Pay negotiations concluded

[DropKnee]

If I may take a quote from ole RF's missive.
"While the GC acknowledges that the numbers surrounding a pay deal will be contentious, "
He did note that no productivity increases were asked for by the company. Frankly, flying 900 hrs a year. I don't see how I could possibly be anymore productive. I really hope the U.S. and N.Z. folks were not left to hang in the cold, again.
Adios

[Free Flight]

I am unaware that the management asked for any productivity - because they already mugged us and TOOK it by cancelling the RPs.
The issue is not the 900hrs - I work my butt off and don't hit the 900hr limit. So, they’ve arranged for me to work harder and I still won't hit the 900hr limit. They get productivity from 2 man AUS and 3 man EUR flights and we will just work harder.

Not impressed.

[sodapop]

A days reinstated as well. In original format.

[Sqwak7700]

Spot on soda pop and Dan B.

Turn up the heat and watch them squirm even more. Still plenty of douchebags up there that need to be shown the door.

[Progress Wanchai]

The numbers may well be contentious.

"But there was no demand from management that we give up productivity in return for pay" apart from rip up your Rostering Practice and smoke it, blowing rings into the faces of the NC.

Seriously Rod?? Didn't take u long to start suffering Stockholm sydrome.
Are you following in the footsteps of past AOA presidents and taking a cushy base after this recommendation gets up?

This should not be put up for a vote until the RP's are sorted out.
We're being asked to bet while only being shown half the hand.
And the half a hand we're seeing is "contentious".

[sirhcttarp]

with the exception of NZ

2/2/1

What a disgrace!

[iceman50]

So much for the company wanting to change the goal posts - the usual suspects on here are just as bad. What happened to lets just talk about pay then RPs then etc etc:ugh::ugh:

[Shep69]

An acceptable TA on pay:

1. Will be straightforward. While some types of contracts are necessarily complex, pay rise increments are about as simple as it comes. It will not have strings attached or trickery in an attempt to bribe or buy votes.

2. Will be uniform. It will be an across the board increase without trying to play sectors off against each other. If a locality has currency issues this can be adjusted through things like HKPA. Moreover, currencies and CPI-U are manipulated in various countries as to mask real inflation; we should not let this be exploited.

3. Will NOT be divisive; divisive or disparate increases are nothing more than union busting in sheeps clothing. Agreeing to a marginal increase for the many at the expense of some creates resentments and divisions for everyone and is wholly unacceptable.

4. Will not play games. Will not take away 5% somewhere else and give 4% back trying to make this look like a gain or something it's not.

5. Won't need marketing to 'sell' it; the figures will speak for themselves.

CC IS very much working. The company is starting to figure out that continuous reserve is horrendously inefficient and doesn't work and folks are timing out. We have been successful in attaining a productivity level commensurate with not going above and beyond or being helpful above the contract and there's little availabe to counter it. Moreover, in time it could become a way of life (just like at other major airlnes) as folks get used to it. I think the company has a genuine concern that this might happen.

We are heading into the busy travel season and need to make sure this isn't simply a trick to get us out of CC--as CC was initiated over pay. Moreover a REAL inflationary adjustment isn't a gift--it's our right. Inflation favors big business with large capital assets because wages always lag inflation (and in practice few nations ever experience TRUE deflationary periods with fiat currencies). The company gets as much or more for less in any inflationary period. The 'productivity increase' argument is often exploited as a red herring--anytime inflation happens the company GETS a de-facto productivity increase automatically. Given the competitive pilot market and relatively short supply we finally have a real advantage here and shoudn't blow it.

If it winds up being a genuine and honest offer which reflects a reasonable inflationary adjustment then go for it. If it's a meh........, something seems 'not quite right,' or throws breathern under the bus reject it (and one can wait for the inevitable 'imposition' anyway). Hopefully the leadership will carefully review it and won't bring forward anything that is bogus or an offer that once again tries to divide us against ourselves.

And hopefully it IS an honest, reasonable, and forthright offer. That's really all that folks have been asking for from the get-go.

