PDA

View Full Version : IFALPA/BALPA Cathay ban.


niknak
28th May 2002, 18:58
Today's Flight International contains a notice placed by BALPA and IFALPA telling pilots that they must not apply for or accept jobs with Cathay.
I think that I understand the reasons behind the notice, but what happens if you did apply or accept, will you be excomunicated? get a midnight visit? Never work in the civilised world again? What are the implications?:confused:

Zulu
28th May 2002, 20:22
The implications are you'd be working for a company that a year ago, unilaterally & illegally sacked 51 pilots.

So, are you going to take yourself and your family out to HK, and work for a company, where you have no assurance that they are not going to do the same to you at any time?

Ban or no ban, you'd have to be mad or desperate to take a job with CX and their present management. Probably explains why no-one turned up to their last recruitment day in London.

Orca strait
28th May 2002, 20:28
You can play their game, take the training then make your decision as to whether you really want to support that type of management culture...

----------

touch&go
28th May 2002, 21:02
Just another view, if youíre a pilot out of work, need a job, family to feed, mortgage to pay and not your fight in the first place, wonít these guys put there families first ?

Before you have a go at me, Iím not looking to work for Cx or out of work, just opening up a debate on the matter.

NoJoke
28th May 2002, 21:38
I understand and would support a Union action if it was backed by the membership. CX 'A' scale members allowed the 'B' scale - to their benefit. CX 'B' scale . . . . To my understanding, since the spate of sackings, there have been Command upgrades . . . . to the positions their own 'A' 'B' or 'C' scalers may have been in.

I would consider a job with CX to a certain extent but I do not like their 'Management' style. However I also do not like elitist RAF plonkers and anti-podian perfectionists. :mad: :cool:

411A
28th May 2002, 21:42
The so called "ban" has been demonstrated as an abject failure...the guys in the HKAOA are "really" getting desperate...illegal "sackings"...complete nonsense...looks like it was "according to contract"
Clearly, managements' actions are intended to to show that "management" is "in charge"...not a bunch of whinging pilots.

The company shareholders would expect NOTHING less.:rolleyes:

NoJoke
28th May 2002, 21:54
Mr 411a-b (failed)

You think you understand Pilots. Try again. There is Honour. However this is normally associated with a (C)ivil understanding of other people. From my observation of you're previous comments you seem to miss this point.

DownIn3Green
28th May 2002, 22:15
I'm with 411 on this one...

NoJoke (no pun intended) when was the last time "honor" was a currency honored by the bank?

From what I've seen in this business since 1978, honor belongs to the "haves" at the expense of the "have-nots".

Exception being the Comair guys last year...

(by the way, taking the training and leaving puts one in the same boat as one who trains and flys, so go for it guys...)

NoJoke
28th May 2002, 22:32
DownIn3Green,

I've done the course(s). Presently 9,700 hrs Fixed & Rotary. Oh dear, but there you go. The whole point of my post was those who should be looking.

'%MAC'
28th May 2002, 23:14
A legitimate question. I simply do not know what the repercussions are, and they ought to be announced. Iíd like to know what ALPA intends to do to those whoíve crossed. If ALPA has called for an action they probably ought to delineate what the consequences are. Are those who cross going to be denied membership? Will they be terminated if the union wins its demands? What punitive action can ALPA take?

Telling someone, ďOh youíll be in big trouble if you doĒ might work with teenagers but probably not with adults.

Here in the US we had pilots crossing the line at Eastern (EAL). Many of those pilots are now denied jumpseat privileges and have difficulty (impossibility) getting a job with the majors. Many though have found employment at non-union carriers (AirTran). Those are the consequences that evolved from the bitter strike at Eastern, and itís 11 years latter, some people canít let go. I canít imagine CX being that contentious.

basil fawlty
28th May 2002, 23:21
I'm with touch&go on this one.
Also, in relation to the unions, this action amounts to a "closed shop" scenario. I will not be told or even mildly "threatened" by any professional association/union as to whom I can or cannot apply to and work for. As previously stated this is nobody elses fight, and perhaps the situation would best be resolved from the "inside" of CX, but it seems those much more closely related bretherin do not have the desire to put up a proper fight.

