Why has CX stopped flying to MAN ?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX management manipulated the pilot protest as an excuse to terminate the service.
Its such a viable route and the inconvenience it cause is considerable.
CX, you going to lose passengers.
I am really disappointed by CX management and reading what TT says, its just bull****.
Its such a viable route and the inconvenience it cause is considerable.
CX, you going to lose passengers.
I am really disappointed by CX management and reading what TT says, its just bull****.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snake Hips,
You infer the AOA are not "squeaky clean". Since ND took over what has the AOA done to damage your confidence?
You say to the AOA, "call off the limited industrial action and get to the negotiating table". Are you calling for the AOA to cease their action permanently, or just for a pre-defined period?
There are two parties to the dispute, why do you not call on the company to come back to table with the flying stats the AOA has requested? ( for those not aware, this is the only precondition the AOA have to further negotiations, for without such stats the AOA believes it cannot evaluate the overtime scheme the company is promoting)
Look forward to your response.
You infer the AOA are not "squeaky clean". Since ND took over what has the AOA done to damage your confidence?
You say to the AOA, "call off the limited industrial action and get to the negotiating table". Are you calling for the AOA to cease their action permanently, or just for a pre-defined period?
There are two parties to the dispute, why do you not call on the company to come back to table with the flying stats the AOA has requested? ( for those not aware, this is the only precondition the AOA have to further negotiations, for without such stats the AOA believes it cannot evaluate the overtime scheme the company is promoting)
Look forward to your response.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Liam
In previous postings, I have urged BOTH sides to get round the table. This is still the only solution to this sad state of affairs.
Even then, there are many who doubt there can again be a meaningful relationship between the company and its aircrew which is even sadder. This global phenomenon is discussed in the current edition of (I think) Airline Business.
Regarding the AOA, the 'squeaky clean' comment related to the view being promoted on this forum, that failure to reach a negotiated settlement was all the fault of the company. This is patently untrue. Goal posts WERE moved on an alarmingly regular basis and in the end company patience ran out.
My lack of 'confidence' in the union stems form a belief (not shared by others here I know) that they dreadfully underestimated company and shareholder resolve this time round. I don't blame ND but a 'professional' (JF) should have twigged.
I believe immediate withdrawl of any action,
limited or otherwise, will get the company back to the table although there are many who think it is already too late. Exchange of data (to those of us not directly involved) does SEEM like a nonsense. Surely every member logs their hours? The AOA therefore must have data on hours worked? Have I missed the point?
Re pre conditions, I thought re-instatement
was also a pre condition? This will be major
problem. They are not wanted in the organisation and I see this as a huge stumbling block.
Regards
SH
In previous postings, I have urged BOTH sides to get round the table. This is still the only solution to this sad state of affairs.
Even then, there are many who doubt there can again be a meaningful relationship between the company and its aircrew which is even sadder. This global phenomenon is discussed in the current edition of (I think) Airline Business.
Regarding the AOA, the 'squeaky clean' comment related to the view being promoted on this forum, that failure to reach a negotiated settlement was all the fault of the company. This is patently untrue. Goal posts WERE moved on an alarmingly regular basis and in the end company patience ran out.
My lack of 'confidence' in the union stems form a belief (not shared by others here I know) that they dreadfully underestimated company and shareholder resolve this time round. I don't blame ND but a 'professional' (JF) should have twigged.
I believe immediate withdrawl of any action,
limited or otherwise, will get the company back to the table although there are many who think it is already too late. Exchange of data (to those of us not directly involved) does SEEM like a nonsense. Surely every member logs their hours? The AOA therefore must have data on hours worked? Have I missed the point?
Re pre conditions, I thought re-instatement
was also a pre condition? This will be major
problem. They are not wanted in the organisation and I see this as a huge stumbling block.
Regards
SH
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear snake
“Regarding the AOA, the 'squeaky clean' comment related to the view being promoted on this forum, that failure to reach a negotiated settlement was all the fault of the company. This is patently untrue.”
Really! Then tell us why the company have not, at any time in the last 8 years, negotiated in good faith. On every occasion they have walked out and unilaterally imposed their wishes upon a bewildered pilot body. This time was just another farce. Company negotiators walked straight out of the meeting into a pre-planned press conference and shortly thereafter fired 53 pilots and wet leased several aircraft. I suppose it was the AOA who pre-planned all this. Remember a work to rule was all that was threatened. The requirement to wet lease was not established and if management had held their fire to assess the situation they could have saved several hundred million dollars. Patently true!