[Cumguzzler]

Actually it's only a 2 year deal...

[mngmt mole]

Twenty years of being abused, disrespected and lied to? My CC is permanent to the day of retirement. The ONLY thing a proper contract will buy from me will be my consideration in not taking 'some time off' on an adhoc and gratuitous basis. They lost my loyalty and consideration years ago. That is what bad management accomplishes.

[Toe Knee Tiler]

Hey Mole.
I am with you on this. CC until retirement.

Carpe Diem.

[Trafalgar]

Regarding the recent increases to staff travel costs: I have the discretion to save "X" amount on each flight that I operate. I can assure you that from now on I will make SURE that I use that discretion in a way that guarantees that any potential cost saving will be HEAVILY factored towards the "safety" side of the formula. In other words, the THOUSANDS of dollars I could save EACH flight will now be lost to a professional emphasis on safety. The word "loathing" does not even begin to describe how I feel about the management of this airline. Making a profit center of your own employees is disgusting and venal.

[betpump5]

Regardless what we get, I hope everyone realises that there can be no good working a G Day. EVER!

[iceman50]

Staying in CC for RP's etc etc, if the pay increase is accepted, would that then not put the AOA in breach of the Good Faith Bargaining Agreement and play into the company's hands?

[Bob Hawke]

Iceman, you crack me up.

[White None]

Staying in CC for RP's etc etc, if the pay increase is accepted, would that then not put the AOA in breach of the Good Faith Bargaining Agreement and play into the company's hands?
Yes - We should continue with persistent domination of the high moral ground.

[goathead]

So more bones of massive contention are to be served up , is anyone really surprised?

All I can say is turn up to the Focus meeting ( including some local pilots please !) and ask the question to the NC .

There is no genuine effort by management , and there never will be until they learn good and proper, the value of our collective goodwill.

[White None]

When a whole demographic fails to turn up to an event in which they, (to some extent, more than others), have a vested interest, you have to wonder what more important stuff they are doing on their "?" days off?

[Max Reheat]

Bob Hawke,

Iceman is correct.
If we accept the pay offer CC has to be cancelled, and then we must start all over again for rostering practices under the terms of the GFBFA. That's the deal!

Where did the 2/2/1 come from? Except out of sirhcttarp's arse?

[BalusKaptan]

Company has already called an impasse on RPs so no need to start again. Also no problem extending cc to the still outstanding issues of RPs, HKPA etc and having RPs not put in policy but returned to cos.
We vote as we see fit over the pay but irrespective of the outcome remain in cc as the other outstanding issues need to be resolved. The company have shown their insincerity in their promises (think SLS agreement/25 year housing).

[Max Reheat]

I agree with you entirely Balus...

However, the vote for CC was with reference to pay only!

[BusyB]

The vote for CC was for the previous pay deal which has not been agreed merely imposed:suspect:

[Max Reheat]

Yes, but it was still only about pay!

[joblow]

Unless the pay rise numbers are staggering I'm not coming out of CC . If the numbers are as low as I think that they will be. It's time to ramp up the pressure

[The FUB]

EUR based pilots are in CC for A days??????

HKG pilots for pay?????

Thats my way of thinking. Whatever the outcome I kinna enjoy the status quo of being in CC.

['round midnight]

Max,
At a time when CX is breaching existing RPs with every roster publication, I think you're concentrating a little too much on the niceties of the CC mandate.
Take or leave the pay deal but please remain in CC until RP negotiations are concluded.
I hardly think that CX would have the nerve to argue the scope of our mandate, with their track history. Even if they do call 'foul play' what can they possibly do about it? Make our rosters worse? That would take some creativity at this point.

'RM

[Anotherday]

If we agree to the TA then CC stops. That's what we agreed to. You want to do your own private nonAOA CC for whatever reason, go right ahead.

[Arfur Dent]

As several people have already mentioned - CC (or as we used to say "Withdrawal of Enthusiasm") is a Lifestyle for ever with this lot. They comply completely with their interpretation of our Contract(s) so we should comply absolutely with it - no more - no less.
It's exactly what they deserve. Don't 'help out' ever.:{

[geh065]

Arfur, the only helping going on when people work G days is helping themselves. People are not going it to help the company, only their own rosters or overtime. I'm not sure it makes it any better though!

