The end of arapa

[Coronavirus]

Todays Q3 email doesn’t have the best outlook for the next 3 years. Cutbacks will happen, and pilots aren’t immune.

Every pilot I’ve flown with since the beginning of this crisis, who is on arapa, thinks that they will come out of this on the same contract and terms that they’re on today. They are in complete denial that this will be one of the first items the company will cut come Q4. They believe that they, and only they, can captain these 747s, 777s, and Airbuses safely. Cadet pilots aren’t qualified to be captains. Only arapa pilots are good and experienced enough to do the job and that’s why they won’t be losing their housing.

So the question I ask is; when will you arapa pilots join the rest of the world. We’re all going to come out of this with some loss. Why do you feel invincible? How fast will you sign over to a new contract once it’s the only one being offered by the company?

I respect you all, but it’s time to stop living in dreamland.

[Farman Biplane]

Great idea from the newbie!
Let’s roll over and just accept whatever happens.
I suppose COS20 for ex-ARAP and all the rest of the pilots laid off, how does that sound? Enjoy your time off.

[main_dog]

I’m probably taking a troll’s bait, but I love the way some relative newcomers (on HKPA?) are continuously putting ARAP up in the line of fire (hey, shoot here first!)

Of course, the same will happen to them later on in their careers, when all the ARAP recipients are gone and they now have the best package compared to the COS18s that joined after them. And so on and so forth, in this profession‘s implacable race to the bottom, where the most disheartening aspect of all is watching your own colleagues cheer management on.

[mngmt mole]

I was hoping that one, just a single one of the above posts would demonstrate a single quality; that of grammar. Sadly, not only are they all lacking in that basic quality, they also demonstrate why this profession is probably doomed. Foolish, envious and short sighted people now inhabit too many seats at this airline. I am in the Four Seasons/mid levels/DB townhouse (pick one) because I am availing myself of the contractual terms that I signed up for. Something about "a standard of living commensurate with that which I would enjoy in my home country". A big reason I agreed to the CX contract that I signed. That being said, do you feel that CX is obligated to honour my contract? And if not, then why should they honour yours (as meager as it may be). The remaining ARAPA pilots are not the problem in this company. The problem is a provably incompetent management. The loss on fuel hedging the past several years would have alone provided funds to put every single pilot onto ARAPA. So no, I don't accept the premise you raise. I, and my other ARAPA colleagues are guilty of nothing more than working within the contract that we were offered by CX when we considered joining. Like all else in that contract, I expect it to be honoured if I fulfill my duties faithfully towards the company. So far, I have done so to the letter. For that reason I expect management to do the same towards me. That's how contracts work.

[YellowFever777]

I was hoping that one, just a single one of the above posts would demonstrate a single quality; that of grammar. Sadly, not only are they all lacking in that basic quality, they also demonstrate why this profession is probably doomed. Foolish, envious and short sighted people now inhabit too many seats at this airline. I am in the Four Seasons/mid levels/DB townhouse (pick one) because I am availing myself of the contractual terms that I signed up for. Something about "a standard of living commensurate with that which I would enjoy in my home country". A big reason I agreed to the CX contract that I signed. That being said, do you feel that CX is obligated to honour my contract? And if not, then why should they honour yours (as meager as it may be). The remaining ARAPA pilots are not the problem in this company. The problem is a provably incompetent management. The loss on fuel hedging the past several years would have alone provided funds to put every single pilot onto ARAPA. So no, I don't accept the premise you raise. I, and my other ARAPA colleagues are guilty of nothing more than working within the contract that we were offered by CX when we considered joining. Like all else in that contract, I expect it to be honoured if I fulfill my duties faithfully towards the company. So far, I have done so to the letter. For that reason I expect management to do the same towards me. That's how contracts work.

Ever hear of paragraphs, grammar Nazi?

