What's the culture at Cathay like?
The Reverend
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sydney,NSW,Australia
Posts: 2,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
frankg They're a bunch of arrogant c***s.
Now, isn't that strange? Just a handful of malcontents, displaying their literary prowess and by sheer coincidence, most of them claim location USA.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well ?
ACMS, Hot Dog, Busy Bee:
So answer the question. Do you think that the current training system should change ? Do you think that the current failure rate at CX is acceptable ? What are your suggestions to improve the supposedly lacking skills and knowledge being displayed by so many pilots ? How do we expand this airline if we can't upgrade the pilots we have ?
Standing by for meaningful discussion.........
So answer the question. Do you think that the current training system should change ? Do you think that the current failure rate at CX is acceptable ? What are your suggestions to improve the supposedly lacking skills and knowledge being displayed by so many pilots ? How do we expand this airline if we can't upgrade the pilots we have ?
Standing by for meaningful discussion.........
God help me, if I hear any more yank moaning I think I'll spew.
If it's so good back in the good ole US of A, why don't y'all do the rest of us a favour and sod off back there?
Maybe I'll do it now and get it over with...
If it's so good back in the good ole US of A, why don't y'all do the rest of us a favour and sod off back there?
Maybe I'll do it now and get it over with...
The Pass rate for command on the 777 is damn near 100% now.
And not a yank seen yet, maybe then it'll be over 100% !!
ya awl have a nice day, ya hear.
outta 3 for 4.
etc etc
And we thought Singapore were the master race.
byeeeeeeeeeeeeee
And not a yank seen yet, maybe then it'll be over 100% !!
ya awl have a nice day, ya hear.
outta 3 for 4.
etc etc
And we thought Singapore were the master race.
byeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Say again please.."
Originally Posted by BusyB
The truth is that the vast majority of C & T's are excellent with a few that are not so good (just like any major airline). The main problem in CX is limited to one or two senior management (soon to be gone) that overrule the C & T's.
Originally Posted by BusyB
As for all this BS about RT my personal judgement is that if an individual has to make the same call 3 times to pass his message and someone else can do it in one there is a problem. In my experience this is not limited to one nationality, in the last month I have flown with 4 different nationalities who can't pass a straightforward position report.
Originally Posted by BusyB
No-one who's prepared to do the work will fail in the long run. What applicants should be worried about is the fact that contracts in CX are changed as often as the management change their underwear.
Why worry about your next contract when the monetary value of being CAT D'd or held back for 1 or 2 years is very significant and represents an immediate pay cut and possibly a drastic pay cut if you find yourself looking for work elsewhere ?
I read everything and I approach things with an open mind, but I am easily tricked.
Still standing by for meaningful dialogue or are you going to tell me I don't deserve to work here again ?
5 green, I am having trouble working out what we're in dispute about. Having been sin-binned myself due a personal conflict with one of the senior management I am fairly confident in my opinions.
The vast majority of C & T's are excellent with a few that don't cut the mustard. These are few enough that your right to request an instructor change covers them (I am not a trainer). With a few retirements looming I hope the Star Chamber will soon be a thing of the past.
Yes, you're perfectly entitled to your opinion
"And I am sure that you politely taught them to do it correctly.
It is not about passing "in the long run".No pilot I know goes into their command or JFO without doing the work. It is about a system with no checks and balances."
And yes, I did teach them politely to do it correctly. Its part of the free training that CX gets from its line Captains. I know of several pilots who have gone for upgrades or commands thinking they know it all and unsurprisingly have failed. I also know others who have been screwed by the Star Chamber and they have all passed on their next attempt.
As for a system with no checks and balances, it seems to me that there are plenty of checks but possibly not yet enough balances.
The vast majority of C & T's are excellent with a few that don't cut the mustard. These are few enough that your right to request an instructor change covers them (I am not a trainer). With a few retirements looming I hope the Star Chamber will soon be a thing of the past.
Yes, you're perfectly entitled to your opinion
"And I am sure that you politely taught them to do it correctly.
It is not about passing "in the long run".No pilot I know goes into their command or JFO without doing the work. It is about a system with no checks and balances."
And yes, I did teach them politely to do it correctly. Its part of the free training that CX gets from its line Captains. I know of several pilots who have gone for upgrades or commands thinking they know it all and unsurprisingly have failed. I also know others who have been screwed by the Star Chamber and they have all passed on their next attempt.