“My lack of 'confidence' in the union stems form a belief (not shared by others here I know) that they dreadfully underestimated company and shareholder resolve this time round. I don't blame ND but a 'professional' (JF) should have twigged. “
On the contrary. The fact is the company have woefully misread the resolve of the pilot body this time around. Resolve was very firm prior to the disastrous decision to terminate, without any stated reason, 49 pilots. Now there are previously anti union pilots firmly in the AOA camp. Well done snake, you have managed to strengthen the union. Over 1300 letters rejecting the company offer and yet TT still says the pilots have accepted it. Snake tell me who is in touch with reality here.
”Exchange of data (to those of us not directly involved) does SEEM like a nonsense. Surely every member logs their hours? The AOA therefore must have data on hours worked? Have I missed the point? “
Of course you have. If it is nonsense then why not just give the data to the AOA? If the pilots were to send individual data for AOA compilation you know, just as well as everyone else, that the company would refuse to accept any conclusions drawn because they were derived from unverified data. So quite simply snake give the AOA the data and let us get back to the negotiating table.
“Re pre conditions, I thought re-instatement
was also a pre condition? This will be major
problem. They are not wanted in the organisation and I see this as a huge stumbling block.”
Once again snake you are totally wrong (obviously believe what TT tells you). The only requirement that has to be met prior to calling off LIA and returning to negotiation is the provision of the data. Of course re-instatement is a requirement for a final settlement, as any decent human being would realise.
I am sorry you are so out of touch snake. However, I would imagine you are no different to the other armchair warriors who are subjected to misinformation and propaganda every single day.
Regards
D
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
“Regarding the AOA, the 'squeaky clean' comment related to the view being promoted on this forum, that failure to reach a negotiated settlement was all the fault of the company. This is patently untrue.”
Really! Then tell us why the company have not, at any time in the last 8 years, negotiated in good faith. On every occasion they have walked out and unilaterally imposed their wishes upon a bewildered pilot body. This time was just another farce. Company negotiators walked straight out of the meeting into a pre-planned press conference and shortly thereafter fired 53 pilots and wet leased several aircraft. I suppose it was the AOA who pre-planned all this. Remember a work to rule was all that was threatened. The requirement to wet lease was not established and if management had held their fire to assess the situation they could have saved several hundred million dollars. Patently true!
“My lack of 'confidence' in the union stems form a belief (not shared by others here I know) that they dreadfully underestimated company and shareholder resolve this time round. I don't blame ND but a 'professional' (JF) should have twigged. “
On the contrary. The fact is the company have woefully misread the resolve of the pilot body this time around. Resolve was very firm prior to the disastrous decision to terminate, without any stated reason, 49 pilots. Now there are previously anti union pilots firmly in the AOA camp. Well done snake, you have managed to strengthen the union. Over 1300 letters rejecting the company offer and yet TT still says the pilots have accepted it. Snake tell me who is in touch with reality here.
”Exchange of data (to those of us not directly involved) does SEEM like a nonsense. Surely every member logs their hours? The AOA therefore must have data on hours worked? Have I missed the point? “
Of course you have. If it is nonsense then why not just give the data to the AOA? If the pilots were to send individual data for AOA compilation you know, just as well as everyone else, that the company would refuse to accept any conclusions drawn because they were derived from unverified data. So quite simply snake give the AOA the data and let us get back to the negotiating table.
“Re pre conditions, I thought re-instatement
was also a pre condition? This will be major
problem. They are not wanted in the organisation and I see this as a huge stumbling block.”
Once again snake you are totally wrong (obviously believe what TT tells you). The only requirement that has to be met prior to calling off LIA and returning to negotiation is the provision of the data. Of course re-instatement is a requirement for a final settlement, as any decent human being would realise.
I am sorry you are so out of touch snake. However, I would imagine you are no different to the other armchair warriors who are subjected to misinformation and propaganda every single day.
Regards
D
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dismayed
In the middle of a 3 year 'agreement' we are now seeing limited industrial action with potential for escalation. Good faith is required all round. My point was that people on this forum, perhaps not suprisingly, expound the view that the AOA is wonderful and the company is evil. Now I don't happen to believe that. Goal posts WERE moved by the union and on a regular basis. Something was going to give, it was obvious.
Leasing aircraft to cover UNKNOWN eventualities, whilst at the same time signalling to government that contingency plans were in place frankly doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.
Your second point, let's just wait and see.
I am NOT saying it's right, what I AM saying is you have no comprehension of what the shareholders are prepared to do to make this go away. This gives me no pleasure at all. I have 14 years invested in the company and I don't wish to see it destroyed by internal warfare.