[mngmt mole]

The senior pilots have made sacrifices as well. Already into the second SLS, No 13th month for two of the past three years (and about to be three of the past four). Profit sharing nothing more than a formula that will never again pay out a penny to the staff. So yes, I feel that major sacrifices have already been made, by me and everyone else. Fear is the company's best friend at the moment, and it is ably demonstrated by the posts on this thread. I have no objection to agreeing temporary changes to our pay and benefits providing they are negotiated and agreed. They must include a snap back provision once the company is again profitable. Otherwise, it is yet another case of the "company never letting a good crisis go to waste". There is no career to be had under those terms.

[main_dog]

Exactly. Temporary pay sacrifices (even significant ones) are fine and I think most have been more than happy to accept them, and will accept more, lasting as long as the crisis lasts. This is an unprecedented situation and we all know that.

Permanent cuts to terms and conditions are a different story and would simply be opportunistic cost-cutting. When things pick up again (and they will) you won’t ever be getting those back.

If they need more cost cutting than that, then they have to start getting rid of people (which I suspect they need to do, regardless). How they do that is up to them.

Until then, stop offering up your colleagues’ terms and conditions on the sacrificial altar.

[Bangaluru]

Todays Q3 email doesn’t have the best outlook for the next 3 years. Cutbacks will happen, and pilots aren’t immune.

Every pilot I’ve flown with since the beginning of this crisis, who is on arapa, thinks that they will come out of this on the same contract and terms that they’re on today. They are in complete denial that this will be one of the first items the company will cut come Q4. They believe that they, and only they, can captain these 747s, 777s, and Airbuses safely. Cadet pilots aren’t qualified to be captains. Only arapa pilots are good and experienced enough to do the job and that’s why they won’t be losing their housing.

So the question I ask is; when will you arapa pilots join the rest of the world. We’re all going to come out of this with some loss. Why do you feel invincible? How fast will you sign over to a new contract once it’s the only one being offered by the company?

I respect you all, but it’s time to stop living in dreamland.
What a vacuous load of misguided bollocks. Delete this thread due to a complete lack of substance.

[Dilbert68]

Lose is a verb that means “to fail to win, to misplace, or to free oneself from something or someone.” Loose is an adjective that means “not tight.

Herewego75, please learn how to spell.

[Stick Flying]

Lose is a verb that means “to fail to win, to misplace, or to free oneself from something or someone.” Loose is an adjective that means “not tight.

Herewego75, please learn how to spell.
Bugger, the spelling police are about. At your beds everyone.

[cabbages]

Lose is a verb that means “to fail to win, to misplace, or to free oneself from something or someone.” Loose is an adjective that means “not tight.

Herewego75, please learn how to spell.

For God’s sake, why can’t people like you learn to include closing quotation marks?

[Dsteve]

*Popcorn chewing intensifies*

[doolay]

And once arapa is gone, what do you think will be next their next target? That's right, your beloved HKPA.
It amazes me the glee that some have over the demise of arapa without realizing the detrimental impact it will have on their own contracts in the future.

[cxorcist]

And once arapa is gone, what do you think will be next their next target? That's right, your beloved HKPA.
It amazes me the glee that some have over the demise of arapa without realizing the detrimental impact it will have on their own contracts in the future.
Indeed, but that’s the benefit of a dumbed down workforce. They aren’t even thinking beyond their next meal. Forget about chess, checkers is a challenge.

[Porterboy]

And once arapa is gone, what do you think will be next their next target? That's right, your beloved HKPA.
It amazes me the glee that some have over the demise of arapa without realizing the detrimental impact it will have on their own contracts in the future.
I was going to start as an SO earlier this year, but thanks to Covid, that was cancelled and I am now unemployed and looking to start from the bottom once again (likely chucking bags into aircraft in the bush). Despite this, I truly hope CX sticks to LIFO even if it means I won't be flying.. erm babysitting... a CX aircraft for a handful of years or more, for the exact reason you stated. The last thing I want is for all of the experience to leave the flightdeck and then to have my contract slashed during the next crisis. Although, COS18 means nothing anyways with all of the "at company's discretion," so maybe it would happen anyways. Anyhow, once you accept anything other than what the contract states, you've set the precedence for the company to do whatever they want as they please. Take short term concessions, but please don't take any permanent concessions.

