retention.

Perhaps don't mention it to your colleagues though, they might be a bit funny about it.

Vortex Thing

25th May 2014, 21:52

Hmmm so let me see if you haven't been hit by a bus you are not qualified in your eyes to decide if it hurts or not.

I'm not entirely sure that your version and mine of retention agree. We loose about 10-15 pilots a year. We like you have hundreds waiting in the wings. Im not sure that loosing 5-10% turnover wise is a retention problem.

The vast majority of those who left were returning from furlough. Some of course have crossed the runway to EK.

Other than your penchant for name calling I am still not so sure what your issue is with new hires signing a longer bond. You seem happy to call names, cast aspersions and attempt to belittle but you are not explaining what havoc it is that you foresee.

Some spoke of "destruction of the industry", some spoke of "everything you espousing going against the pilot".

You have already signed your contract at EK. So the change does not directly affect you, however it does affect anyone on the outside of EK who is joining now or in the future. Those joining would likely be pilots, this is a pilots forum. So if you feel that the views of pilots to whom the bond would apply is not relevant then whose attitude is in need of adjustment. Now granted this "change" may well be symptomatic of some deeper and other problem but the thread topic isn't wether you like HR/mgt.

So new joiners sign a longer and more onerous bond and guess what they are still signing it in the same numbers. What is it that threatens you soo much that you cannot rationally, calmly and clearly explain why you think this is bad. Perhaps I may see it from another view and think ok hadn't thought about it that way. However with your attitude of you are with me or against me in pure John Wayne style CRM you just make me think that management are fed up with putting up with your woe is me whining and decided that perhaps this measure will ensure they get people who are actually in this hook, line and sinker not just hoping that they can run away when the going isn't good anymore.

Now how about a company thinking about themselves before you, why would they do such a heinous thing. They aren't there to support your needs as mentioned above in mine and another posts we are profit heads/ cost units and are managed as such. If you don't want non EK pilots views then post inside your airlines own forum!

fliion

26th May 2014, 02:49

Vortex,

You are starting to look even more silly.

Not even an a pilot with the co. who's contract principles you defend.

The whole point that you missed is that the 'contract' is not respected.

Off with you.

f.

777boyindubai

26th May 2014, 05:24

Vortex,

They don't respect contracts. End of.

Numerous examples over many grades.

Over many years.

Overtime threshold, and utilities are two that spring to mind.

The bond is a way of reducing attrition as the pay isn't keeping up and the resignations are starting to bite. In addition, the roadshows are not bringing the quality and numbers required.

They need to rethink things as the strategic challenges around them are greater than they care to admit.

harry the cod

26th May 2014, 06:20

The only people who are starting to look silly are those not prepared to offer valid arguments to what have been two well written and truthful posts by Vortex Thing.

We may feel that our services are so precious that we can write our own contracts, like premiership footballers but the truth, ladies and gents, is that we're at the mercy of market forces. Dubai itself is a classic example of obtaining a workforce at cheaper rates simply because those people are prepared to work for less. To have experienced pilots shocked at contract adjustments reflects naivety of the highest level. There are two issues here. Firstly, go and read your actual contract, the one that informs you of contractual entitlement such as ALT, accommodation, ticket for maid etc. That's your 'contract and as far as I'm aware, has not changed. Unless you've been promoted of course in which case it's improved. The second issue is terms and conditions which Vortex is alluding to. BA is often referred to as a model employer on these forums, correct? Well, just ask those ex Ryanair, Monarch, RAF guys that joined about 9 years ago why their pension plan is different from the generous final salary enjoyed by the senior guys. That didn't stop them joining though, market forces and free will again. The strong and often touted BA Union didn't fight for that somewhat surprisingly. Why? Because it didn't effect those pilots on the current contract. And, as far as I'm aware, new joiners on a sponsored course now have to be bonded. They weren't 10 years ago.

As I've said before, please save the usual diatribe of management lackey and keep drinking the cool aid, that old record is the crutch for those unable to reply with logic. Put the effort into a nice CV to those utopia Companies out there who'll welcome you with open arms, 400$k dollar contracts a year and 60 hour duty months with free first class tickets for commuting.