[Toe Knee Tiler]

Fuel prices down staff travel massive increase. This deal is below the average inflation rate of Hong Kong.

I am staying in CC and voting the deal down.

WTF are they thinking?

Hong Kong Inflation Rate | 1981-2015 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast (http://www.tradingeconomics.com/hong-kong/inflation-cpi)

:ugh:

[Frogman1484]

How much has staff travel gone up by?

[kenfoggo]

G day compensation payments are encompassed in the RPs. Even if we come out of CC there will still be no RPs and so no G day compensation and so no incentive to work on a G day anyway. Which means the Company want us to stay in CC as they offer no incentive to come out of it and to help them by working a G day.

[Trafalgar]

Rod: simple segway into the issue. Insist that ANY increase in staff travel is tied to the percentage pay increase for a given year. This year, approx 3.5% (average), therefore that is the maximum increase allowed in staff travel costs. No change to CC until then. That and numerous other issues MUST be resolved before I consider any change to CC.

[BusyB]

CC was for the previous pay deal. Until that is mutually agreed I would expect CC to remain. This pay deal does not supersede the previous ones.:confused:

[Trafalgar]

I think we all need to wake up and realise that the time is now to put on the maximum pressure possible, and not relent until EVERY issue is SATISFACTORILY resolved. Without a comprehensive agreement, covering ALL areas of major concern, we will just dissipate our advantage to an extent that whatever gains we accomplish in one area, will be given up in other areas. I don't think this pay deal is adequate. And I certainly don't want to be 'bought' off by a barely sufficient amount of money now, only for them to screw it back out of me with RP's and any other number of devious and two-faced tricks that i've seen far too many of over the years. I vote no. I don't need the money that badly. I do need a proper rostering system, staff travel system, trip bid system, medical system...etc, etc. I vote no. CC until the magnetic field flips for all I care.

[Lowkoon]

Simple, if you agree to their pay deal, notify them you will be out of contract compliance immediately. Shake hands leave the room. Then request a meeting to discuss the wholesale dismantling of previously agreed rostering practices without consultation or negotiation, and notify the company that a vote on contract compliance on the issue of rostering practices will be tabled to members. Specify a day that is the minimum under the rules for notification to members for a vote. If contract compliance was specifically aimed at pay, if pay is resolved, remove it, then vote on it again for rostering, and any other issue you wish to be resolved.

[goathead]

A question to the NC
you spent a week discussing this ? Why ?
This is inadequate and you know it , so have you learnt yet ?

My biggest gripe is this will be accepted by the majority , and there we go no more CC and the end of any leverage we have and a continuation into the slow dissemination of our pay and contract etc etc issues.

Now is not the time to accept this as adequate .

[Loopdeloop]

I agree with Lowkoon.
Vote on pay and cancel CC if it passes the vote.
Then:
"Be it resolved that the HKAOA members will abide strictly with the terms of their contract until the company commit to abide by RP's as agreed between the company and the HKAOA iaw long standing custom and practice"

Have it in writing that RP's will be adhered to, remove CC, then re-negotiate RP's.

[Oasis]

Good deal, not great. Will vote yes.
Stop cc after yes vote, for the simple reason that we have to be able to turn the tap on and off, so the company feels what its like when we're not happy/happy.

[bang ding ow]

+1 on the post by OASIS above. Bang

[anotherbusdriver]

No. Do not think it is a good deal.

First of all, 4.5% is what we should have got anyway. Like every other staff member in HK.

Second of all, with RP protections thrown out, it will effectively be a massive gain in productivity for the company, with a massive decrease in our salary to work ratio. We will be even more exhausted working harder for less. With no protections.

We will be contributing so much more to the overall profit margin through our extra work, yet, when profit sharing comes around - we will again be given the least. Again, management will grant themselves record bonuses for their fabulous work!