[Speed Weasel]

And once arapa is gone, what do you think will be next their next target? That's right, your beloved HKPA.
It amazes me the glee that some have over the demise of arapa without realizing the detrimental impact it will have on their own contracts in the future.

Has anyone that wants to scrap ARAPA realized that any new contract comes with age 65 retirement?

What do you think that does to upgrade times in a shrinking airline?

We should all be hoping people get to stay on COS 99 and leave at 55.

[Numero Crunchero]

coronavirus - clearly we didn't fly together ;-)

Thanks to the failure of TA16 and TA18 we don't have any pesky legal restrictions on changes to ARAP or HKPA. Minor changes can be done with impunity, wholesale changes are 'challengeable' in court. But given the economic environment we find ourselves in, what would be considered 'wholesale' with an airline making a profit vs 'wholesale' with an airline losing $1.5Billion a month is debatable.

There has been a long term degradation in our terms. It is not the newcomer's fault - I remember some on A scale complaining about B scalers arriving. Then ASL - then COS08, then HKPA, then COS18. If the deal was so bad, people wouldn't come. Market forces!

A year from now I will be grateful to have/keep my job - I will be even more grateful if my employment terms(I mean $$$) are close to what I got prior to SLS. I will be gob smacked if they are the same. As the saying goes, never waste a crisis. All airlines will try to make themselves leaner out of all this. And that means- us - where else can they trim?

PS to spelling and grammar nazis - I do numbers not English - fire away at errors but I don't care ;-)

[mothy1583]

ARAP is certainly one of the "low-hanging fruit" that I fully expect the company to take an axe to. What seems to contradict this though, is the offer to continue to pay this allowance while people are on the latest Unpaid Leave offer going through to March next year.

The out-going GMA gave us a 10-year deal on ARAP so we could plan with some degree of certainty. Maybe they're going to honour this? Large changes could potentially bankrupt some people (though no-one saw Covid coming and planned accordingly). Maybe they're going to slowly turn the tap off as leases come up for renewal. It's anyone's guess.

[Bangaluru]

(though no-one saw Covid coming and planned accordingly).

Correction if I may: No one knew it would be COVID but many knew the financial and economic system had to end sometime and some were even prepared for the changes that are being brought about by COVID.

[Tappingtheadmiral]

I hope I am wrong and we will all be happily flying soon, but we all know that won't happen.[/QUOTE]

I’m sure you are right with parking a chunk of the fleet and the following quote:
On possible job cuts in 2020, CEO Augustus Tang said: “It is inevitable we will need to make difficult decisions”

I’d also wager that before long they’ll start the process of new contracts sign here or else.

On that gloomy note I’ll sign off 😂.
Good luck everybody.

[Busbitch]

The days of $70k to pay your mortgage or $100k to rent one of those nice places in Kowloon will be gone by Christmas. A new deal is coming, it won't be terrible but you will all sign it because there is nowhere else to go. It does't matter if you think it's fair. Life's not fair. You will just be happy not be be on the scrap heap like half the other Pilots in the world. Also if you are anywhere near 50 your career is probably over if you loose your job now.

[Gnadenburg]

The days of $70k to pay your mortgage or $100k to rent one of those nice places in Kowloon will be gone by Christmas. A new deal is coming, it won't be terrible but you will all sign it because there is nowhere else to go. It does't matter if you think it's fair. Life's not fair. You will just be happy not be be on the scrap heap like half the other Pilots in the world. Also if you are anywhere near 50 your career is probably over if you loose your job now.

I don't think a highly-experienced pilot will have trouble resurrecting their careers post-COVID. It's probably going to be hardest for the inexperienced or command-less.

Housing changes will mean dramatic lifestyle changes for many if they cut deep. Those who have houses/ apartments may be better off than those dependant on renting due refinancing options. But who really knows?