If you find it, great. Just be careful they don't bond you!

Harry

hunterboy

26th May 2014, 06:38

Harry the cod
Point of order.....selfishness was not the reason that incumbent BA pilots didn't fight the closure of the NAPS pension scheme. I understand it was due to legal advice obtained. Many of us knew only too well that it would lead to the general reduction in pension benefits for everybody.
Anyway, back to the thread.....

fliion

26th May 2014, 06:58

Harry,

Read post #27.

Nothing about $400k & 1st commute.

f.

harry the cod

26th May 2014, 07:00

Hunterboy

I was aware of that, pension rules and accountability changed in the UK and BA would be showing a liability that could not be met if the fund was to be wound up. That's why it was changed. My point was that despite the terms becoming less favourable, pilots still joined.

Thanks for the explanation though.

Harry

nolimitholdem

26th May 2014, 10:20

Wow. What a surprise, HTC finds a defense of management practices logical. Knock me over with a feather. The pre-emptive “koolaid” statement to try and hide behind is noted.

Here’s the logical disconnect. It’s in VT’s statement:

I think the bond is indicative of how unreliable and how unwilling to commit, and how much less professional pilots are becoming.

How is it unprofessional to be unwilling to commit to a company for one day longer than the contractual requirement? It is a JOB, a way to exchange one’s time for money, not a life partner. And if unwilling or unable to fulfill the entire period of the contractual requirement, is there not already a mechanism in place to compensate the company? Or is only the employer allowed to change their mind on a whim?

Obviously the company feels that 36,000USD was not enough compensation, and that spreading it over three years was not a long enough time. Fine. (Although thank Dog it doesn’t affect me, looking back.) But cheerleading for it with remarks about how grateful one is and how they’d sign for even more? The height of foolishness.

Incidentally I fulfilled my entire bond and then some. Should it be assumed my complaint is with the bond per se. It is not.

I consider it highly unprofessional, and frankly bizarre to display an attitude of willing acquiesce to degraded terms. When the productivity threshold jumped from 78 to 92 hours/month at EK, there wasn’t anything anyone could do about it. But I never once heard anyone stating how thankful they were and would happily work 110 hours/month.

Nothing wrong with employee loyalty. In fact, quality companies manage to garner great amounts of the same, completely aside from whatever they offer in compensation. Imagine that. But that isn’t EK. There is no give and take, only take.

All expat jobs are mercenary jobs. You come, you work, you get paid, you go home. You have no negotiating power - as has been stated many times over, if you don’t like it, leave. With that complete absence of loyalty and respect from the company, to state that one would voluntarily offer it in return for nothing is…wait for it Harry…ILLOGICAL.

donpizmeov

26th May 2014, 10:56

I wonder if the 5yrs was introduced to help persuade those that are still joining in hope of a quick command to stay on once they find it will not happen.

The Don

harry the cod

26th May 2014, 11:28

Nolimitholdem

Careful with your argument. Firstly, I don't disagree with much of what you've said, however, you haven't understood mine. I'm in no way condoning all management decisions and a read of posts on other forums will support that. My point is that unless people actually leave and the Company struggles to replace them, they'll always squeeze what they can. Agreed, you can argue that the new extended term on the bond is a reflection that T&C's are not what they were. My belief is as Don's stated that command time is now creeping up and up thus making EK less of an attractive proposition than when you and I joined.

So, if they can still get pilots to join then it demonstrates EK is still attractive to some and market forces will again play out. Singapore Airlines has always been more restrictive yet still pilots still joined, didn't they?

Finally, you mention that you 'consider it highly unprofessional, and frankly bizarre to display an attitude of willing acquiesce to degraded terms. Well, so do I, but there really is bugger all I can do about it unless I leave and I'm not prepared to do that unless I can find conditions better or more suited to my family elsewhere. Is that not the same for everybody here?