Exchange of data. Try withdrawing any threat of action and see what happens. Who know's you may find the data you want.
Reinstatement. This 'armchair warrior' has two good friends in the 49. Sadly they will not work for this company again so yet another impasse.
All pretty depressing.
SH
In the middle of a 3 year 'agreement' we are now seeing limited industrial action with potential for escalation. Good faith is required all round. My point was that people on this forum, perhaps not suprisingly, expound the view that the AOA is wonderful and the company is evil. Now I don't happen to believe that. Goal posts WERE moved by the union and on a regular basis. Something was going to give, it was obvious.
Leasing aircraft to cover UNKNOWN eventualities, whilst at the same time signalling to government that contingency plans were in place frankly doesn't sound like a bad idea to me.
Your second point, let's just wait and see.
I am NOT saying it's right, what I AM saying is you have no comprehension of what the shareholders are prepared to do to make this go away. This gives me no pleasure at all. I have 14 years invested in the company and I don't wish to see it destroyed by internal warfare.
Exchange of data. Try withdrawing any threat of action and see what happens. Who know's you may find the data you want.
Reinstatement. This 'armchair warrior' has two good friends in the 49. Sadly they will not work for this company again so yet another impasse.
All pretty depressing.
SH
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snake,
In the middle of a 3 year agreement containing a clause stating that rostering practices would remain unchanged UNTIL new ones could be negotiated. In the middle of this 3 year agreement the company moves to change rostering practices unilaterally and remove them from the contract completely and totally in breach of the existing contract. Did you mention the words good faith? I notice you appropriately placed the word agreement inside inverted commas as you are well aware this agreement was imposed with the termination of all A scalers the only alternative. Thus an agreement only reached because the company threatened to use the most extreme form of industrial action. Industrial action, which they are still happy to be using right now!
Exchange of data. Did you not know that this data was first requested a very long time ago? In fact well before there were any threats of LIA. Hence your:
“Exchange of data. Try withdrawing any threat of action and see what happens. Who know's you may find the data you want.
Is quite obviously meaningless rhetoric.
By the way shouldn't you be doing something in the office more usefull than writing prpoganda on this forum?
Just wondering!
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
In the middle of a 3 year agreement containing a clause stating that rostering practices would remain unchanged UNTIL new ones could be negotiated. In the middle of this 3 year agreement the company moves to change rostering practices unilaterally and remove them from the contract completely and totally in breach of the existing contract. Did you mention the words good faith? I notice you appropriately placed the word agreement inside inverted commas as you are well aware this agreement was imposed with the termination of all A scalers the only alternative. Thus an agreement only reached because the company threatened to use the most extreme form of industrial action. Industrial action, which they are still happy to be using right now!
Exchange of data. Did you not know that this data was first requested a very long time ago? In fact well before there were any threats of LIA. Hence your:
“Exchange of data. Try withdrawing any threat of action and see what happens. Who know's you may find the data you want.
Is quite obviously meaningless rhetoric.
By the way shouldn't you be doing something in the office more usefull than writing prpoganda on this forum?
Just wondering!
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you rightly say, meaningless rhetoric. So far apart that the nightmare scenario is just around the corner. I just hope you know what you're getting yourself into.
Cheers and good luck
PS Shouldn't you be resting? Just wondering!
Cheers and good luck
PS Shouldn't you be resting? Just wondering!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snake,
I guess you are right. In the cold war they called it MAD (mutually assured destruction). This all seems pretty mad to me too, all you have to do is provide the data; but you will not. Please tell us all why you will not supply this data and thus provide an escape route from MAD.
Remember that the good guys prevailed in the cold war!
I am resting thanks!
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
I guess you are right. In the cold war they called it MAD (mutually assured destruction). This all seems pretty mad to me too, all you have to do is provide the data; but you will not. Please tell us all why you will not supply this data and thus provide an escape route from MAD.
Remember that the good guys prevailed in the cold war!
I am resting thanks!
[ 10 August 2001: Message edited by: Dismayed ]
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dismayed
I don't know. I am not that close to FOP
(fix 'em don't fly 'em) but am told by several that it's not really a deal breaking issue only a ploy etc etc.
Think I've exhausted my contribution to this forum, it's all getting too hard!
SH
I don't know. I am not that close to FOP
(fix 'em don't fly 'em) but am told by several that it's not really a deal breaking issue only a ploy etc etc.
Think I've exhausted my contribution to this forum, it's all getting too hard!