[Progress Wanchai]

Has anyone that wants to scrap ARAPA realized that any new contract comes with age 65 retirement?

What do you think that does to upgrade times in a shrinking airline?

We should all be hoping people get to stay on COS 99 and leave at 55.

I’m not sure everyone quite understands what the current arrangements are. Certainly the original poster is confused.


ARAPA has been gone for three years now and is highly unlikely to ever be negotiated again or put to a vote to ratify an agreement over the housing allowance. Obviously the company still pays an allowance though as this is a contractural requirement to comply with the Accommodation and Rental Assistance clause.

I can only assume the original poster was referring to this payment when he made reference to ARAPA. In order for the company to cease this payment they’d be required to offer new contracts to eligible COS99 and COS08 crew. It’s arguable that the issue of a productivity based payment system has actually been a higher priority than any other aspect of our contracts, so it’s highly likely that if the company did offer new contracts that they won’t change one aspect of it but many. Not just productivity and housing but provident fund, CEA, payment increments, leave, seniority, list mergers, recruitment policy in regards to DEFO/DEC, etc. as well as adjusting non contractural allowances such as HKPA.

It’s also highly likely that it won’t be just one pilot group offered a new contract, but everyone within the group. The pain will be shared, although not equally. Until we see the devil in the detail we really have no idea of the effect it will have on individuals or if it will result in lifestyle adjustments.

[Freehills]

I don't think a highly-experienced pilot will have trouble resurrecting their careers post-COVID. It's probably going to be hardest for the inexperienced or command-less.

Housing changes will mean dramatic lifestyle changes for many if they cut deep. Those who have houses/ apartments may be better off than those dependant on renting due refinancing options. But who really knows?

seniority means that even for a highly experienced pilot their career will be shafted - unless they go contracting.

[Tappingtheadmiral]

I’m not sure everyone quite understands what the current arrangements are. Certainly the original poster is confused.


ARAPA has been gone for three years now and is highly unlikely to ever be negotiated again or put to a vote to ratify an agreement over the housing allowance. Obviously the company still pays an allowance though as this is a contractural requirement to comply with the Accommodation and Rental Assistance clause.

I can only assume the original poster was referring to this payment when he made reference to ARAPA. In order for the company to cease this payment they’d be required to offer new contracts. It’s arguable that the issue of a productivity based payment system has actually been a higher priority than any other aspect of our contracts, so it’s highly likely that if the company did offer new contracts that they won’t change one aspect of it but many. Not just productivity and housing but provident fund, CEA, payment increments, leave, seniority, list mergers, recruitment policy in regards to DEFO/DEC, etc. as well as adjusting non contractural allowances such as HKPA.

It’s also highly likely that it won’t be just one pilot group offered a new contract, but everyone within the group. The pain will be shared, although not equally. Until we see the devil in the detail we really have no idea of the effect it will have on individuals or if it will result in lifestyle adjustments.

One just has to look at the recurrent theme in the press (small leaks here and there) and from certain pilot and cc managers. It’s Classic CX expectation management. Keep pushing the bad news to prepare the ground for pineapples.

[Numero Crunchero]

Yes it is contractual to pay housing assistance/HKPA for all of us. The levels are policy. So $1 is still an ARAP payment for someone who was getting $100K last month in rental assistance. As I have stated on these forums, and in all the TA18 forums, the amount can vary. If it varies too much - then it is challengeable in court. As I said - what was defines "too much" in Sep 2020 is very different to what the amount/percentage would have been in Dec 2019.

In terms of even pain? I am not so sure - somehow I think i am in the demographic that will be hit hardest. If they put us on onto current levels of HKPA - that hurts less than half the pilots here. And where would we go? If they tweak HKPA as well - then a lot of pain for the expats very little pain for HKPA recipients.

So yeah - if there is pain I will almost guarantee it won't be (fairly) shared - pretty sure my demographic will be hit hardest!