As for acquiescing, may I be so bold as to state 99% of us do that every time we report for work. if you're on the bus 75 minutes before departure just because it's been dictated by cabin crew management and flight ops is too soft to tell them to stuff it, we 'acquiesce' on every duty. Think about that next time you have an early report after a day off. If that's not a violation, I don't know what is!

Harry

Vortex Thing

26th May 2014, 23:28

You have no negotiating power - as has been stated many times over, if you don’t like it, leave. With that complete absence of loyalty and respect from the company, to state that one would voluntarily offer it in return for nothing is…wait for it Harry…ILLOGICAL.

I think perhaps NOLIMIT you may have finally made your point. What you in essence appear to be saying is that unless there is something in it for you every single time without fail you see no point in doing it.

I would call it ungentlemanly to not hold a door open for a lady, or give up a seat for the elderly. I try to think about cause and effect in anything I do. If I just hold the lights for 2 seconds then I won't blind my fellow pilot who is lining up from the opposite side....If I don't leave my wing lights on on stand then it may help another of my fellow pilots.

And just perhaps if I don't only work to rule/only do anything explicitly as stated in my contract and not one iota more then perhaps management will not see us all as money grabbing mercenaries.

So yes I will help a mother standing in the air bridge with three children get a stroller. No it isn't in my contract, no I am not required, told, paid or asked to do it. Guess what I will also make a PA when we have optional moments to do so, when not mandated, when I know something significant is happening that could affect my pax. Hey I even give advice to new joiners and help them find things and there is no reward in it for me.

I find it curious that I have seen crews leaving passengers on board for the next crew, as "they have finished" and "they are not getting paid for this" being the oft cited excuses. I find this unprofessional also.

You talk of espousing everything that goes against the pilot but basically then go on to state that effectively you believe the carrot to be pointless and that only the stick will work then wonder in the same breath why the management just resort to the stick!

Had it ever occurred to you that doing something altruistically could be rewarding?

The epitome is to be found here It is a JOB, a way to exchange one’s time for money, not a life partner.

Errmm that is exactly why I use the term unprofessional. It may be a job to you. To me it is a way of life and all encompassing vocation. I get paid, granted but most of us would get paid more for doing other lines of work or "professions". Why is it that the travelling public hold us in a different esteem than other jobs? Do we get treated the same in airports across the world as every worker in the airport, does our opinion appear to matter more, would we be considered more reliable witnesses to the police or in court, are we entrusted with numerous lives, and multi million dollar pieces of equipment on a regular basis, do we appear in lists of most respected professions if you search the web? Would the general NON aviation population consider us as airline pilots likely to be more or less trustworthy than non pilots?

By definition A professional is a member of a profession. The term also describes the standards of education and training that prepare members of the profession with the particular knowledge and skills necessary to perform the role of that profession. In addition, most professionals are subject to strict codes of conduct enshrining rigorous ethical and moral obligations. Professional standards of practice and ethics for a particular field are typically agreed upon and maintained through widely recognized professional associations.

Now happy to take definitions from other sources but lets run with the above being pretty accurate, perhaps and this is my view just perhaps if we stopped acting like spoilt teenagers who didn't get a Porsche from daddy when we knew he could afford it then just perhaps when terms change we may see that it simply isn't just about what we want.

I am not saying that your terms and conditions have not changed fairly or otherwise, I am saying that this thread is about the bond being longer and more onerous. I don't need to be an EK pilot to understand employment in aviation any airline pilot could and should do that and that is why I do not see what you are connecting one with the other. The fact that your conditions or terms have changed is an annoyance to be dealt with separately. This new bond however is simply something that is put on NEW contracts which actually helps you.

If more people are held by the bond, retention is better; that means the Ts and Cs increase or at the least hold still! rather than have to be reduced to accommodate higher turnover in hiring costs. Now that seems pretty logical to me. Look at it this way (figures made up as a vehicle to illustration only) Bond everyone for 10years. In a ten year period new pilots leave on average every 10yrs. If the bond was 5 yrs then pilots would leave and join in a closed system at twice the rate. i.e you have to pay out new hire and unrefundable costs on unknown entities. More risk, more cost less in the pot, the same pot that gives profit share and benefits.

