Thirteen Reasons Why...

[Hannah Baker]

Cathay Pacific Airways is committing suicide.

1. For the last 40+ years, the Hong Kong aviation market has been a POT OF GOLD! Most airlines consider Hong Kong one of their most cherished routes. On the doorstep of Mainland China, a huge market that has been gradually opening to more capitalism and subsequent growth, the opportunities have been nearly limitless. The geographic advantage of Hong Kong cannot be understated. From the Kangaroo Route to the North Pacific and every place Southeast and Subcontinent Asian in between, Hong Kong has always had more than just strong origin and destination traffic from the financial and manufacturing sectors of the Pearl River Delta, but also huge potential as a global and regional passenger/cargo hub to compete with any airline. Unfortunately, many of these opportunities have been "missed", but worse than that, the relatively easy success of the past has bred a culture of apathy and arrogance that haunts CX to this day.

2. COLONIALISM is an undeniable part of the Swire's past. Without revisiting all that this entailed historically, it is still very much a part of the management culture at CX today. The emphasis on "profits over people" has produced a general feeling amongst staff that they are not valued. This, in turn, has affected the service levels that CX passengers receive from disenfranchised staff. As passengers are faced with ever more airlines choices, they are increasingly choosing other options. These are not just low fare customers, but also premium paying business travelers whom have witnessed first-hand the CX product decay. All the while, despite dwindling profits and horrid gambles on fuel hedges, the directors receive ever increasing bonuses awarded to them by the board.

3. VERTICAL SILO MANAGEMENT is a hallmark of CX. This highly territorial and bureaucratic method of being solely concerned with one's own department's budget is incredibly shortsighted and inefficient. Airlines are extremely interoperable as many departments have huge impacts on one another. To ignore this dynamic to the degree that CX regularly does based purely on historical precedent defies logic and represents a massive leadership failure. Departments heavily entrenched in vertical silo management become individual "kingdoms" more concerned with themselves than the greater needs of the Company. 21st century information technology, the increased speed & quantity of information flow and the exponential computer processing power available, presents vast opportunities to "right the ship." Thus far, I have seen little to indicate that this is changing for the better. Perhaps the redundancy of 30% of office staff will create higher reliance on IT and, thereby, increase interconnectivity between departments.

4. LACK OF CREATIVITY haunts CX in ways unimaginable. The inability to problem solve is legendary in China. The Chinese are masters of emulation, but Mao killed creativity and problem solving initiative for generations. Ironically, the Chinese dynasties were centuries ahead of those on other continents. Therefore, this is not a racial, but a present day cultural, issue. One would assume that the influence of Swire management, which is predominantly British, would help with this problem, but that does not seem to be the case. I believe those problems stem from placing non-airline managers into operational positions. Zoologists and soft drink bottlers have no business running airlines because the differences are too vast. Airline operations are complex and becoming more so. The directors running them need to be experts in both the operations and the financial aspects of the business.

5. LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY is a big problem at CX. While the staff are regularly reviewed and held accountable, it seems that directors at CX do not share in this tradition. When was the last time a director was actually sacked in lieu of being quietly shuffled to another Swire business or being allowed to retire comfortably? More importantly, when was a director ever denied a bonus larger than those of previous years? Who is being held accountable for the disastrous fuel hedges that are doing massive damage to the CX balance sheet? Similarly, who is being held accountable for the horrible relations between CX and its pilots? How much has been gained versus lost as a result of the years-long conflict? Was one 3-crew LHR pattern really worth destroying all goodwill between 3000+ pilots and the Company? Whose decision was that? Is s/he being held accountable?

6. IGNORING INDUSTRY STANDARDS is another common failure at CX. The arrogant and prideful mentality of "we know best" is rampant within the many "kingdoms" inside the Company. I'm not really sure where all of this pomp comes from, but I suspect its roots are in the Hong Kong POT OF GOLD and Swire COLONIALISM. Much of airline industry operates in very similar fashions, but CX operates well outside the mainstream. While that was for several decades a source of pride, it has in the past several years become an embarrassment as those other airlines are handily outperforming CX. Wise managers would explore how other airlines conduct business and tweak those processes to suit their own operations, but CX managers like to "re-create the wheel" and come up with cheaper alternatives. We have all seen how this goes (ugh, heavy sigh). Most often, it is more cost effective to just do it right the first time, even if that means paying a bit more up front.

7. CX knows the COST OF EVERYTHING BUT THE VALUE OF NOTHING. Make no mistake, CX has amazing accountants. They know what everything costs right down to the penny, but they have no idea about what represents good value. Perhaps this is the byproduct of Hong Kong being so expensive. The value associated with the cost becomes lost in the fog of rampant inflation. Prices in Hong Kong have become so disconnected from actual value on items like real estate and food that perhaps the whole concept of value itself has been lost.

8. LAWLESSNESS is another problem for CX. I have never in my entire life witnessed a company that gets fined and sued as much as CX. Why is that? Some is just bitter and disenfranchised staff, but mostly it is because CX lives in the gray areas of the law. The Company has paid multiple fines for cargo price fixing. They have had to address charges of age discrimination in multiple jurisdictions. Taxes have gone unpaid in Europe. There have been cases settled against CX in the UK and all the way to the High Court in Hong Kong. If CX is going to be a top-shelf international company, then it must be willing to comply with the laws of the jurisdictions in which it operates and employs staff. Hong Kong is a very employer friendly city, but much of the rest of world is going the other direction. CX needs better qualified managers to ensure that business done overseas complies with the laws there.