[Progress Wanchai]

Yes it is contractual to pay housing assistance/HKPA for all of us. The levels are policy. So $1 is still an ARAP payment for someone who was getting $100K last month in rental assistance. As I have stated on these forums, and in all the TA18 forums, the amount can vary. If it varies too much - then it is challengeable in court. As I said - what was defines "too much" in Sep 2020 is very different to what the amount/percentage would have been in Dec 2019.

In terms of even pain? I am not so sure - somehow I think i am in the demographic that will be hit hardest. If they put us on onto current levels of HKPA - that hurts less than half the pilots here. And where would we go? If they tweak HKPA as well - then a lot of pain for the expats very little pain for HKPA recipients.

So yeah - if there is pain I will almost guarantee it won't be (fairly) shared - pretty sure my demographic will be hit hardest!

The housing rental levels are contractural. Sometimes you put too much emphasis on numbers while ignoring words. “adjusted to reflect market conditions in Hong Kong” while not being rock solid, is probably why they’ve only been adjusted to reflect market conditions in Hong Kong. Sure, market conditions are currently weak, so there’s no surprise the allowance currently reflects this. That’s exactly what the contract stipulates.

I’m in agreement with you that the pain won’t be shared equally. It never is. That’s life.
I’m not sure how much sympathy our demographic that failed to negotiate a common retirement age while “enjoying” 10 years of extra work can argue we’ll be hit the hardest. In the game of swings and roundabouts there won’t be many tears for us.

[Gidddyup]

"The housing rental levels are contractual"

I hope I’m wrong but I wouldn’t plan on relying on current contractual rights.
Under restructuring laws employment is not automatically transferred between entities as a result of restructuring.
Either;
The employee accepts the offer of employment with the new entity,
The employee resigns, or
The employment is terminated by the employer on grounds of redundancy (IAW Employment Ordinance Cap 57)

[Numero Crunchero]

The housing rental levels are contractural. Sometimes you put too much emphasis on numbers while ignoring words. “adjusted to reflect market conditions in Hong Kong” while not being rock solid, is probably why they’ve only been adjusted to reflect market conditions in Hong Kong. Sure, market conditions are currently weak, so there’s no surprise the allowance currently reflects this. That’s exactly what the contract stipulates.


I wish you were right but you are 100% wrong. The HKAOA lawyers and senior counsel advice on two seperate occasions have stated what I have repeated here. Though a former chairman spent an hour on the phone arguing with our lawyers telling them they were all wrong.
Up to you - believe the bush lawyers amongst us, or the legal advice prepared for the HKAOA by specialists in HK labour/employment law!

[Curry Lamb]

The housing rental levels are contractural.

Until a new contract is thrown at you, with no mention of any housing allowance. It's coming, and it's going to be a case of "Use it or lose it"

[Progress Wanchai]

Until a new contract is thrown at you, with no mention of any housing allowance. It's coming, and it's going to be a case of "Use it or lose it"

I suspect this would be the company’s preferred path rather than merely adjusting company policies. By using this option the company can tidy up a wish list of outstanding issues.

Some home owners and all boat owners have their payment in regards to Housing and Rental Assistance fixed, irrespective of the latest changes to ARAPA or ARAP. Can a change of company policy affect this agreement between individuals and the company? Certainly the company can try and certainly the affected individuals will seek redress through the courts.
It’s not all that hard to find lawyers who will argue anything including disagreeing with NC’s “100% wrong” assertion. When it comes to the courts no lawyer will give any client a 100% guarantee of a particular finding.

So a court case is inevitable whether the company chooses to significantly alter the housing allowance or if it chooses to re-write everyone’s contracts.
I suspect they’d rather go to court having taken a giant bite rather than a tasting lick.

[Farman Biplane]

Any expensive lawsuit funded by the HKAOA that benefits only the (former) expat pilots will not be popular with the majority of the HKAOA members and will result in a massive exodus, another win for the company!