If I am not being logical then show me where please this is bad for you or anyone other pilots?

harry the cod

27th May 2014, 03:06

Not sure about that last point. If the terms and conditions were industry leading from the get go, people wouldn't want to leave.

"Train people well enough that they can leave. Treat them well enough that they don't want to. If you look after the staff, they look after the customer."

Not always a huge fan of Sir Richard Branson but he's hit the nail on the head with that quote!

Harry

Craggenmore

27th May 2014, 06:16

Give a Brit a uniform and he will do the job for free.....

That's hilarious hunterboy.

Like when BA's pilots crossed their cabin crew's picket line to work as cabin crew for free, whilst wearing their pilot uniform?

Outatowner

27th May 2014, 07:05

Vortex the amount of writing you're doing, almost an evangelical outpouring, makes me wonder about your real world outlook.

I think you're incredibly naive, myself. From what I've gleaned about you (and admittedly I stopped reading your posts thoroughly after the first one) I suspect you belong in a different era. This is not a bad thing but maybe you should've been in BOAC or some Flying Boat airline. Imperial Airways or something.

The things you seem to believe in are all very worthwhile in life in general but very little of what you say holds any water in EK. The arguments you're making are pointless in a company environment like EK's. You seem to understand so little about the corporate culture here that it is just not worth the time to try to argue.

As much as I don't agree with you, I hope you keep up your outlook because it's never pleasant to see the occasional True Believer come to unexpected grief and being rogered and having his faith, and therein his way of life, smashed to pieces.

nolimitholdem

27th May 2014, 07:52

harry,

Really, my argument is not with you (today! :)). My comment about aquiescence was directed at VT with his stated willingness to bond himself longer voluntarily. I do agree that there is bugger all one can do about much. (Except leave! Which many are.) But there is a difference between being forced, and openly declaring that handcuffs are good.

Vortex,

Do not preach to me about altruism. You know nothing about me nor how I deal with people on an individual basis.

I am the guy who waits at the conveyor belt at the end of a long flight to make sure every last crew member has their bag before I leave.

I am the guy who waits at the hotel check in to make sure every one of my crew has their room before I head to my own.

I am the guy who patiently deals with the little old lady who lost her glasses when the ground staff just want to get rid of her.

I am the guy who has no greater pleasure than showing a small child the flight deck and taking their picture while they sit on my seat wearing my hat.

I am the guy who emails a sick/injured crew member a couple days after a flight to make sure they’re getting the care they need.

I am the guy who enters 30R at night with only the turnoff lights because I know full well my taxi lights are right at eye level of your wee NG waiting across at N9. Who knows, you may even be the guy who clicked the mike button and said “Thanks”. (Nah, it’s usually an American.)

I could go on. It’s not important other than none of these things are in my contract.

Your grave mistake is to confuse human decency and basic airmanship with anything to do with a corporate entity like EK or FZ. They will simply take everything you give them. And then a bit more. And then a bit more. That is their purpose, and you have very few legal tools to defend yourself. It won’t matter how “gentlemanly” you consider yourself (and it does seem you have quite a lofty opinion of yourself in that regard), you will only ever be given as little as it takes to retain you. Not one fil more. You are seen as a money grabbing mercenary because you ARE one, in the context of employment. Your romantic view of yourself notwithstanding.

I categorically disagree with your rationale for longer bonds. The world labour market is changing faster and faster and the last thing any worker needs is decreased flexibility. Fine, a balance must be struck to prevent a revolving door, but draconian measures like 10 year bonds are hardly the answer. Everyone thinks ‘this is my last job’. Sure. We’ll just have to agree to disagree.

I’m sorry you seem to base your entire identity on what you do for a living. I guess that’s why airline pilots die so soon after retirement, statistically. They have nothing else to live for. I take pride in what I do but I hold it loosely. I do not need to gain “respect” by parading through an airport with my stripes. To each their own.

I’m done on this topic, enjoy your time at FZ.