9. The HIGH COST OF LIVING in Hong Kong is really hurting CX. Paying high quality staff a livable wage in Hong Kong is difficult. In the past decade, I have seen the skills and qualifications of new joiners go down dramatically. It is embarrassing that CX has literally hundreds of its pilots living with their parents in Hong Kong. Suitable applicants are simply not willing to come to CX and endure the cost of living in Hong Kong. Yet, CX cannot continue to pay well above industry average wages long term and expect to thrive against competitors from elsewhere whose employees cost significantly less. There are two solutions for this problem: outport staff (basings) and technology (more machines and fewer people).

10. TRAINING at CX has always been a problem. Improvements have been made, but there is a long ways to go yet. That it takes many months to train a new captain is ridiculous. A solidly experienced first officer should take no more than one or two months to become a captain. Similarly, that it takes as many as 80 sectors to sign off a junior first officer is absurd. That failures are so common says much more about the recruiting and training departments than it does about the trainees. Also, upgrade training inevitably brings or keeps pilots on the Hong Kong base. Upgrades and fleet decisions should be made to get pilots out of Hong Kong and onto bases, not to keep them in HK where they are most expensive.

11. PROMOTION FROM WITHIN versus acquiring outsiders makes change difficult. Nearly every new CX manager is cut from the same mold. They are Swire princes or princesses from high profile universities whom have navigated the Swire/CX gauntlet. They all think the same way. If they did not, they would long since have been sacked. Free thinkers and those willing to venture outside their "silo" do not last at CX. These are the only Swire managers you will ever observe being visibly removed. Why? Because they have broken "the code" and every Swire knows what that is through observations like these. Usually, those who are publicly removed are either from the outside or have lost their Swire discipline and called CX's stupidity out. In short, CX managers know who butters their bread, and getting the job done right is less important than keeping your job.

12. Why does all this occur? One reason... because POWER IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS at CX. The whole "house of cards" comes crashing down once "the help" comes to think they have any power over their employers. This "house of cards" is both colonial and Asian. It is all about showing who is boss and saving face. Never mind that "the help" are significant stakeholders in the Company and its success or failure as well. What matters most at CX is that they know their place. This defies logic because if these employees are desiring a career, then their connectedness to the Company is every bit as strong as any director. Arguably, they are more vested in the long term health of the Company because they will NOT be receiving a golden parachute and shuffled to another Swire company when things go pear-shaped.

13. Every time there is a suicide, the inevitable question is why. Often, there is no obvious answer, but one truth always remains... BECAUSE THEY CAN. I don't know why CX seems determined to kill itself. The above are certainly contributors but not the whole explanation. Maybe the Swires don't really care about CX. Maybe they are trying to sell it. Perhaps CX is more about branding and bragging rights than actually making money from a successful company. Perhaps the other Swire companies in Asia benefit from CX in ways that are not commonly or well understood. Maybe the recent failures are not fully comprehended in London. Perhaps the constant BS the Company is always shoveling at its employees is actually believed in London. That would be hard to imagine, but I have always heard that staff "updates" are actually written for those above, not below. Could it be that simple? Do Mom and Dad (London Swires and the Mainland Chinese) simply have no idea what is going on in the life of their teenager (CX)? I am really starting to wonder if the adults will show up before it is too late. Even if they do, will they know how to fix it? Perhaps it is time for some professional help. I believe there are outsiders who could save CX, but I doubt anyone at CX now or anywhere within Swire can get the job done. God help us...

[The Visionary]

I wanted to write something like this but I have given up caring anymore honestly.

From a business perspective, I understand the need to change. The industry has always been fluid and always will be. You must adapt and overcome or go out of business. This place, however, has become so morally corrupt and unethical that it bothers my sensibilities.

I honestly believe that the management of this company are disturbed. I do not mean that in a funny way but in a true way. The year(s) that JS and AT joined were the beginning of the end. They do not have the business acumen nor the fortitude to fix the issues. It's not just the pilot's or any staff, it's the airline as a whole. It has lost its moral compass and its mojo, so to speak.

Books of interest to read are; "Frank Lorenzo and the destruction of Eastern airlines" AND "From Worst to First" about saving Continental. Also, "A Splash of Colors" about Braniff. These books are great in that they show what happens when management mismanages and destroys not only a brand but peoples lives.

The ideology they have held onto for so long will destroy this company and dare I say it might need to die. I do not want to see people hurt but they already are and this company will continue to do the same thing over and over until it burns to the ground. You have a choice, get busy living or get busy dying. They have no couth.

All of this bothers me greatly as I see what it doing to myself and others. It's why I say it's Time to Leave not Time to win.

[Farman Biplane]

I think they want you to leave, your replacement will be cheaper than you, so they Win.
Of course if more trainers keep leaving then the capacity to upgrade the cheaper replacement starts to disappear.....

[Freehills]

Well said.

Also - the rise of significant local competition. HKE shows that there is a market for low cost in HKG, and HKA is now "good enough" to be a threat. Are HX as good as CX? No. But you get 80% of the quality for half the price.

[Sam Ting Wong]

What a load of gibberish.