[doolay]

Yeah that's a good plan, ensure no lawsuit for ARAPA so that the Company can get to work right away on abolishing HKPA. It WILL be their next target.

[Curry Lamb]

Hence an enticing new contract coming your way. 2 Birds with one (brush) stroke!

[Numero Crunchero]

I suspect this would be the company’s preferred path rather than merely adjusting company policies. By using this option the company can tidy up a wish list of outstanding issues.

Some home owners and all boat owners have their payment in regards to Housing and Rental Assistance fixed, irrespective of the latest changes to ARAPA or ARAP. Can a change of company policy affect this agreement between individuals and the company? Certainly the company can try and certainly the affected individuals will seek redress through the courts.
It’s not all that hard to find lawyers who will argue anything including disagreeing with NC’s “100% wrong” assertion. When it comes to the courts no lawyer will give any client a 100% guarantee of a particular finding.

So a court case is inevitable whether the company chooses to significantly alter the housing allowance or if it chooses to re-write everyone’s contracts.
I suspect they’d rather go to court having taken a giant bite rather than a tasting lick.

I actually agree with some of what you have said here! Quelle surprise!

Where I disagree.....The amounts paid by CX on Level 1 or RFZ or mortgage are POLICY. They spell out in the policy how they come up with those numbers. There is no contract between CX and the pilot stating that their monthly payment is, say, $74,000 per month for life of the mortgage. The Policy states you will get it. So defining a number does not empower its' resilience in the face of corporate change to policy. If I am reading your arguments correctly, you are inferring that those with fixed numbers (whether for life of the mortgage or for 2 year periods) are more 'bullet proof' to variation than those on RFZ or level 1? That is NOT the case. Level 1 is clearly identifiable(by govt indices) and fixed(and varied by terms of the policy)- RFZ is also defined by govt indices (and varied by terms of the policy) - the 2 year rolling is fixed (and varied by terms of the policy) - the 15/25 year lock-in is fixed (by the terms of the policy). But all are under the policy. And the contractual obligation of the company is to provide housing assistance law with the policy. Policy can change unilaterally - and even as optimistic a person as I am, I suspect it will change soon! A large change leading to a significant change in your standard of living is challengeable. But what if you are getting 74K a month in purchasing a property, but you can put out the term of the loan to say 20 years and lower the payments to say 30K per month. You are still living in your flat/house - and CX could pay you 30K and you keep your flat. How have you suffered? Yes you are losing how quickly you were paying it off. But you see my point. Ironically I think the renters have a stronger case - if they are renting for 74K - then they would be materially and immediately affected by a substantial change in policy levels. So yes - not as clear as some people seem to think it is. Which is why the union paid a lot of money getting SC advice on two occasions over the last decade or so. Not as obvious as our bush lawyers would like us to think!

But I agree with your last sentence - a lick would not win in court -a bite(if big enough) would be defendable. But as I have said, what size bite would have been acceptable in 2019 is likely to be smaller than an acceptable bite size in covid times.

Of course the easy way out for them(CX) is for us to sign a new contract - that removes all the ambiguity. Question is - will it be a 1994 "voluntary' offer or a 1999 'sign or be fired' offer. Given the economic environment I tend to lean towards the latter.

Anyway - good debating with you PW

PS people please don't bother telling me the 1999 option can't be done - just go read the Judgements on the 49ers case/appeal etc. Then ask yourself - would a court be as sympathetic to CX pilots today as they were to the 49ers?

[Zapp_Brannigan]

I actually agree with some of what you have said here! Quelle surprise!