Vortex Thing

27th May 2014, 11:14

fliion
Don't undersell your career as a professional pilot with the 'it's just a job' slant - it's an affront to hear a fellow pilot describe it that way. Many of us have taken over ten years of studying, Checking, interviews, university and flawless flying records just to get a chance to interview for the LHS at this company....only to know that those amongst us too easily forget what a bumpy road that can be.

This is what YOU wrote on the EK Meydan Heights thread?

Then in this thread you write that you believe me to be "silly" tell me I have missed a point about the contract not being respected when I have categorically said I get the point I simply do not agree that it is relevant to this thread topic . Ergo I haven't missed the point. Then, in effect, you say that I have no business to comment as I do not work for EK. Yet above you espouse being a professional. See above for the definition of one.

Harry the Cod. I completely agree with you and Richard Branson's quote I think is excellent. It is exactly why we do not want to leave and why I do look after the customer as I believe that we are treated "well enough".

Nolimit
I know EXACTLY how you deal with people on an individual basis.
I am a person and by stating what you have in your posts you are attempting to denigrate my outlook on life to fit your model of the world by calling me names and saying I do not have the right to voice my opinion.

You say that my view was not worth reply had you known that I was FZ not EK. Then in the very same post you tell me what you think my colleagues and mgt who work here at FZ may think when you work at EK. A tad hypocritical?

In essence you belittle other peoples views if they disagree with you, then lastly you sell yourself as someone who has the exact same mentality professionally. So as a professional surely you understand that there are sometimes different viewpoints and neither of them are wrong. I like to hear yours and others this is why I read and contribute to this forum. I sometimes agree and sometimes don't with views aired in this forum but isn't that the point. We become more balanced by understanding others.

I simply do not care if my contributions are rewarded by the mgt. I would like them to be and wish that they noticed them but that is not my raison d'être. I actually, genuinely just enjoy doing a good job. So I haven't missed that they don't care. I just don't care that they don't care as my happiness comes from my mini VTs and MRs VTs smiles and wellbeing.

Outatowner get a dictionary and look up the word naive; it does not mean disagrees with you. I understand the corporate culture very well indeed. It is trust me surprisingly better here than other places I have been. So if you think I do not perhaps it is you who is naive. Just because they don't care doesn't change my standards, desires and way of living my life. Perhaps it changes yours and if your moral compass can live life that way, then you crack on with that but I do not have to fall in line with your pessimism and should not have to suffer your vitriol solely because I disagree with your point of view.

I haven't hurt or attacked you or yours. I am simply saying I do not believe things to be that bad and why I think so. I do not need to go to sleep crying that mgt do not pat me on the back or care how much I am willing to give. If they can take and never give then that is for them to make their peace with.

So why wish me ill for not being you?

LHR Rain

27th May 2014, 13:55

Vortex you don't think things are bad where you are from? WTF! What world are you living in? Things are bad at EK and I know things are much worse at FZ. Just look at the attrition rates at both airlines.
From your posts FZ is obviously the best job you had. That is not something to be proud of or something you should put on your CV. You did not apply to BA because you and everyone else knows that you wouldn't get hired.
I really hope your are not a pilot. You do our "profession" a big disservice.

Vortex Thing

27th May 2014, 15:22

LHR Rain

What world am I living in? The same one as you but it doesn't owe me a living?

As for FZ being the best job I've had? As a civilian hell yes, streets above any job I've had and I could not really make it much better. My roster is great, the pay is great, the planes are new and well maintained, the network is diverse enough and large enough to not get bored. I enjoy the flying and most of the guys I fly with seem to enjoy it too.

Proud of it. Yep I love it actually.

As for not getting into BA. Passing Officer Aircrew Selection at 16 for my RAF flying scholarship, again for University Air Squadron and again for regular entry would I think likely point to a reasonable chance of success at getting through a system based on those very assessments and character profiles.

If BA offered me B787 I would not be interested. Life here is too good. So if your life here isn't then that speaks volumes about you.

An FZ FO gets paid more than a BA captain, an FZ skipper laughingly spends on brunches what a BA skipper pays in tax!

You can send your children to a good prep school and live a lifestyle that I could only dream of in UK. So the world I live in is as described.