1. For the last 40+ years, the Hong Kong aviation market has been a POT OF GOLD! Most airlines consider Hong Kong one of their most cherished routes. On the doorstep of Mainland China, a huge market that has been gradually opening to more capitalism and subsequent growth, the opportunities have been nearly limitless. The geographic advantage of Hong Kong cannot be understated. From the Kangaroo Route to the North Pacific and every place Southeast and Subcontinent Asian in between, Hong Kong has always had more than just strong origin and destination traffic from the financial and manufacturing sectors of the Pearl River Delta, but also huge potential as a global and regional passenger/cargo hub to compete with any airline. Unfortunately, many of these opportunities have been "missed", but worse than that, the relatively easy success of the past has bred a culture of apathy and arrogance that haunts CX to this day.

What "opportunities" have been missed? What "apathy"? Empty waffle.

Yes, it WAS a pot of gold, but things change.You completely ignore the rise of competition that wasn't there 10 or 20 years, mainly Chinese airlines and Gulf casrriers.

2. COLONIALISM is an undeniable part of the Swire's past. Without revisiting all that this entailed historically, it is still very much a part of the management culture at CX today. The emphasis on "profits over people" has produced a general feeling amongst staff that they are not valued. This, in turn, has affected the service levels that CX passengers receive from disenfranchised staff. As passengers are faced with ever more airlines choices, they are increasingly choosing other options. These are not just low fare customers, but also premium paying business travelers whom have witnessed first-hand the CX product decay. All the while, despite dwindling profits and horrid gambles on fuel hedges, the directors receive ever increasing bonuses awarded to them by the board.

You are contradicting yourself. Just a minute ago you were praising the past ( see 1), now it is the root of all evil. What has colonialism to do with our cabin product? are you on drugs?

3. VERTICAL SILO MANAGEMENT is a hallmark of CX. This highly territorial and bureaucratic method of being solely concerned with one's own department's budget is incredibly shortsighted and inefficient. Airlines are extremely interoperable as many departments have huge impacts on one another. To ignore this dynamic to the degree that CX regularly does based purely on historical precedent defies logic and represents a massive leadership failure. Departments heavily entrenched in vertical silo management become individual "kingdoms" more concerned with themselves than the greater needs of the Company. 21st century information technology, the increased speed & quantity of information flow and the exponential computer processing power available, presents vast opportunities to "right the ship." Thus far, I have seen little to indicate that this is changing for the better. Perhaps the redundancy of 30% of office staff will create higher reliance on IT and, thereby, increase interconnectivity between departments.

So just to get this straight. In 2.) you are promoting "profits over people", but now you think firing 30% is a good way to enhance IT? Or are you implying "people" are only certain individuals, preferably those with a colonial past maybe? What proof do you have for your claim in Cathay "territorial" methods have caused problems? Can you produce any real arguments at all or just copy and paste from a 1980's management for dummies textbook? Are you not embarrassed to produce such meaningless vapouring?

4. LACK OF CREATIVITY haunts CX in ways unimaginable. The inability to problem solve is legendary in China. The Chinese are masters of emulation, but Mao killed creativity and problem solving initiative for generations. Ironically, the Chinese dynasties were centuries ahead of those on other continents. Therefore, this is not a racial, but a present day cultural, issue. One would assume that the influence of Swire management, which is predominantly British, would help with this problem, but that does not seem to be the case. I believe those problems stem from placing non-airline managers into operational positions. Zoologists and soft drink bottlers have no business running airlines because the differences are too vast. Airline operations are complex and becoming more so. The directors running them need to be experts in both the operations and the financial aspects of the business.

Again, what a contradiction! What a disgraceful load of drivel. So it's not colonialism, now it's Mao? Can you not see what anutter rubbish you are talking? Hong Kong is one of the most successful economic centers of the planet and you are blaming Mao and " lack of creativity"? And I am really really grateful that you don't blame the Chinese "race", very gracious of you.

5. LACK OF ACCOUNTABILITY is a big problem at CX. While the staff are regularly reviewed and held accountable, it seems that directors at CX do not share in this tradition. When was the last time a director was actually sacked in lieu of being quietly shuffled to another Swire business or being allowed to retire comfortably? More importantly, when was a director ever denied a bonus larger than those of previous years? Who is being held accountable for the disastrous fuel hedges that are doing massive damage to the CX balance sheet? Similarly, who is being held accountable for the horrible relations between CX and its pilots? How much has been gained versus lost as a result of the years-long conflict? Was one 3-crew LHR pattern really worth destroying all goodwill between 3000+ pilots and the Company? Whose decision was that? Is s/he being held accountable?

ALL our competitors are doing this trip with 3 men!!!!! What are talking about? It was a trial and thankjesusthelord it was stopped. What goodwill? Are you joking? Your view is so egocentric it hurts. And managers getting a golden parachute is, as you know very well, a problem not only of Cathay but of our entire economy!And what difference does it make?? What difference would it make if Ivan would now retire instead of moving to China???

6. IGNORING INDUSTRY STANDARDS is another common failure at CX. The arrogant and prideful mentality of "we know best" is rampant within the many "kingdoms" inside the Company. I'm not really sure where all of this pomp comes from, but I suspect its roots are in the Hong Kong POT OF GOLD and Swire COLONIALISM. Much of airline industry operates in very similar fashions, but CX operates well outside the mainstream. While that was for several decades a source of pride, it has in the past several years become an embarrassment as those other airlines are handily outperforming CX. Wise managers would explore how other airlines conduct business and tweak those processes to suit their own operations, but CX managers like to "re-create the wheel" and come up with cheaper alternatives. We have all seen how this goes (ugh, heavy sigh). Most often, it is more cost effective to just do it right the first time, even if that means paying a bit more up front.

TELL ME PLEASE WHICH AIRLINES YOU ARE TALKING OF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PLEASE!!!!!!
EMIRATES???????? CHINA SOUTHERN?????? ARE YOU COMPLETELY MENTAL?????