Thirdly, What happens next year when the company announces all "eligible HK staff" get (-.-)% (I can guarantee it will be higher than 3.5%)?
- We will be locked in at 3.5% and can do nothing until 2017 in regard to CC and pay.

Vote no, for the sake of your dignity at least!!!!!
Surely you are worth more than that??!!!!!

[Silent Running]

I said it last year and I'll say it again, in these uncertain times we cannot afford to enter multi-year pay deals, we'll lose every time!:ugh:

Most have forgotten or simply don't realise that years ago the Company persuaded us to forego annual pay negotiations in return for profit sharing... we all know where that has led us!

We have to return to annual bargaining for inflation related salary adjustments, just like everyone else! Time and resource consuming it may be but the Company has saved itself a small fortune since it last paid the relevant profit share to its aircrew; or maybe most of you believe HK$2000 adequately compensates you for the annual loss of spending power and static input to your pitiful retirement packages.

[Threethirty]

RP15, two man OZ, 3 man Europe/Vancouver all for 4.5%/3.5%, great deal for the company!

[stevieboy330]

You can have your 4% 4.5% 5.0% or 10% but I guarantee you will just loose it somewhere else & end up with the 3.0% they planned on giving from the start. They will get it back on RP's, OT, rostering, O days rostered after reserve, 2 man crew, 3 man crew, housing allowance, shorter aircraft ratings, shorter or no base training, shorter or no handling sims, more expensive staff travel, reduced "quality" health care approved treatments & coverage, travel insurance, hotel allowances, hotels etc...every one of those things is being hit hard or will be hit hard in the next 12 months. The only thing on the rise is the share price (from $14 to $20 in 6 months), dividends & management bonuses. We are working for a company that couldn't care less about moral (check their response & action to the survey response = Nil) or where this will lead in 5 years. It's a sad state or affairs, I'm not saying I have the answers but I am saying I care less & less about CX every day & that ain't what you want from a guy flying a heavy jet all night to the other side of the world. Chances are guys like me won't even be here in 5 years & that's a shame!

[anotherbusdriver]

What???... Nowhere have I stated anything like 9%. I would just like to see a fair cost of living increase.

Do you think we deserve LESS than every other HK employee?

First of all, to clarify: I believe negotiations are pointless when in fact the outcome is that we are given LESS than every other "eligible HK employee" as a cost of living increase. No productivity gains, no reductions required from them. Just for turning up.

And then we are given a lock-in figure, which is going to be lower than next year's cost of living increase for everyone else, I would bet on it.

Anything less than what the rest of our "people, they make an airline" staff get, is just a slap in the face. Why not just settle on the annual "cost of living increase". We will get it anyway, when no agreement is forthcoming. We are giving up our big gun Contract Compliance for nothing. How stupid are we if we say yes?!!!!

Secondly, the fact that the company has decided to delete RP's agreement, without compensation for the extra workload we will have to cover, for NADA, NOTHING! NIL! ZILCH???!!!!!... Come on, we should be in CONTRACT COMPLIANCE ON THIS ISSUE ALONE!!!!!!

Remember when AKL and ANC went 3 crew?... That was negotiated for a 14% credit factor. I do hope that they will pay the 14% credit factor for 3 man Europe. What is the credit factor increase for 2 man Oz??.... Do we have any higher than 14%.... because I know from experience 2 crew through the night is worth more like a 50% credit factor. Let alone 14%.

So many reasons to say, "no thanks".

[Trafalgar]

I understand that the initial reaction will be to vote 'yes', as a sense of fatigue and relief combine to push us in that direction. As other posters have mentioned before me, the company is once again selling us a trojan horse. Inside the horse is a complete dissembling of our work rules through the suspension of RP's. The changes in RP's effectively nullify the value of this pay raise. I say again: the pay raise is a mirage under the new RP environment. Even prior to the suspension of RP's, they have already drastically lowered the quality of life for those on bases with the single act of cancelling A days. Imagine how bad it will get for all of us when they start tinkering with every single facet of our operation and lives.