I'm well paid, in a nice villa, with a nice car, with happy wife and happy life. So pray tell what is so terrible about life here or in fact give me even one good reason why I wold want to go home before retirement.

So what is it that is soooo bad about being here and if it is bad, perhaps it is you who would not get into BA for you seem to have a tenuous grasp on reality. Do excuse you whilst I go cry into my pint with 50% of EPC discount at various establishments.

FZ attrition rate 5-10% hardly an exodus!!!

Not only am I a pilot. I have been for a pretty long time now and even worse I fear in your books I am a happy pilot!

Outatowner

27th May 2014, 16:16

Then why are you so defensive VT? Sounds more like you're vigourously trying to defend the less than ideal position in which you've found yourself. It's happened before.

Nolimitetc...... that is some of the funniest **!* I've read in a fair while. I especially liked the part where you claim to hang around the carousel while the crew get their bags. What a waste of time!!! (and a load of crank, lets be honest)

fliion

27th May 2014, 16:48

VT

AGAIN... You miss the point. Upholding the profession does not mean supporting a mgt system that does not respect a contract.

It's that simple.

Your posts are naive. The longer you are here, the more casualties you will see.

Why don't we come back and discuss in three years time ...I think you get the gist of what everybody is saying ...and we get yours...(to be honest I'm too tired to get past the first four sentences of anything you write )

Wishing you well Sir.

f.

six7driver

27th May 2014, 18:44

Excellent posts VT, agree with every single word!

harry the cod

28th May 2014, 02:41

Outatowner

Maybe it's me being naive but I think Nolimitholdem actually means it....and why shouldn't he? Does it not set a good example? Not for the benefit of the Company but for our own pride as Commanders. Behave like a selfish **** and you'll be treated like one. We're quick to dish the diatribe on our own managers without realising what effect our own influential position holds amongst our crew. Can you not see the irony of it?

Craggenmore

Hilarious? Yes, I'm sure it was for the 3000+ pilots at BA who faced the very real possibility that their employer would be bankrupted by an over zealous and rigid cabin crew union who's main reason for striking was to protect and safe guard their very own position, part of the very left wing Transport and General Workers Union. The pilots union, BALPA, had already accepted new terms and conditions based on the reality that airlines like EK and Qatar were a serious threat to their survival. BASSA and CC89 were stuck in a time warp expecting senior cabin crew members to have 80K POUND salaries for working almost half the hours that many competitors worked. $150 hardship allowance because passengers on Miami flights are more demanding than other flights. 3 days off after ULR's, excluding rest days, two days minimum for all other flights. 1000 pound sterling 'box' payments for long flights to Japan, half of which you're in the bunk. That's per sector! Those are just a few examples of many. So, what would you have done? See your hard earned future ruined, along with your children's education, mortgage, pension etc all for the sake of cabin crew maintaining an overpaid and outdated contract? Or might you yourself have been tempted to say I've worked too bloody hard for these selfish idiots to screw with my future?

I know what I'd have done, but there again I am British!

Harry

Outatowner

28th May 2014, 04:05

I see, I thought he was pulling the piss. When he said he waits around at check in and emails sick crew... well, it does look a bit unlikely!!

Yes it does set a certain example of some kind however unfortunately it would be wasted about 90% of the time or more, being either not noticed or not particularly appreciated and easily forgotten long before the trip back the next day. Therefore pointless.

I think that if you're honest and if you look at it with eyes wide open, you will find in fact it is the purser who is the influential one wrt the crew and on a day to day basis, under normal conditions, what the capt does or says has little real impact.

Craggenmore

28th May 2014, 11:10

Harry,

The comment about Brits in uniform working for free is hilarious, and was backed up with a perfect example. You needn't have given the explanation.

Did you know that as early as 1998, new cadets at BA had a salary deduction each month lasting 5 years to pay back their rating?

Vortex Thing

28th May 2014, 16:32

Outatowner

That is exactly what HTC and I are implying. It seems so unlikely TO YOU!!! To me I find it hard to believe that there are captains and FOs who would not do this every single day! Everyone else comes first we come last.