7. CX knows the COST OF EVERYTHING BUT THE VALUE OF NOTHING. Make no mistake, CX has amazing accountants. They know what everything costs right down to the penny, but they have no idea about what represents good value. Perhaps this is the byproduct of Hong Kong being so expensive. The value associated with the cost becomes lost in the fog of rampant inflation. Prices in Hong Kong have become so disconnected from actual value on items like real estate and food that perhaps the whole concept of value itself has been lost.

OH, so know it's the entire Hong Kong economy who is behind all this, glad you give Mao a rest.

8. LAWLESSNESS is another problem for CX. I have never in my entire life witnessed a company that gets fined and sued as much as CX. Why is that? Some is just bitter and disenfranchised staff, but mostly it is because CX lives in the gray areas of the law. The Company has paid multiple fines for cargo price fixing. They have had to address charges of age discrimination in multiple jurisdictions. Taxes have gone unpaid in Europe. There have been cases settled against CX in the UK and all the way to the High Court in Hong Kong. If CX is going to be a top-shelf international company, then it must be willing to comply with the laws of the jurisdictions in which it operates and employs staff. Hong Kong is a very employer friendly city, but much of the rest of world is going the other direction. CX needs better qualified managers to ensure that business done overseas complies with the laws there.


Are you living on planet earth???????? ALL airlines have these problems!!! Lufthansa has endured a dozen strikes in the last couple of years, even more lawsuits! About a dozen airlines have been fined, United just made news for beating their passengers, Quatar is imprisoning their female staff, no unions at Emirates, everyday you can read about this. Your ignorance is beyond belief, unf@ckingbelievable.

9. The HIGH COST OF LIVING in Hong Kong is really hurting CX. Paying high quality staff a livable wage in Hong Kong is difficult. In the past decade, I have seen the skills and qualifications of new joiners go down dramatically. It is embarrassing that CX has literally hundreds of its pilots living with their parents in Hong Kong. Suitable applicants are simply not willing to come to CX and endure the cost of living in Hong Kong. Yet, CX cannot continue to pay well above industry average wages long term and expect to thrive against competitors from elsewhere whose employees cost significantly less. There are two solutions for this problem: outport staff (basings) and technology (more machines and fewer people).

No kidding, HK is a high cost environment?? Thank you so much for that insight. You are a genius.I am in awe, you just opened my eyes.

10. TRAINING at CX has always been a problem. Improvements have been made, but there is a long ways to go yet. That it takes many months to train a new captain is ridiculous. A solidly experienced first officer should take no more than one or two months to become a captain. Similarly, that it takes as many as 80 sectors to sign off a junior first officer is absurd. That failures are so common says much more about the recruiting and training departments than it does about the trainees. Also, upgrade training inevitably brings or keeps pilots on the Hong Kong base. Upgrades and fleet decisions should be made to get pilots out of Hong Kong and onto bases, not to keep them in HK where they are most expensive.

Our command failure rates are not very high actually. Thing of the past.Again, a very egocentric view. Meaningless businesswise.

11. PROMOTION FROM WITHIN versus acquiring outsiders makes change difficult. Nearly every new CX manager is cut from the same mold. They are Swire princes or princesses from high profile universities whom have navigated the Swire/CX gauntlet. They all think the same way. If they did not, they would long since have been sacked. Free thinkers and those willing to venture outside their "silo" do not last at CX. These are the only Swire managers you will ever observe being visibly removed. Why? Because they have broken "the code" and every Swire knows what that is through observations like these. Usually, those who are publicly removed are either from the outside or have lost their Swire discipline and called CX's stupidity out. In short, CX managers know who butters their bread, and getting the job done right is less important than keeping your job.

So having managers from high profile universities is a BAD THING???? You prefer Mr Wong from Community College Mongkok? What proof do you have the Swre culture is a bad influence? Any evidence???? Jus a few years ago Cathay ( under Swire management then as today) was highly profitable, voted best airline for multiple times, and now it is the Swire culture which is the culprit? Makes no sense whatsoever.

12. Why does all this occur? One reason... because POWER IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN PROFITS at CX. The whole "house of cards" comes crashing down once "the help" comes to think they have any power over their employers. This "house of cards" is both colonial and Asian. It is all about showing who is boss and saving face. Never mind that "the help" are significant stakeholders in the Company and its success or failure as well. What matters most at CX is that they know their place. This defies logic because if these employees are desiring a career, then their connectedness to the Company is every bit as strong as any director. Arguably, they are more vested in the long term health of the Company because they will NOT be receiving a golden parachute and shuffled to another Swire company when things go pear-shaped.

First of all, no business is a democracy. what are you, a Marxist?

Then, you are saying profits are more important than people, now power is more important than profits, and it is not only a problem of "colonialism" alone, but also "Asian". And the"help" comes after the employers,but the we have at the same time "lawlessness" and influences of Mao. Now you really got me confused. Mind you, all of that has not changed for the last 50 or 100 years, it CAN'T be the reason for anything that happened last 5 years, don't you get that??