I say that the ONLY way this is voted through is with an amendment to the suspension of RP's. The oompany agrees to keep the current RP's in effect until proper negotiations have been completed. This with the knowledge that CC will be implemented immediately if any degradation to our work rules and quality of life ensues from the resulting RP package.

[Oasis]

RP's was never supposed to be part of these talks, wasn't this a stipulation?
This was only about pay, the next talks will cover RP's, don't muddy the waters, keep it simple.

[Trafalgar]

Oasis, you are technically correct, however in the interim, the company has been arbitrarily amending established work rules (A days), attacking our staff travel, suspending RP's (instead of stating they will remain in place until a new negotiated package is agreed). Why should be suspend something that is obviously working, and putting intolerable pressure on the company. Suspend them for pay, and then immediately reimpose them for all the other travesties that they are committing. The only group 'muddying the waters' is the company. Always has been.

[Progress Wanchai]

Oasis,
That's not muddy waters you're looking at.
That's your bowels after cx shoved the RP's up there with a cricket bat. It wasn't the AoA who decided to lump them together.

Anyone thinking that things can't get worse with rostering need to ring a mate at Emirates or SQ.
With rostering incorporated into OMPA it can be amended on a whim.
Eg, res call outs within 75min (as per the girls)
Call 8929 at 6am on every O day to be prepared to start work 10 hours later.
All G's to disappear to be replaced by O days.
Call the JRC and complain? The JRC will be gone.
A former GMA has already made noises about ditching proffering.
Rostering requests? For trainers only. Ditto mutual exchange.

Contract compliance in 2017 will be a strike. Nothing else will affect them.
Roll over on this issue and we're done.

[Hellenic aviator]

I disagree. Silberfuchs said it right:

It should only be about inflation and the cost of living in HK.
Who gives a toss what a Capt at EK or BA makes?

Single digit pay raise? You've been conditioned to the crumbs that the corporation has been tossing at you. :ugh:

[routetuner]

I agree with DB. Take the money and keep CC until we get our RPs back. CC is a big stick they obviously have a problem with.Stay on the road and stick together.

[Oasis]

I reckon it would cause more havoc if we went out of CC for a few months and then use it again if the new RP's are not acceptable.
It also shows them how much our goodwill would benefit them.

Imagine; everything would run on time again, no cancelled flights, you can hear a pin drop in crew control...
If you are in constant CC, you are losing the benefit of the bad, if you don't show the good every once in a while.

[Soul planet]

R52ItjJ_0UM


Should we be concerned about this? Our valued cx passengers :sad:

[routetuner]

We should keep our foot on the their throats, don't stop CC. They "ripped up" our lifestyle, after the fact. It is NOT attached to pay anymore. Play hard ball with these people, it's what they play with us so we must reciprocate.

[Flying Clog]

Absolutely, let's keep the CC going until ALL the issues are sorted.

The big issues are yet to be addressed.

Pay negotiations with our 'caring' employer are like bartering with a whore - you might make or save a few dollars here and there, but at the end of the day you're going to get fukked anyway.

:E

[LongTimeInCX]

I'm with oasis on this one.
It may be hard for CX to actually realise how much CC is affecting them, when it's in place constantly.
If for example the percentage pay changes (it's not a payrise) are accepted, we as an Association could say we will cancel CC straight away, eg 1st June, the AOAGC give their members the directive/suggestion, that in order to show them how much good will is actually worth, that the members should help out above and beyond if the individual sees fit, but.... with the effin' big caveat, that if RP's are not sorted to the NC's/GC's/members satisfaction by 1 July, we give them just ONE month only, then we go back into a full, unified CC squared.
Let them see what a huge and sudden effect, a large contrast in a lack of enthusiasm to only do whats professionally required, will have.

Turning the heat on and off may be one of the more effective ways of getting the message across that they need to be professional too.
Historically, their workplace relationship efforts have been amateurish at best.
So sad when this could still have been a great company where employees are happy to and enjoy helping out, because they are respected and appreciated.
Clearly not the case at present.