Airbubba
29th May 2002, 02:17
>>Here in the US we had pilots crossing the line at Eastern (EAL). Many of those pilots are now denied jumpseat privileges and have difficulty (impossibility) getting a job with the majors.<<

On the other hand, the pilots who crossed at Continental received full amnesty from ALPA last year. They are working with union pins while many of the Eastern strikers never turned another wheel. Some of the pilot unions seem to be better at name calling than getting jobs for their unemployed colleagues.

Are the HKAOA refusing to do training or accept upgrades until their fallen brothers are rehired? If so, maybe their threats have some weight...

THINALBERT
29th May 2002, 04:00
I'm no fan of the way CX do business but I find the behaviour of some of their alleged employees just as bad. IE, a friend of mine joined CX cargo at SYD recently and now he and his wife and kids are the subject of foul and abusive 'phone calls in the middle of the night from people claiming to be CX pilots.
Its no way to behave and further your case guys.

And, yes a couple of my friends are 49ers.

Hung Like A Horse
29th May 2002, 05:45
A few things need to be crystal clear.

Firstly, there is no picket line.

If there is no picket line, no one has crossed it.

Secondly, the gutless ******s who're calling people I know in the middle of the night for taking a job with Cathay are not reflecting well upon the ideal, and I say that loosely, of repugnance and 'brotherhood bonding' in times of trevail.

Identify yourself, and you'll be out of Cathay before you hang up the phone you cowards!

How dare you.

ironbutt57
29th May 2002, 09:15
Good point airbubba....the answer is no...the commands vacated by several 49-ers are filled by the same folks calling new-hires scabs....pretty silly ?

Snoop
29th May 2002, 10:28
Despite looking I am not sure what Cathay's current requirements for new hires are, so I am not sure that the specifics of this apply to people like me. However seen in a broader context I do have a question.

I have been looking for that first proper break for a few years now. I scrape by doing whatever job comes along, hoping that lady luck will look my way again. Apart from my o'levels and highers , my only other qualifications are for flying. To get these I borrowed £40,000 which I still owe. I understand the importance of solidarity and presenting a united front as pilots, in the face of management's mis-management, but since Balpa has been sod all help in my employment search and offered nothing in the way of support or information since Sept 11th why should I listen to them? I need a job flying and if this was a chance to get going, how could they vilify people such as myself who would consider taking a chance like this?

Let face it, looking for a job for a low hours CPL/IR like myself is akin to looking for a needle in a haysatck at the moment.

BusyB
29th May 2002, 11:40
Just a couple of points:- 411A is wrong as usual, contractually there is a disciplinary and grievance procedure which was not used. Secondly, whilst not in any way approving of threats or anonymous phone calls from AOA members with CX's management techniques don't forget they (management reps) could well be making these threats and phone calls to alienate the AOA.:rolleyes:

THINALBERT
29th May 2002, 12:31
Fair point. I do not know how likely it is that management would do such a thing, but as I am told that the police are involved, all calls are taped and a trace is in place, I guess the guilty party(s) will soon be identified.

dallas dude
29th May 2002, 13:15
Despite what 411 believes the IFALPA ban is having an effect.

A retiring RAF acquaintance was invited to interview in HK this month. CP was completely up front about the ban, both before he flew out and when he arrived at CP. He was asked at the interview whether he intended to accept the position before or after the ban.

He also said the other interviewees (11) mostly had very low levels of experience. Not criticism, just a fact.

No doubt there are some folks that don't (and never will) "get it".

They'll sit in their ivory tower watching principled people make tough decisions and continue to make their own hay for the time being.

Until they're the last one left when management says, "Well, we'll pay you a fiver for your service 'cos that's all it's worth!".

CP (not Turnbull) has privately admitted that they'd enter talks with HKAOA about the 49ers if the ban is dropped.