Where I disagree.....The amounts paid by CX on Level 1 or RFZ or mortgage are POLICY. They spell out in the policy how they come up with those numbers. There is no contract between CX and the pilot stating that their monthly payment is, say, $74,000 per month for life of the mortgage. The Policy states you will get it. So defining a number does not empower its' resilience in the face of corporate change to policy. If I am reading your arguments correctly, you are inferring that those with fixed numbers (whether for life of the mortgage or for 2 year periods) are more 'bullet proof' to variation than those on RFZ or level 1? That is NOT the case. Level 1 is clearly identifiable(by govt indices) and fixed(and varied by terms of the policy)- RFZ is also defined by govt indices (and varied by terms of the policy) - the 2 year rolling is fixed (and varied by terms of the policy) - the 15/25 year lock-in is fixed (by the terms of the policy). But all are under the policy. And the contractual obligation of the company is to provide housing assistance law with the policy. Policy can change unilaterally - and even as optimistic a person as I am, I suspect it will change soon! A large change leading to a significant change in your standard of living is challengeable. But what if you are getting 74K a month in purchasing a property, but you can put out the term of the loan to say 20 years and lower the payments to say 30K per month. You are still living in your flat/house - and CX could pay you 30K and you keep your flat. How have you suffered? Yes you are losing how quickly you were paying it off. But you see my point. Ironically I think the renters have a stronger case - if they are renting for 74K - then they would be materially and immediately affected by a substantial change in policy levels. So yes - not as clear as some people seem to think it is. Which is why the union paid a lot of money getting SC advice on two occasions over the last decade or so. Not as obvious as our bush lawyers would like us to think!

But I agree with your last sentence - a lick would not win in court -a bite(if big enough) would be defendable. But as I have said, what size bite would have been acceptable in 2019 is likely to be smaller than an acceptable bite size in covid times.

Of course the easy way out for them(CX) is for us to sign a new contract - that removes all the ambiguity. Question is - will it be a 1994 "voluntary' offer or a 1999 'sign or be fired' offer. Given the economic environment I tend to lean towards the latter.

Anyway - good debating with you PW

PS people please don't bother telling me the 1999 option can't be done - just go read the Judgements on the 49ers case/appeal etc. Then ask yourself - would a court be as sympathetic to CX pilots today as they were to the 49ers?

I don't necessarily disagree with the fact that a court might side with CX, but the fact is, nobody knows until it happens. Even the 3 courts couldn't reach the same verdict.

The context in the 49ers case was absolutely different than the current one.
​​​​​​Guys were doing a sick-out campaign and fired accordingly (although officially for no reason).
​​​​​​If they let people go in a few months, this would be a case of redundancy. And the redundancy clause in all contracts but POS18 is spelled out very clearly.

I honestly expect the company to try to reduce costs. But I hope they do it legally and by consulting with us first.
It's in everybody's interest to find a compromise.
A lengthy court case and years of lost goodwill won't help any future recovery.

​​​​

[Curry Lamb]

But I hope they do it legally and by consulting with us first. ​​​​

Haha like they've ever done that! Dream on.

[main_dog]

To be fair this is a completely different situation, one not caused by either party. Hopefully a compromise will actually be sought after this time.

I know, call me a dreamer...

[Numero Crunchero]

Main Dog
I hope you are right too. I am an optimist at heart.

But as they say - prepare for the worst and hope for the best. (but of course the cynics will call that expectation management)

[AnAmusedReader]

Zapp B, you wrote:
"The context in the 49ers case was absolutely different than the current one.
​​​​​​Guys were doing a sick-out campaign and fired accordingly (although officially for no reason).

Where were you when the 49ers were sacked? The above is absolutely rubbish. Read John Warham;s book if you can get a copy.

[Zapp_Brannigan]

Zapp B, you wrote:
"The context in the 49ers case was absolutely different than the current one.
​​​​​​Guys were doing a sick-out campaign and fired accordingly (although officially for no reason).

Where were you when the 49ers were sacked? The above is absolutely rubbish. Read John Warham;s book if you can get a copy.

I was in HK, and in the union.

Guys were picked because of their role in the "industrial" action (work-to-rule, transforming into sickout)
They were terminated for "no reason" and not because they refused to sign a new contract.
We all know they were picked because of their involvement in the industrial dispute and/or too many days of absence.

This was absolutely not the same situation as now.
There was no talk about redundancies.

Apologies if I am wrong, but please correct me, then.