Heat off, heat ON+

[goathead]

Voting this payrise in because of the upcoming RP negotiations is a HUGE mistake
Our snakehead masters are well ahead of us on this one
Do not be sucked into voting for this lets face it another sh#t payrise to concentrate on something were all going to get fukked on anyway
This BS from RF about concentrating on the RPs and HKPA is utter nonsense
Wise up boys and girls
Cx are two steps ahead of us already , vote this in and you will pay

[Shep69]

Coming out of CC--if we believe it is working and are using it to accomplish goals--is a REALLY REALLY bad idea. If the company is good at anything, it's good at bean counting and crunching numbers. It keenly knows what CC is doing and what it's costing already. We have been seeing real results of its effectiveness, which didn't happen right away. Moreover, we have the advantage of having a (n experienced) pilot shortage on our hands and training pilots has a healthy lag time. AND are finally somewhat organized in the effort. Even if we were to 'come out' with negotiations still in play we'd have varying degrees of individual participation and philosophy. Better to stay the course.

But the main thing is that CC takes a fair bit of time to fully ripple through and is more of a war of attrition tactic--especially for those who aren't participating and have to be 'timed out'. Like a temporary cease fire, removing it only gives the opposition time to regroup and rearm--and develop countertactics for when it kicks in again. And this whole thing has been timed such that the TA will (likely) be ratified right as we approach the busy summer travel season. If we knock it off now, the major effects of CC won't be back in place until the lull in October. We've made this mistake before.

We can all be friends again after common goals are achieved. Don't forget that we tried for years to avoid this confrontation to no avail. Common goals could be achieved in a week if the company were genuinely interested in win-win solutions and real negotiation. When folks are happy they are VERY productive.

[goathead]

So until their is a motion passed for CC to continue under the premise of ' until Rp's and HKPA are sorted to our collective agreement'

IT WILL BE A HUGE MISTAKE TO VOTE THIS PAY DEAL IN

[iceman50]

Goathead

Yes go ahead don't accept the offer and wait another year and get a similar offer or worse because the economy has worsened. You will never recoup the money lost!

The vote for CC was only for PAY, was it not, so future votes will be required for CC in relation to RP's etc etc.:ugh:

[goathead]

Iceman

If we goof around with the ball the chances are we are going to have a dropped catch.

All I'm saying is that without a new CC motion passed before this pay deal gets voted through we are going to have more than a dropped catch, folks need to realise that. So I'll wait and see and vote accordingly.We are playing with proven world champions here , not a bunch of amateurs, this lot have every inconceivable trick up there sleeve and if you think otherwise you are completely naive .

If you have faith with the NC then good on , but history says otherwise.

[wheels up]

All you people planning to vote down the pay deal again: how effective do you think contract compliance is going to be once RPs have been cancelled, three man long haul is imposed and the company is essentially free to do as they like to introduce measures to make cc ineffective? Shooting ourselves in the foot, once again - as it is all cc has achieved is a negligible salary increase, while giving the company a perfect excuse to ram through huge productivity concessions uncontested - I say take the money and continue to withhold goodwill anyway.

[mngmt mole]

Simple solution: Vote for tha pay deal and take the money. "suspend" CC....and continue to do EXACTLY what we've been doing now for months. Best of both worlds. CC forever OR until the company comes to their senses and fixes all these profoundly unsatisfactory issues.

[Oasis]

I did not vote for cc for anything beyond pay. To keep it going after a pay deal is reached is abuse of the membership vote.
That's not going to happen.
The AOA can feel free to give us a vote to continue cc. I'm fine with that, that's democracy.

If we stay in cc, AT can hide behind the notion that we are just impossible to work with and that we don't keep our word. Which would be true.

If we get out of cc, the burden would be on AT to make this work, and it would reflect badly on her if we went back into cc due to negotiations with her.
More pressure on AT to give us what we want in the next round.

The difference between strategic and tactical. Let's fight to win.