13. Every time there is a suicide, the inevitable question is why. Often, there is no obvious answer, but one truth always remains... BECAUSE THEY CAN. I don't know why CX seems determined to kill itself. The above are certainly contributors but not the whole explanation. Maybe the Swires don't really care about CX. Maybe they are trying to sell it. Perhaps CX is more about branding and bragging rights than actually making money from a successful company. Perhaps the other Swire companies in Asia benefit from CX in ways that are not commonly or well understood. Maybe the recent failures are not fully comprehended in London. Perhaps the constant BS the Company is always shoveling at its employees is actually believed in London. That would be hard to imagine, but I have always heard that staff "updates" are actually written for those above, not below. Could it be that simple? Do Mom and Dad (London Swires and the Mainland Chinese) simply have no idea what is going on in the life of their teenager (CX)? I am really starting to wonder if the adults will show up before it is too late. Even if they do, will they know how to fix it? Perhaps it is time for some professional help. I believe there are outsiders who could save CX, but I doubt anyone at CX now or anywhere within Swire can get the job done. God help us...


Excellent idea. I reduce profits in order to sell it better. Now, wait.. Maybe they want to commit suicide, the sell it.. no wait, I got it now! We need outsiders, but at the same time promotion from within! ok, no that doesn't work.. Wait!! I got it!! No colonialism, but help from LONDON!! That's it!!!


PH, you really really need to retire, I can't take this anymore.

You are killing me!!!!!!!!!

[cxorcist]

I think Hannah can take quiet solace that STW disagrees. An endorsement from STW would be troubling.

Well put Miss Baker. You have summarized many of the problems CX has very well. Let's hope help arrives before she bleeds out.

[Bangaluru]

Great post HB. You captured a lot of sentiment that a lot of people share.

STW, p155 off.

[Bob Hawke]

STW what a pleasure it must be to work with you.

[wdew]

Sounds almost like the company is being destroyed from within by people acting on behalf of other companies eyeing those routes and market...

[Kotuku]

Sam Ting Wong,

You are coming across more and more as a complete plonker and ********. I did not write the above and I take my hat off to Hannah Baker for taking the time to write it. As you well know, I am close to Retirement, in 116 days as a matter of fact and whilst I have flown with many fine people over the last many years, you are not one of them, whoever you are. Why don't you show a few balls and cojones and come out and say who you are, I don't hide behind an alias like you do. I use my PPrune handle of Kotuku to log in, but I don't try to hide who I am here on PPrune, where I use my initials, as you did in referring to me and I don't hide on the AOA Forums. You are full of BS, so do us all a favour, please.

Cheers. PH

[main_dog]

That's bloody spot-on Hannah.

MD

[BusyB]

Very good HB. STW thanks for repeating it all with your pathetic bleatings after each item. It really does show you as one of the incompetent mismanagement.

[Bob Hawke]

PH, good reply. I know who has greater integrity and it isn't STW.

[raven11]

STW....lay off the coffee...

BH raises good points and presented them in a well thought out post.

Your tone, on the other hand, was disrespectful and rude. Some introspection, please.

[Progress Wanchai]

HB,

You could have saved yourself a lot of trouble by simply posting the Haddon-Cave report on here.
But H-C made a grave error of judgement when he recommended HB's point 11. Hiring outside experts instead of from within. At that stage CX management circled the wagons and found the ever reliable shredder.

Sam Ting Wong,
Name one major structural change CX has made since the Haddon-Cave review?
Also, name one, any, outside senior manager CX has employed since the 2011 report was released?

There's a good reason CX is relying purely on inward looking CX managers to formulate and implement "time to win". They learnt from Haddon-Cave that if you don't want to know the answer, don't ask the question.

[Trafalgar]

....arguing with STW is like the proverbial about wrestling with a pig: you only end up covered in mud, and besides, the pig likes it. :bored:

[Trafalgar]

Speaking about rolling around in the mud, surely it's time for another company survey. It's been three weeks since the last one.

[Will IB Fayed]

HB,
Excellent post, captured eloquently.

One thing you left off (perhaps a post script to point one), Chek Lap Kok is rapidly becoming a disaster. Halfway into a flight to HK, the ATIS scrawls out, "blah blah....expect 30mins holding", with reasonable wx. Once the frequent transient passengers realise they need to add 30-45 mins per HK transit, they'll seek alternatives. EK/QF from Aus, ETC.
I agree (unfortunately). This airline is rapidly seeking it's own demise. :-(

EDIT: STW: I previously hadn't appreciated the ridicule toward you......until now.

[Pucka]

…and if this Owens people person mentions "customer centric" ever again..I will personally ram a Time to win down his scrawny fukcnig throat…they have so totally lost the crews in ALL of this..marginalising the pilots pretty much all the way as far south as possible was just a gem..to recover any of that transport is nigh on impossible..and to wit..you can never bring an airline back from the brink without the good will of its pilots..Brannif..B'Cal..Pan Am… et al..

[Average Fool]

I would love to see these 13 reasons posted along the "street"

[Shep69]

That is very well said HB and I think captures what folks have been saying for a long time. Fix the blame, don't fix the problem seems the order of the day--to the extent of finding completely unrelated fall guys or gals to punish in order to 'do something about it'. Power and position takes precedence over profit. To the extent of totally alienating a talented and extremely motivated work force (many of whom have pretty impressive resumes and would love to help out but have been so demoralized they are just marking time and squirreling away cash). It's better to pound the table and be right and lose money than admit you're wrong, fix things, and make money.

Took awhile for the loss of the protected market to kick in, but it's kicked in.

Perhaps it would be useful if someone were to carefully explain to the powers that be that "How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying" was a musical play and work of fiction, and not a successful blueprint to run a multi billion dollar corporation.

As far as stw, the propaganda is old and has eliminated any shadow of credibility.

[Trafalgar]

As far as STW, he's probably management, and if he's not, then he should be. An apologist of the worst kind.