SH
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Aluetian Islands
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dismayed, stick to CPrune. Post there and you'll find all about Snake Hips. He is not interested in yoiur opinions, welfare or the truth in any form. His only purpose is to lie, lie and lie - get it? You are providing a forum for him, so don't fall into that trap. Notice how he has no answers for the very good points you have raised, he only speaks of veiled threats and vague promises of dire action from afar. Empty words, empty threats. This was the same person who said the sky would fall on August 1.
Shut it down.
Shut it down.
to spannersatcx.if 'everything was ok before' why don't you cast your mind back to the time when KT was the boss at haeco. how did he reward loyalty then?...the same way he does now...we've seen engineers,ground staff,catering,reservations people and pilots all fired to be replaced with lower paid new hires...years of service and loyalty are qualities treated with disdain. you should watch managements' reaction carefully because they are demonstrating to ALL employees how they intend to deal with YOU in the future.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snake,
Sorry to drag you back into the debate. My understanding of the data issue is that the AOA does indeed have their own data and that data indicates the deal the company is promoting is very poor (essentially a lot more work compressed into a short time, normally holiday periods, for not a lot of money). When challenged, the company's response is that their data (re:hours/overtime) indicates otherwise; so why don't they show the data and sell the deal?
Whilst we all agree this matter will be settled at the table, even if one side has clearly lost; you say abandon the LIA and come to the table. Why do you think the company will then wish to negotiate? Surely they will say we have the AOA beat, they have pay where they want it (linked to productivity) roster/work practices contolled solely by them, and no prospect of any further industrial disruption; why make any concessions?
After July 1999 no pilot is under any illusions as to the resolve of the shareholders. We know they were about 72 hours away from shutting down the airline and if pushed, and they are being pushed, they will do it. However, for 1300 guys it has been become, "if we lose this one, we may as pack up and go home".. and that's what some are about to do.
I valued the interchange between Dismayed and yourself. I may not agree with some of your views, however I join with you in that this matter can only be settled by reasoned debate, understanding and compromise...You seem able to do all 3, lets hope others do so ... and soon!
Sorry to drag you back into the debate. My understanding of the data issue is that the AOA does indeed have their own data and that data indicates the deal the company is promoting is very poor (essentially a lot more work compressed into a short time, normally holiday periods, for not a lot of money). When challenged, the company's response is that their data (re:hours/overtime) indicates otherwise; so why don't they show the data and sell the deal?
Whilst we all agree this matter will be settled at the table, even if one side has clearly lost; you say abandon the LIA and come to the table. Why do you think the company will then wish to negotiate? Surely they will say we have the AOA beat, they have pay where they want it (linked to productivity) roster/work practices contolled solely by them, and no prospect of any further industrial disruption; why make any concessions?
After July 1999 no pilot is under any illusions as to the resolve of the shareholders. We know they were about 72 hours away from shutting down the airline and if pushed, and they are being pushed, they will do it. However, for 1300 guys it has been become, "if we lose this one, we may as pack up and go home".. and that's what some are about to do.
I valued the interchange between Dismayed and yourself. I may not agree with some of your views, however I join with you in that this matter can only be settled by reasoned debate, understanding and compromise...You seem able to do all 3, lets hope others do so ... and soon!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 88
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liam
As usual, valid points. I don't have all the answers but whatever St Paul's Island says I have no agenda nor do I lie. When I first started this I was uncomfortable with some of the postings which kept saying the shareholders wouldn't tolerate management actions etc. I KNEW this to be untrue and said so. That was really the prime motive.
You (and your mates) clearly do appreciate this and can make your career/life judgements based on this knowledge.
The negotiations issue. You are spot on. CX has no apparent reason to go back but they have said withdrawl of any threats would mean a return to the table. What do you have to lose? I would see this as a damge limitation excercise now. Unfortunately even as I type
I am even more unsure about the future. Data
as I said I'm not that close to FOP (fix 'em on't fly 'em) but if this is the crucial (deal breaker) issue for the AOA, then I guess they had better stick to their guns.
Good luck to all I'll try and retire again!
As usual, valid points. I don't have all the answers but whatever St Paul's Island says I have no agenda nor do I lie. When I first started this I was uncomfortable with some of the postings which kept saying the shareholders wouldn't tolerate management actions etc. I KNEW this to be untrue and said so. That was really the prime motive.
You (and your mates) clearly do appreciate this and can make your career/life judgements based on this knowledge.