[RHEINHARD]

Well put Oasis; we can only demonstrate the effectiveness of CC by coming out of it. Eventually some degree of "battle " fatigue (for want of a better phrase) will set in with the troops anyway. And as you say it gives AT a chance to demonstrate she can work worth us, or not. Just remaining in cc ad infinitum for every conceivable gripe weakens it's effectiveness, and as has been stated a return to it for the next phase is easily tabled and voted on. And gives us the moral high ground to boot.

[Shep69]

Rhein, Oasis, again I disagree. Giving up CC will relax pressure, will give time to negate the effects (CC takes time to work and is a cumulative deal) as we move into the summer travel season, and indicate modifying and ignoring (and in fact complete abandonment) of the RPs is acceptable. The company knows full well the effects of CC; no need to come out of it to tell them something they already know.

An acceptance of the TA and a vote to remain in CC until RPs are satisfactorily addressed will send the message that yes we are willing to work with you, but what you have done with rostering since January (and even before) is unacceptable and needs to be fixed. While maintaining pressure to actually do something.

The only "moral high ground" coming out of CC allows for is effectively stating "it's OK with us if you screw us on rostering." This isn't exactly a moral high ground; it's accepting the unacceptable. Like a wife telling her husband "it's OK--you really didn't beat me that hard and I deserved it because I burned the toast."

Don't forget, little was accomplished in the year prior to going into CC, and we were forced into it by a bad deal. We needed it to get this far, and we need it to force any form of real negotiation.

[iceman50]

Shep69

It would HAVE to be another vote for further CC, not a problem with that, assuming that the GFBA has been complied with.

However, the impasse in RP's seems to be that the AOA went in asking for something that the membership were not asking for, an american style of rostering and hourly duty pay. They did not have a mandate for that apart from a very poorly worded survey to possibly give the result wanted. We need LESS of our salary attached to HDP NOT more. The company cancelling the RP's were within its rights the same as the AOA could have cancelled them.

[goathead]

Coming out of CC or not immediately going back in to CC with maximum a months break would be akin to sending the goalkeeper off and playing 10 man
There is a risk they will score a goal or two or three and we will only have ourselves to blame ..... We are negotiating with a dogged party called SWIRE
Who are hellbent on winning at all costs and some of you need to wise up pronto
Or learn the hardway AGAIN

[Blowback]

Okay for all those who haven't been here that long , some history , we voted down a pay rise a number of years ago because it wasn't enough
Guess what we never did get it .
A pay rise is on the table , it's nowhere close to being enough but it looks like it's the best we are going to get for now

SO TAKE IT and BANK THE MONEY .

They don't play fair with us so we are under no obligation to be honorable either remember that this pay rise was arbitrarily given to everyone else in the company we had to fight for it WHY ?

So take the offer we can always do exactly what the company does ,change the conditions when it suits them

[goathead]

Blowback
Your missing the point here
Short sightedness and short term greed has cost this pilot group dearly over the years
What is the rush to negotiate a fair pay deal same as everyone else ?? What about our payrise 2013 ? What is your rush
What's more important , a good set of Rp's or a sh#t unfair payrise?

[Blowback]

Curtain rod and goathead I agree with your sentiments , and accept your argument and point of view .But ,unless you are prepared to crack a few heads of those that refuse to comply with CC ,the full effect will never be felt as it should .
So whilst you say I'm not going to agree to the pay rise .
Let's play Devils advocate here . 4.5% is up for grabs . You all say NO WAY . So the company simply shrugs their shoulders and says well We offered !
the crew didn't want the increase so we won't force them to take it .
What then? you turned down an increase in the hope of securing a better deal

There are just too many self centered individuals in this company who would crawl over broken glass if they thought that it would give them an advantage to make CC truly effective .

So whilst I'm not happy with the offer . Personally I think it's derisory, are you prepared to turn it down in the hope of getting more ? If the pilot body was truly United and we could really make CC exceedingly painful , then yes reject it . But as I said, there are far too many self centered individuals who are undermining CC on a daily basis

Hence my suggestion grab what you can now , who says we have to come out of CC . The vote was CC until we get a decent pay rise . We got a pay rise ,it isn't decent . So take the offer and continue with CC . There is no requirement to take a moral high ground here ,the company has never negotiated in good faith so why do we have to ?