[azhkman]

HB,
Once the frequent transient passengers realise they need to add 30-45 mins per HK transit, they'll seek alternatives. EK/QF from Aus, ETC.
I agree (unfortunately). This airline is rapidly seeking it's own demise. :-(


Um, DXB is actually worse, but it seems they build in the time to the flight. Plan on at least an hour extra on the ground for taxi time on landing or taking off. If anyone ever needed more runways, it is DXB.

[Scoreboard]

Simply because you Cathay and Dragon pilots are trying to avoid every moisture or rain to make yourself comfortable. As a result, many landing slots are wasted. I have seen one day every airlines is flying through the rain for an approach (Delta and Southern Air said light turbulence and rain), several BIG local airlines are insisting 50 miles off track. The delay just increase from 10 mins to 40 mins for no reason.

U dont fly me muchdo you? Calling BS. Delta i think wrote off 747 in the last couple of years cause they werent allowed to avoid "light turbulence and some rain". Best bit is avoiding a CB and watching some mainland carrier/air asia/jetstar plough straight thru a CB and then ask for wx avoidance when they are in it. And if you had flown for a mainland domestic carroer they tend to carry enough fuel to arrive at destination and turn around and fly back if wx is bad. Dont want to get docked salary for getting a lightning strike....

Personally landed during a typhoon and was lucky with no windshear warning while the 7 before all went around...one other behind me got in and then they gave up and closed the airport 30 mins later since everyone else couldnt land. So its not always light turb and some rain ....

So yeah BS is what i am callingon UNIFO

[Arfur Dent]

Methinks STW is "The Management" reincarnated!

[Staggers]

Simply because you Cathay and Dragon pilots are trying to avoid every moisture or rain to make yourself comfortable. As a result, many landing slots are wasted. I have seen one day every airlines is flying through the rain for an approach (Delta and Southern Air said light turbulence and rain), several BIG local airlines are insisting 50 miles off track. The delay just increase from 10 mins to 40 mins for no reason.

Oh please 🙄

[Bob Hawke]

Don't think so Arthur, The Management was articulate and clever. STW is not!

[Arfur Dent]

Yes - I think STW has been "Swired". Maybe he/she has been to Oxbridge. They do have a different "take" on life in my experience. Senior management in London who think a Zoology degree from Oxford qualifies one to be DFO are deluded. To follow that with a weak pilot is deluded. To follow that with another Oxford grad is simply ridiculous.
Has it worked? I don't think so………….

[Sam Ting Wong]

PH,
my apologies, in my anger I wrongly addressed you,although I do not agree with your opinions in most cases it was not right of me getting personal.

Hannah, I totally disagree with your perspective, but I forgot my manners and did not use the proper words in my response, apologies.

I will rewrite my argument.

[Dragon69]

PH,
my apologies, in my anger....

You are getting angry at posts that criticize the company?? Are sure you mentally fit to hold a medical?

[cxorcist]

I'm pretty sure no one cares what you think or write STW, not even PH.

[Sam Ting Wong]

13 reasons why your statement is flawed and meaningless.

1.) Total lack of reason

Everybody can claim everything. Everybody can accuse anybody of everything.
You, as the accuser, are carrying the 'burden of proof". That is the only rational way to argue in a civilised world. I read your statement multiple times. It does not contain one single piece of evidence or proof. Absolutely nothing but wild accusations, theories and generalizations.

2.) Total lack of tangibility

Not only do you ommit any reason, your accusations are so vague, so unspecific ( "missed opportunies", "culture of apathy") that there is no way to respond in a meaningful way. What missed opportunites? What culture of "apathy" ? I do not know your personal reasons for applying this vagueness, but this technique is a very common tool for populists.

3) Conialism can't be the reason for Cathay's present problems for multiple reasons.

Colonialism is a shared historic past of not only the entire Hong Kong economy , but half of the rest of the world. It is like claiming monarchy or the plague for problems at Johnsons and Johnsons. Hong Kongs companies ( and those of Singapore, Australia, NZ, US, Canada, SA) have been highly successful in the past and present, as Cathay has been until very recently. It makes no sense to blame a historic event for an individual current business crisis, none. Also see 1), where is your proof for your allegation?

3) "Silo mangement"

Have a look at Cathay's organigram. it is a very common company structure, I challenge you to identify any differences to similar companies. Your claim of a "vertical silo management" , which is in your opinion a "hallmark of CX" is a myth. Have a look at other companies, the organigrams are publicly available. Your accusation is unfounded and wrong.

You further claim Cathay's organisation is "highly territorial and bureaucratic ", being "solely concerned with one's own department's budget " and this would be "incredibly shortsighted and inefficient". Can you name a specific occurence, any recent event where this was evident? You also have to keep in mind that every organisation has problems, only mentioning this general fact is pointless. What is the alternative? No company is a democracy, and even democracies are not flawless. Do you have a specific plan in mind how to organise a company with thousands of employees, multiple franchises, global representions etc? I am happy to see your suggestions.