That is the definition of altruism. It doesn't matter if 90% of the time it goes unnoticed, ignored or otherwise. It is what makes leadership different from management.

Anyone can be a manager and if as a captain that is all you are/hope to be and you can sleep well at nice then you crack on with that.

In the world I came from if you led men/women in the self interest (I'll only do it for a reward or recognition rather than because its my duty) then it was pretty likely that come the time your were deeply up to your neck in it somewhere you would really be quite deservedly on your own or getting shot in the back.

And no I am not defending my position. I love my position! I am replying to your inability to understand the meaning of naivety not being the same as I get it but just don't agree. Perhaps your dictionary has a different definition.

Oh hold on a second I'll stick to your logic.... dictionary sounds like a management lackeys tool. You weren't issued one with the FCOMs so likely think that you do not need to use one.

The captain may not be the most hands on during most flights of the crew and I will grant you that the momentum is maintained by the purser and a long day out with a bad one of those is something none of us enjoy. However it is by definition, by rank by duty and by professionally the captains absolutely definitive moment to set the tone for the conduct of the flight and make it clear how he/she runs their ship. The buck stops with you and if you don't care for setting that tone then why take the job.

Oh hold on I already know the answer for you it would/will be likely just for the pay rise!

fliion
Especially for you I thought I would wait until I was past 4 sentences as you say you stop reading there! Perhaps if you cannot be bothered to give something the depth of thought or time required to read someones reply you wouldn't:
a) Jump to conclusions about them
b) understand that a thread about bonds is nothing to do with my views on how the mgt are or are not behaving
c) understand that. "off with you" and you don't even work here are actually irrelevant to your inability to construct a logical answer to my not so unreasonable questions as to why you think X and Y

Thank you six7 and HTC for letting me believe that we are not so few and far between!

nakbin330

28th May 2014, 18:03

Bloody hell, Vortex, get off the forum and get a life.

fliion

28th May 2014, 20:24

Lol!

Can you imagine what his briefs are like!?

f.

Plastic787

28th May 2014, 20:45

Let's keep his underwear out of this please

The Outlaw

29th May 2014, 01:08

Was he a management pilot?

You can't trust someone who rambles on like that.

Anyway, back to the thread...Bond INC to 45,000 @ 5 years....BAD

maggot

29th May 2014, 01:10

Does the bond apply to type rated recruits or, all new hires?
Don't really mind the concept, 3 years to ensure a return on invested training (rating) is reasonable to me but 5 years is a joke; you can't enforce loyalty :hmm:

777boyindubai

29th May 2014, 05:39

Vortex, please would you comment on the Al Fajar building post and about honouring contracts? Thanks

Vortex Thing

29th May 2014, 07:53

Nabkin

I have a life thanks, oddly enough a very good one. Right here in Dubai. Is that your logical and well mannered response?

777boy
Well isn't that kind of my point. THIS THREAD isn't about the contract or anything other than the bond. If you want to talk about the contractual aspects then start a thread on that very subject and I will happily contribute if I feel I can add any value or if I feel I may learn something from anyone out there with a more persuasive, coherent or logical argument.

As I fear you are after my view on contracts in general (because I am good like that) it is really simple I have already stated in the last few posts.

A contract is a contract. If someone is offered specific accommodation in their contract and that changes without mutual agreement then one of two states occur. Either party has inalienable right to consider if the breach is fundamental. If they consider it so and most importantly ACT as so they can then take whatever action they deem remedies the breach and treat the contract as repudiated.

If however EITHER party acquiesces and continues to act as if the breach was not fundamental then life is simple. By accepting the change and continuing to act as if a contract is still binding you are deemed to have accepted the change and cannot even under law of precedence ruled states (where it exists in law i.e NOT HERE as it is a code not a statue) claim that you have been hard done by. i.e the remedy in law cannot be restitution to the original envisaged state as you have not acted as if the contract was breached.

So it is simple either refuse to come until you have sufficient trust that you will get what you were promised on your side of the contract. Or don't come. That is that simple. If you want to go down the route of breach of contract etc. Then you will waste a lot of time, likely get nowhere and certainly not work here.