[goathead]

Blowback
Your focusing on the donut not the hole
Any chance when you were at school you unknowingly got held back a year?

[Not Hiding]

Just pulled out the old 1999 pay scales.

Assuming this TA is ratified, pay increases over the past 16 years will have amounted to an annual increase of 1.54% for a 10-year senior first officer. The gross pay has increased 25.7% since 1999.

What has inflation averaged annually over the past 16 years? 2.35%

Gross pay SHOULD have increased by 41.7% since 1999.

There's a shortage of qualified pilots, too, right?

Just sayin'...

[Blowback]

Goathead,
I don't recollect being rude to you, or disrespecting your point of view. So why not try becoming an adult and respect others with differing ideas

[goathead]

Not hiding and silberfuchs have pretty much hit the nail on the head
If the membership wishes to vote this through then so be it
If the membership has had enough of CC and cant handle continuing with it because its too tough is and too much of a marathon as RF has said then thats it ,we might as well lay down and be trampled over like the wallies we deserve to be treated like

[Arfur Dent]

How can CC be 'too hard to handle'? It's what you are paid for. That is all you are required to do for Cathay Pacific Airways. The rest of the time is your own to enjoy as you wish. That, surely, is the whole point.........

[Captain Dart]

I've said it once, and I'll say it again. You are NOT working for your old military squadron, a charity, or a small family business.

You are S/O/F/O/CAPT Bloggs contracted to a ruthless group of bonus-driven businessmen on a three month rolling renewable basis. You are not part of a 'team'. You are a carbon-based revenue-producing unit. So you fly your contract, no more, no less.

What is so hard about CC?

[Trafalgar]

We have to carefully and methodically 'educate' some of those amongst us who just either don't 'get it', or are so self centered that the long term interests of the whole are something they simply don't care about. Either way, once they are on that 'list', they will always be treated with 'special' care when I fly with them :E

[Blowback]

Trafalgar ,

You are absolutely correct ,if everyone would apply CC correctly and with greater enthusiasm the effect would be far more pronounced
It only takes one to wilt, work on a G day and get a flight from A to B which would otherwise have to be cancelled due to a lack of crew.
Had this been the case we may well be looking at a higher figure than the offer currently on the table .

So the dilemma is take the offer on the table or throw it back and be like Oliver Twist "Please sir I want more " But then you need everyone and I do mean everyone to partake to make it sufficiently painful to force the company back into further talks

[sodapop]

According to the GMAs memo (yes, I know!) but the negotiations covered only what other airlines get paid (a healthy debate we are told)
I don't care what EK, AA or Ethiopean make.
It's irrelevant data used as a smokescreen.
The only issue is CoL in HK....that's it!!
We are being paid far far less than inflation.
Why are we negotiating over totally moot points?

Also a shortsighted and typical hkg based response. CoL in hkg is, obviously and rightly,
only applicable to hkg based crew. Which is why US and EU pilots need their own AOA thus being able to vote for pay free from disgruntled, sometimes rightly so, other CX jurisdictions.

Cheers,
Soda

[Anotherday]

You're only going to get those in the union onside with it unfortunately so that's only half of the crew in hkg. Everyone in the AOA seems to be doing it, so unless there's a big increase in membership, we can't hope for a much higher level of CC.

[Oasis]

Yea but best discuss it after the flight, not during.

[oriental flyer]

There are a lot of non members who are ardent proponents of CC and do everything they can

[AQIS Boigu]

The airline down the road would be the choice...rents and property prices are still affordable there.

[controlledrest]

As my income has been lagging inflation I have decided to adjust my roster by the difference, so my hourly pay remains the same in real terms. After all I did enter into a contract to work a certain amount of hours for a certain amount of money.

I appreciate that someone else will be called off reserve and have to work these 'correction' flights, so my adjustments will generally be in the last few days of the month with the hope of rewarding the person working for me with overtime.

[betpump5]

Or reward the perpetual g day working terd who just can't help himself.

Totally agree with your self imposed pay adjustment.