4) Lack of creativity of Cathay and the " Chinese" in general

An interesting argument from someone who is just reiterating cockpit gossip, but ok. What kind of "creative" solutions are missing? And what has Chinese history to do with it? Again, you are using a historic event ( Mao) plus racial stereotypes to support your "argument" Why are the so many Chinese companies so successful today? China as a country is much more successful than India for instance, which only 50 years ago was much richer. And even if you would be right, and it is all down to Mao, what is your conclusion? What can a company make more differently than Cathay, and NOT hiring Chinese managers predominantly? And regarding the "zoologist", he graduated from Oxbridge as far as I know, and it is very common to study a wide range before specialising.In the end he had 23 years (twenty-three years) of experience in the airline industry before becoming DFO. I am not saying he did a good job, but lack of experience or inferior education was surely not the problem. He was trained for decades by Swire for his career, he was an expert, that is a fact. And I say it again to make that absolutely clear, I am NOT saying he did a good job, i am just saying your argument is unfounded.By the way, a very common way to introduce creativity is by hiring people from other fields.

5) Contradictions

Maybe the most prominent concomitant of your text. You claim we need promotion from within but then also outside help, that does not make any sense. Also it it is absurd to think you would reduce profits of a company before selling it. Just a few points out of too many to quote.

6) Swire

Cathay has been owned by Swire for decades, but our problems are recent. You need to further support your claim, otherwise it makes no sense. See Mao.

7) Lack of accountability

I actually understand your critisism, it hurts to see a CEO getting a bonus and a nice golden hand shake when the company is suffering. I agree. BUT the company culture wasn't any different at better times. It can't be the reason for our current problems. Plus you have to admit that every time has it's unique problems. Is Ivan maybe just a scape goat? Could that be possible? Do we really know who made what decision? In the end this injustice is probably impossible to overcome, managers will always get away, and that is that. Pointless argument.


8. The HIGH COST OF LIVING in Hong Kong is "really hurting CX". No ****. Ok, what is your point here? You think "basing" is a solution ( erh, we do have basings actually. Much more than any other airline as far as I know).But ok, fair point, it could be more cost effective. but then it could not. Do you have the numbers? Did you calculate all the legal risks, holidays, tax, social costes etc etc? We will see in a few months if expat pilots in HK will indeed continue to be more expensive ( thanks to you guys not signing the contract, but that is another topic). To "hundreds of pilots living with their parents": first of all this is a general problem of Hong Kong, not only CX pilots, secondly many I talked to do so to save money. They could rent their own place, but rather save for a mortgage.
Then you offer "automation" as another solution. I assume you are not talking about pilots, or do you? I challenge you to give specific examples for possible replacements of humans in Cathay. I want to know where and whom. If you cannot provide this information you do not have an argument, plain and simple. Plus as we speak layoffs are in the pipeline..

9. Ignoring "Industry standards".Well, which airline would you have in mind that has better standards toward their employees? I challenge you to find any among our direct competitors. also, what exactly are "industry standards"? You are again very vague, it is impossible to argue and hence a pointless statement. You need to specify what you actually mean, and then you have to accept the fact that the 'industry standard" is exactly that, it is the common practise, NOT the ideal standard, I hope you see the crucial difference. An airline, any company, can only work within these ( lower and lower) standards unfortunately.

10.) Training

Training has been terrible at times the company excelled profit-wise, there is simply no (significant) correlation between the profitability of Cathay and it's training system. Yes, courses last a bit longer, albeit that has changed somewhat mind you, yes we had high failure rates, but they are quite ok at the moment actually. I will not defend the training system in general, not a big fan either, I am just saying it has nothing to do with the current crisis.

11) Power is more important than profits

Any specific example of your allegation? And, just for the sake of the argument, how do you know power is not more important than profit in some cases ? Again,you generalise without providing any reasonable examples.

12)Lawlessness

Yes, there have been many law suits. But that is just part of the business. Can you prove Cathay is facing more lawsuits than others? If they do, what is the legal system in the respective country? Can the employer sue the airline at all? Have a look elsewhere. People sue their employer all the time, then they get sued by customers, by tax authorities, about traffic rights,from the competition, they struggle with international law, bribery, etc etc. Ryan Air, the most valuable airline in Europe, is infamous for their bad relationship with their employees andcustomers, United just had a nearly fatal pr desaster and a subsequent settlement, dozens of cargo airlines have been fined, many airlines are facing strikes as we speak. Could the relationship be better with the employees? Yes, of course! But I challenge you to find a company that has a great time with their employees while facing a loss and layoffs, show me one please. And for CC, my opinion is well known. if it was for me, there would ne no CC, 5% payrise and another 3 years of housing plus major increase HKPA.

13) YOUR 13)

The conclusion is the most essential part of any essay, and it is no wonder you totally collapse trying to find any. Why does somebody commit suicide "because they can"? That does not answer anything, everybody can! So why only few do? Mind you, suicide is a willful act, are you suggesting there is such a will? Where? Why?

PS Cxorcist, if you read this you do care.

[Trafalgar]

STW. A thousand words that prove beyond any doubt that you are, a) a management apologist, and b) deluded. Do us all a favour and migrate to a different forum. You have no credibility, and you are only embarrassing yourself.

[ACMS]

Just block him/her.

Easy

[Shep69]

STW. A thousand words that prove beyond any doubt that you are, a) a management apologist, and b) deluded. Do us all a favour and migrate to a different forum. You have no credibility, and you are only embarrassing yourself.

Yup.

"Market Forces" are often claimed but everywhere ELSE airlines are paying quite well to hire and retain quality experienced individuals. Guess we're special.

Or are taking the airline down the path of a low cost regional without the cost structure to be able to support it with predictable results.