The negotiations issue. You are spot on. CX has no apparent reason to go back but they have said withdrawl of any threats would mean a return to the table. What do you have to lose? I would see this as a damge limitation excercise now. Unfortunately even as I type
I am even more unsure about the future. Data
as I said I'm not that close to FOP (fix 'em on't fly 'em) but if this is the crucial (deal breaker) issue for the AOA, then I guess they had better stick to their guns.
Good luck to all I'll try and retire again!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: .
Posts: 2,997
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest from Manchester Evening News :
So how do you keep the spirits of those at Manchester up, as it seems they are going to lose their jobs!!!!!!
Ringway blow as two airlines quit
PRESTIGE flights from Manchester to Hong Kong have been scrapped as part of a double blow at Ringway.
In a cost-cutting move Cathay Pacific has pulled out its jumbo jets ''indefinitely'' after 12 years.
And Air Mauritius plans to axe its weekly Manchester flight to the sunshine island after five years.
Cathay Pacific bosses say the profits on their route are not high enough to sustain the daily flights via Paris and Amsterdam.
Spokesman Paul Cruttenden said: ''The decision was taken for commercial reasons.
''You can never say never in this business but there are no current plans to reinstate services at Manchester.''
Profits
Mr Cruttenden added: ''There are no passenger figures available but we do know the route was not making a profit. There can be hundreds of reasons for this - and not necessarily falling passenger numbers.
''Numbers could easily be the same, but global costs could be higher leading to a loss of revenue.''
He said staff in Cathay's hospitality suite and its team of engineers would be retained to fulfil contracts with other airlines.
The pullout is a major blow to Ringway and its new managing director John Spooner.
The airport is attempting to attract more travellers after the opening of the £172m second runway last February.
Cheered
Bosses have been buoyed by the success of new bmi British Midland routes to Washington and Chicago, but want more services so that Ringway can outgrow Gatwick by 2012.
Cathay first halted flights in July because of a pilots' strike, but then decided on an ''indefinite'' withdrawal following a financial review.
Passengers will now have to fly to London or other European cities for a connection to the Far East.
Bosses of Air Mauritius, which ceases operations at Ringway in January, say the number of passengers using their service is acceptable, but there is greater demand for seats in London.
Today, airport bosses said they were still in talks with Cathay and hoped to secure the airline's return.
Routes to Hong Kong and Mauritius were viable, but airlines were suffering wider economic problems and had ''their own commercial reasons'' for reducing services.
''We are confident that growth will continue,'' said a spokeswoman. ''The second runway is an unrivalled asset within the UK and gives us tremendous capacity to accommodate new airlines and services.''
PRESTIGE flights from Manchester to Hong Kong have been scrapped as part of a double blow at Ringway.
In a cost-cutting move Cathay Pacific has pulled out its jumbo jets ''indefinitely'' after 12 years.
And Air Mauritius plans to axe its weekly Manchester flight to the sunshine island after five years.
Cathay Pacific bosses say the profits on their route are not high enough to sustain the daily flights via Paris and Amsterdam.
Spokesman Paul Cruttenden said: ''The decision was taken for commercial reasons.
''You can never say never in this business but there are no current plans to reinstate services at Manchester.''
Profits
Mr Cruttenden added: ''There are no passenger figures available but we do know the route was not making a profit. There can be hundreds of reasons for this - and not necessarily falling passenger numbers.
''Numbers could easily be the same, but global costs could be higher leading to a loss of revenue.''
He said staff in Cathay's hospitality suite and its team of engineers would be retained to fulfil contracts with other airlines.
The pullout is a major blow to Ringway and its new managing director John Spooner.
The airport is attempting to attract more travellers after the opening of the £172m second runway last February.
Cheered
Bosses have been buoyed by the success of new bmi British Midland routes to Washington and Chicago, but want more services so that Ringway can outgrow Gatwick by 2012.
Cathay first halted flights in July because of a pilots' strike, but then decided on an ''indefinite'' withdrawal following a financial review.
Passengers will now have to fly to London or other European cities for a connection to the Far East.
Bosses of Air Mauritius, which ceases operations at Ringway in January, say the number of passengers using their service is acceptable, but there is greater demand for seats in London.
Today, airport bosses said they were still in talks with Cathay and hoped to secure the airline's return.
Routes to Hong Kong and Mauritius were viable, but airlines were suffering wider economic problems and had ''their own commercial reasons'' for reducing services.
''We are confident that growth will continue,'' said a spokeswoman. ''The second runway is an unrivalled asset within the UK and gives us tremendous capacity to accommodate new airlines and services.''