HKAOA has said recall the 49ers and the ban can go away.

An olive branch is needed.

Cheers,

6feetunder
29th May 2002, 14:42
dd, ever flown a TriStar?

dallas dude
30th May 2002, 01:24
6feet under,

No but I know a Scottish bloke (Rraamjet) that has, if that's your subtle question!

Ex QFlt.

Cheers,

6feetunder
30th May 2002, 01:27
No, just thinking you spent time on the L10 in the FH. He is ex Qflt as well.

VR-HFX
30th May 2002, 01:49
The simple solution is to put them all on the freighter fleet for 12 months on probation and review the files. The cost of converting the bus boys is minimal in the scheme of things.

There are some that may not get through the review but 12 months in pergatory deserves probation and a secnd chance.

Some of the guys on basings who refused upgrades because they didn't want to come back to HK will have to re-think their positions or opt out permanently.

FWIW

Kubota
30th May 2002, 01:55
VR-

Now that's the first bit of original thinking I've heard on the 49'ers in a long while. If you have the ear of anyone up there, why don't you pitch the idea at them?

ironbutt57
30th May 2002, 18:48
Or better yet, if your personal/family needs dictate, take the employment if offered and disregard the selfish, inane ramblings of the AoA and the rabble-rousers on this forum....:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

reliefer
30th May 2002, 22:12
Not that my opinion matters, but I agree with Ironbutt57.

Plastique
30th May 2002, 22:38
Looks to me like another pathetic desperate attempt by the HKAOA to try to keep their case alive.

From what I can see the whole thing is orchestrated by a bunch of whining ex-RAF, antipodean and Canadians who have pretty much nothing to loose, and who have too much time on their hands sitting on their collective ****s in the soul destroying yet pilot friendly confines of Disco Bay.

VR-HFX
30th May 2002, 23:59
Kubota

The idea has been mentioned. It is now a case of the capuccino sippers getting the pinkies out of their collective port nostrils and taking it upstairs.

If the festering sores are to be healed in my lifetime it will have to be done by compromise. It's that simple.

Sure the company can continue to sit pat and do nothing. The airline will continue to operate and the AOA may gradually wither; BUT as long as there remains a body of pilots who remember what happened last year, the company, the staff AND the shareholders will continue to pay an unholy price.

DownIn3Green
31st May 2002, 00:33
Ironbutt,

I agree with you 100%.

Are you ex-Frank by any chance?

We will never win.

ironbutt57
31st May 2002, 05:05
Never crossed one, never will....but if you expect others to have solidarity and support your cause, then you'd better do it yourself as well.....AoA is asking for outsider support, offering little in return...very silly situation...personally I'd get out of flying before I'd seek and accept employment at CX during the ban...or any other time for that matter, but the recruitment ban is very ill-concieved/executed.

VR-HFX
31st May 2002, 07:37
I guess the reason it hasn't gone upstairs is lack of courage.

Many in magament seem timid to say the least. DMT is not going to bite your nose off. He is looking for a solution as much as we all are.

basil fawlty
31st May 2002, 22:14
lets look at this situation from the so called "scabs" point of view....chances are the T&C's on offer now are far better than those at the regime they are currently working under, so should they honestly be expected to say "oh no, i'm not going there, give the jobs back to those poor guys and i'll stay where i am in a position with less pay, interest and prospects". please grow up and realise this is a competitive job market like many other industries. yes, aviation is a profession, and i am the first to agree it is going downhill rapidly as a career, but i am amazed at those that try to compare it to medicine, the law and such like. ok, the entry criteria are as high, or higher, but doctors and lawyers have a virtual monopoly in their markets. i'm afraid that the airline business is just not like that, there is a lot of competition out there, not just between airlines, but also between those wishing to participate on the flightdeck. for every airline pilot there is more than one pilot with appropriate qualifications ready to step into his place. thats the way it is, airline management will do whatever it thinks it can get away with. i appreciate that CX has bypassed the disciplinary procedure etc etc and that is out of order, but to mark the cards of others who are just trying the best they can to make the most of their own lot is arrogant and selfish. the "i'm alright jack" mentality works both ways you know.

dallas dude
31st May 2002, 22:59
basil fawlty

I agree with the sentiments of your post. I think there's a correlation of "lower" working conditions and the growth of the global alliances.