Basings represent a phenomenal opportunity to bring costs down (and, more importantly, keep them down; the upward spiraling costs of HKG don't show much sign of abating but the airline is betting the farm on being able to retain individuals on ever decreasing conditions). Yet the thought of actually having to make a deal, keep people happy, comply with a few rules, and lose the ability to impose, browbeat, and hit people with a stick is so repugnant to the powers that be it's not happening--when it needed to happen like the day before yesterday. Increasing base slots dramatically is a real no-brainer. Then again I guess you have to use a brain to begin with to see no-brainers.

The plan for the airline required quality service and expansion in order to work. Yet they've so alienated everyone working here they can't crew the jets properly--assets which are phenomenally expensive when they sit and don't earn their keep.

For some reason stw always seems to harp on 'proof'. Well, you don't have to look very far. A simple look at the last set of financials released shows nothing going in the right direction, and everything going in the wrong direction. That's proof enough for me.

[Trafalgar]

Not to mention the tone-deaf, amateurish sloganeering that now constitutes their idea of "time to win" :yuk:. They honestly seem to think that a few inappropriate, ill-timed and comically ironic catch phrases can substitute for the hard work needed to get their employees back onside. Instead, we hear nothing other than the drive for more 'efficiency' and cost cutting. Well AT, I flew 900 hrs last year, and am on track for the same again this. How exactly am I supposed to be more efficient?? Perhaps you can do YOUR job and sort out this debacle of a rostering system so I don't have to call in sick just to get some time off. I guess the fact that most of the rest of the first world airline industry doing this much differently seems to have escaped your notice. This place is probably past the point of no return, not least because the same incompetent boobs that got us here are apparently the same incompetent boobs that are tasked with getting us out of the mess they created. What could possibly go wrong.... :ugh::mad:

[GTC58]

As for paragraph 12.

CX will be getting a taste of the US court system this year as several court cases have been filed against them by US based employees. All the proposed cost savings by management will be gone if the court cases are won. Backpay, fines and damages add up fast in the US.

[Sam Ting Wong]

Shep,

you are claiming: "Market Forces" are often claimed but everywhere ELSE airlines are paying quite well to hire and retain quality experienced individuals. Guess we're special.

Where would that be please?

[Shep69]

Shep,

you are claiming: "Market Forces" are often claimed but everywhere ELSE airlines are paying quite well to hire and retain quality experienced individuals. Guess we're special.

Where would that be please?

Oh, just a few out of the way places....

UPS pilots say OK to labor deal, shower of cash (http://www.courier-journal.com/story/money/companies/2016/08/31/ups-pilots-ratify-new-labor-contract/89560276/)

American Airlines is offering its pilots and flight attendants a raise - Apr. 26, 2017 (http://money.cnn.com/2017/04/26/news/companies/american-airlines-pilot-salary-increase/)

Airline employees are getting huge pay raises - Aug. 26, 2016 (http://money.cnn.com/2016/08/26/news/companies/airline-pay-raises/)

Delta Air Lines | AirlinePilotCentral.com (http://www.airlinepilotcentral.com/airlines/legacy/delta_air_lines)

https://www.dallasnews.com/business/southwest-airlines/2016/11/07/southwest-airlines-pilots-overwhelmingly-approve-new-contract

[Sam Ting Wong]

Ok, fair point. Some US airlines do pay quite well and in general the US seem to be a good place right now. If you have the hours, you like the base, don't work for a commuter.

What if you don't have a green card?
( I never met an American S/O)

[Average Fool]

That's because most are FOs or captains now.

[BusyB]

Anotherday

"I go to work with people who are hell bent on seeing this company failing. They would relish it, "

Guess you work on the 9th Floor:ok:

[ACMS]

I can say that never in any Airline I've worked have any Pilots ever said or casually hinted they would like the Airline to fail.
What rubbish.

[Shep69]

I don't think anyone here wants this place to fail -- very much the opposite.

I do see a very high level of frustration in seeing what was a once great place making very bad decisions at the workers' expense--while continuing to ignore suggestions which can offer hope of recovery. Effectively betting poorly at the track (with some questions as to who actually owns the track) and then expecting folks who actually do things to sacrifice while the powers that be continue their sprees unabated and unchanged (save a few slogans). Folks who work here have a vested interest in success, but remain powerless to help steer the ship away from the icebergs. Most have invested significant portions of their life toward helping the place win only to see such efforts became but a fart in a hurricane compared to what damage those charged to steer the boat can do.

[BusyB]

Anotherday,
Imagine the Boeing workers finding their duties had changed, their days off had changed, their contractual benefits had changed and they were told to work longer every time they went to work.
Bet they'd be some big dents!!!

[cxorcist]

You mistake employees wanting certain Directors and Managers to fall as opposed to the airline. Most I fly with want the airline to flourish, they just want a purging of the Management. Totally different things.

I don't even want that. I simply want said directors and managers to pull their collective heads out and find the obvious cost savings via win-win situations first. Why cut ARAPA when many will gladly leave for bases? Why spend millions on a new Jeppessen CMP and then not turn it on the way it is designed to run? Why have a sickness management crackdown when guys will happily show up for work with a reasonable amount of roster control and (on bases) commutable A days. The low hanging fruit is being skipped. Wake up and smell the 21st century!!!

[mngmt mole]

cxorcist. I think the very questions you ask, and the inexplicable reason why they don't do that should give you the self-evident answers. The management is on a mission to crush our profession. If you can recognise that, then the resolve to resist and agitate against their machinations becomes easier to accept. It's time to fight, not time to 'win'.

[Trafalgar]

Anotherday. What exactly is your agenda? Please, expound.

[Average Fool]

I don't think he has an agenda, just a firm grip on the reality of how this company deals with labor.