[Slasher1]

I was in HK, and in the union.

Guys were picked because of their role in the "industrial" action (work-to-rule, transforming into sickout)
They were terminated for "no reason" and not because they refused to sign a new contract.
We all know they were picked because of their involvement in the industrial dispute and/or too many days of absence.

This was absolutely not the same situation as now.
There was no talk about redundancies.

Apologies if I am wrong, but please correct me, then.

The procedures for redundancies are clearly covered in all of the various contracts. Basically it's reverse seniority order with varying degrees of pay protection. That's it.

Like some other carriers, the company is free to negotiate a meaningful voluntary retirement/reduction scheme that might be attractive to higher seniority individuals and might attract enough to mitigate furloughing from the bottom up. That also doesn't violate any of the contracts.

[reazasassain]

Couldn’t disagree more with slasher. The redundancy clause in the contract is only there to make you feel good. When push comes to shove and the company really needs or wants to remove pilots they have the Clause in the contract they’ll use. Sec 35, says they only need to give you 3 months notice. The threat of sign a new contract or take a pre determined buy out (probably 3 months salary) is very real.

For all of you on here who say the union will take the company to court for violating the contract you need to look at what happened just last summer. The company invoked sec 35 on multiple pilots for their personal view points on the political situation in Hong Kong. Where was the union in protecting them???

As for ARAPA the same will be true. I’ve already started to make arrangements as I know I won’t be receiving what I get now. I suspect it will be something closer to HKPA if we are Lucky. I’m trying to stay positive but let’s not kid ourselves. Cathay is not the type of company to miss an opportunity to slash costs.
I agree that any cuts should be temporary until the company returns to profitability. However I won’t be holding my breath on that one.

The salary for a pilot at Cathay will soon be no better than that of a LCC. HKE is the new target as is COS18. The future of the airline is locally employed pilots. Expats are no longer the desired demographic, and an extension to that I would say bases are doomed.

As for the political situation in HKG. I ask myself why would anyone want to come here. What was once a great country has been ruined by the supreme leader to the North.

[Coronavirus]

Great idea from the newbie!
Let’s roll over and just accept whatever happens.
I suppose COS20 for ex-ARAP and all the rest of the pilots laid off, how does that sound? Enjoy your time off.
You were close!

[Coronavirus]

What a vacuous load of misguided bollocks. Delete this thread due to a complete lack of substance.
Wasn't that misguided..

[mngmt mole]

The announcement is out. KA finished, new contracts for everyone else. Sad day, and my thoughts are particularly with my KA colleagues who didn't deserve this outcome.

[cxorcist]

The announcement is out. KA finished, new contracts for everyone else. Sad day, and my thoughts are particularly with my KA colleagues who didn't deserve this outcome.
Correct, the KA staff have a wonderful brand and lot to be proud of. They deserve so much better than to be sacrificed on the CX alter while a soulless LCC, HK Express, takes their place.

[mngmt mole]

Looks like housing up to $68k/mo for two years IF you sign over to COS 18 by the 28 Oct. If you sign after that, only one year of that amount.

[Oddball77]

Looks like housing up to $68k/mo for two years IF you sign over to COS 18 by the 28 Oct. If you sign after that, only one year of that amount.
What happens if you refuse to sign anything?

[Rie]

Termination if refusal is the word

[mngmt mole]

Correct: sign or be fired. 1999 all over again.

[viking avenger]

Deadlines to sign, pay cuts, 3 years on when record profits are made and you ask for reinstatement of pay you will be told you agreed to that cut. Sorry thanks for shopping. That’s 1999-2001 all over again

[controlledrest]

Sign now or gone, no redundancy.

POS18 has no redundancy provisions or seniority to speak off, so sign over and in a few months another round of "redundancies", only this time you are just terminated.


Your f**ked either way.

[Will IB Fayed]

Correct: sign or be fired. 1999 all over again.
Except, there's no jobs to go to. I wouldn't expect there will be much of a fight in HKG?