Our profession is merely taking its turn in the sausage machine, at this time.

If this corporate model continues and leaps over to the medical profession they'll at least have a roadmap of what to expect.

Either the line is drawn somewhere or every rolls over and plays dead.

Cheers,

411A
1st Jun 2002, 00:36
Welcome to the CX graveyard, dd......many have gone before.
Management always wins, like it or not.
And many certaintly won't.........:rolleyes:

partyreptile
1st Jun 2002, 12:23
411, mgt. always wins, yep Lorenzo sure is a winner, banned for life from the business, Goodwin at UAL sure is a winner, ****-canned quick, Delta sure was the winner against Comair, although it cost them 500 million, yes sir, mgt. always wins. What a crock.

Dallas Dude, it's people like you, who despite numerous warnings continue to attempt to inject some reasonable debate into shrill arguements, people like you will never, never shoot under par. Looks like you are dropping your left shoulder. EX. TRVSTITE FLT.

Seriph
3rd Jun 2002, 09:22
So Basil the entry requirements for flying are as high as for law and medicine are they. Law and medicine are cerebral disciplines, flying, as can clearly be seen by the quality of these postings is not. Most pilots I know have not been to university and wouldn't qualify to get there. Flying requires mechanical co-ordination and some additional capacity, not rare gifts.

willoman
3rd Jun 2002, 10:12
Seriph - what nonsense you spout ! I taught flying at one of our University Air Squadrons some years ago. Some students were good, some average and many were so poor that I assumed that their academic achievements were in under-water basket weaving - and some of those were medical/legal students. As in aviation, university success is gained by graft and application, and occasional cerebral input. Pilots make cerebral decisions in seconds, most other professions can take hours and even days. Finally, I remind you that a legal degree does not necessarily require university attendance.

Kaptin M
3rd Jun 2002, 12:28
Seriph, you are obviously mixing in the "wrong circles" (judging from your previous, IQ-elevated posts) if "Most pilots I know have not been to university and wouldn't qualify to get there."......but then again, the "most pilots I know" are more likely to be Week-end Warriors, who don't rely upon aviation for an income, but rather as a means of R&R.

Your conceited statement "Law and medicine are cerebral disciplines, .............not rare gifts." is a load of BOLLOCKS!
Anyone with a photographic memory is EASILY able to pass the required examinations - OR with the RIGHT family ties!

I have about as much faith in the practicioners of Modern Medicine (for the diagnosing and treatment of routine medical matters), as I do in tea cup readers!!

But back to to your original statement. It's seems more than co-incidental that so many of your espoused "Cerebrally disciplined, professional, law and medico professionals, endowed with 'rare gifts' " consciously and knowingly manouevre their aircraft (usually complete with pax) into a fatal termination which pilots, "who have not been to university and wouldn't qualify to get there." and using their "mechanical co-ordination and some additional capacity" are able to avoid!!

You may consider yourself (and some of your peers) "Rarely Gifted", Seriph, however, in the REAL World you might find that you don't even qualify for a position in the "Survival of the Species", based on common sense, logic, and lateral thinking! :D

Carruthers
3rd Jun 2002, 17:07
I agree with Seriph, in my experience in aviation (professionally for 30 yrs) there is no correlation between flying and academic ability. I know professional pilots who had difficulty achieving 5 GCSE's but no doctors. It is necessary to have a degree to qualify in law. If not a law degree then a CPE course can be done at the Law Society's schools but you must have a degree to qualify. Seriph certainly touched a raw nerve with you Kaptin, obviously hit the mark. What is your degree in? Certainly not logic.