Nothing stops people taking the allowance and finding their own accommodation. 300,000 other expats seem to manage!

If however you sit there and call me names or just belittle what I say without reason or post antithetical rhetoric with no substance to your argument then I will just think that either you do not have the intellectual horsepower to produce a response or are socially incapable or understanding that you are not the only person on the planet with a viewpoint.

Please more interjections such as "off with you", "get a life" as they kind of prove my point.

harry the cod

29th May 2014, 11:03

VT

The problem with simply walking out of Company accommodation and getting your own place is rather an oversimplification of the problem. The allowance will not go far, especially for a family here. 180k for a Captain may cover your mortgage on a 4-5 bed place if you bought during the troughs in the market but you'll struggle now. You'll need 1,000,000 dhs for the deposit alone on a 4,000,000 place for which you may be lucky to get a 3 bed place in nice area. As for rent, the allowance is pitiful. For comparison, a friend of mine who works for NBD on a similar salary gets 300k for housing per year and that's about to increase. Not the forum for this I know.

Anyway, ignore the usual suspects with their constant one sided views, it's harmless banter and often an opportunity to blow of steam and frustrations. This is an open public forum, you and everyone else has the right to comment and express your viewpoint. The problem is, the negative doomsday posters are too paranoid to use our own dedicated forum. That would require a lack of anonymity!

Vortex Thing

29th May 2014, 11:19

Hi HTC,

I'm kind of with you. Funny old thing one of my friends here works at NDB and was discussing this very thing with me last week!

4/5 bed villa, nice area, todays price 200-300k depending on how nice you need. You can just get by on 180k if you go small or are very lucky. So it becomes about what you are prepared to pay.

My perspective is that in UK it is "normal" in the south of England to pay 40-50% of your salary on a house be that rent or mortgage makes little difference.

That means the avg FZ skipper can spend 25,000AEd per month i.e 300k per annum and then avg FZ FO can spend 20,000AED cpm if we use 50% i.e 240,000AED

The EK allowance and the FZ allowance are pretty similar so it just comes down to mentality. For me we personally have scarified for the last 10 yrs to get to where we are now. We intend to be here for the long haul and this is home now so I am not going to cram the children into 2500sq ft to have a bit of cash for 10yrs. I want to live my life whilst I'm lung enough to enjoy it!

I know the pay may be billed as separate elements but in reality the way we see it is money is money, it doesn't matter what the breakdown on the payslip is it still comes as a lump sum on the 26th of each month so granted you can't save anything but hey that can come later!

Bear in mind of course all figures are for just me working, with Mrs VT back in the game who of course is worth waaay more than little ol me then everything she earns is pure disposable to be disbursed home or invested etc.

So I think it is all about strategy and I feel it quite simple as we know exactly what we want at all stages of life from now till were in retirement.

What do you think? Have a nice weekend chap.
VT

P.S Most of the houses we looked at buying are 5.5million or more. Yes I know you can get in for less but personally would only buy smaller than that as investment but to live in with my family need 5mill minimum. This seems to come out around 25,000AEd for a 85% mortgage. So buying or renting is quite doable. You just need to commit to Dubai

BANANASBANANAS

29th May 2014, 11:48

In my opinion, anyone who buys property in DXB now or opts out of company accommodation now to rent is taking a huge gamble. It may work out of course and I really hope it does for those of you that are thinking of rolling the dice. But consider the relatively recent volatility in the Dxb property markets where a few people made millions and many more lost several millions and look at what Expo 2020 is doing for prices in general in Dxb and then ask yourself what happens in 2021? Do you really think the demand will still be there to support the inflated prices or do you think the bubble will burst again? I have my opinion. Everyone else is entitled to theirs. But I will be staying in company accommodation as the cost/benefit analysis just makes any alternative option way too risky for us. If company accommodation becomes unacceptable to us for whatever reason then we have our contingency plan in place. It would most definitely not involve taking the accommodation allowance or buying property in DXB though.