As for a system with no checks and balances, it seems to me that there are plenty of checks but possibly not yet enough balances.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Asia
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All I hear is this “standards” bollocks and people who seem to know it all in a pissing contest about who deserves shoddy treatment and who doesn’t. I personally witnessed two top performers and good friends from a cadet course fired for reasons too petty to mention. I suppose one could interpret this as standardization, i.e. putting the others into place, it was a shocking revelation of what this place is all about.
I was appalled by the way that most peers just revert to shutting up and getting on with it, some even in open denial, just to get ahead. It may be a survival issue, but what some self serving individuals especially the ones on this forum raving on about professional standards fail to realise is that there are certain standards continually ignored by the bullies allowed to run this sad show, and that this may well come back and bite themselves one day.
Personally and in hindsight, I am relieved to have been moved on to a place where “standards” are reciprocal and where the focus is on the task at hand, flying airplanes.
I was appalled by the way that most peers just revert to shutting up and getting on with it, some even in open denial, just to get ahead. It may be a survival issue, but what some self serving individuals especially the ones on this forum raving on about professional standards fail to realise is that there are certain standards continually ignored by the bullies allowed to run this sad show, and that this may well come back and bite themselves one day.
Personally and in hindsight, I am relieved to have been moved on to a place where “standards” are reciprocal and where the focus is on the task at hand, flying airplanes.
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well having just trawled through the last four pages I find it hard to believe that I am actually in the same airline as some of our "angry" contributors.
The majority of what I have read is NOT true and appears to be disinformation spouted by some "individuals" who have prejudiced views.
SOP's / NP's are written down, everything is written down and funnily enough you DO have to put some work in yourself. You cannot expect to be treated (and paid) like an adult if you want to be a child. It was the same for the Charter Airline I flew for in the UK before joining CX.
As for some trainers / checkers being "anal" about standards, why is it that the majority can comply but you "few" cannot. We have to allow you to be different!! Sorry not going to happen, if you cannot be bothered to operate under this airlines "rules" go and fly for another.
R/T & Ground communication standardisation is not just for us, but it is for the people we communicate with and for whom English is NOT their FIRST language. I am also sure many of you have been told that if a controller or someone else uses a different phrase then it is better to use that in replying to PREVENT confusion. As for good CRM by saying "good morning" etc, no problem with that if the frequency is not too busy and we do not get into what we had for breakfast etc etc. Guess what guys we are not the only ones using the frequency!
A good example of non-standard R/T. Cleared to take off runway 31L at JFK, last month in a max weight A340-600, only to hear two calls within 10 seconds of each other of "XXXXX lining up 31L" and "XXXXX rolling onto 31L". Both from two jets making first contact with JFK tower having been handed over from approach. Very disconcerting for a heavy jet about to set take off thrust - **** have we missed something!
The majority of what I have read is NOT true and appears to be disinformation spouted by some "individuals" who have prejudiced views.
SOP's / NP's are written down, everything is written down and funnily enough you DO have to put some work in yourself. You cannot expect to be treated (and paid) like an adult if you want to be a child. It was the same for the Charter Airline I flew for in the UK before joining CX.
As for some trainers / checkers being "anal" about standards, why is it that the majority can comply but you "few" cannot. We have to allow you to be different!! Sorry not going to happen, if you cannot be bothered to operate under this airlines "rules" go and fly for another.
R/T & Ground communication standardisation is not just for us, but it is for the people we communicate with and for whom English is NOT their FIRST language. I am also sure many of you have been told that if a controller or someone else uses a different phrase then it is better to use that in replying to PREVENT confusion. As for good CRM by saying "good morning" etc, no problem with that if the frequency is not too busy and we do not get into what we had for breakfast etc etc. Guess what guys we are not the only ones using the frequency!
A good example of non-standard R/T. Cleared to take off runway 31L at JFK, last month in a max weight A340-600, only to hear two calls within 10 seconds of each other of "XXXXX lining up 31L" and "XXXXX rolling onto 31L". Both from two jets making first contact with JFK tower having been handed over from approach. Very disconcerting for a heavy jet about to set take off thrust - **** have we missed something!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quick to Judge
Electric Jet Jock Sir :
Which part are you saying is not true ?
Everthing is not written down ! That is the whole problem. There is still too much room for individual Checker interpretation.
Want to be a child ? Oh please you can do better than that, because let's face it we all got into this buisiness because we want to be a child. What I would like is an adult conversation about our abismal failure rate on JFO and command upgrades
Just becuase it was the same at your UK past life does not mean there are not more progressive ways to maximise your training and therefore your Pilot's proffesionalism, knowledge and ability to do their jobs, both under regular line flying and under abnormal and emergency situations.
I am not sure that the current monthly and yearly average of unsuccessful courses would constitute as "few" in fact it almost constitutes half. So are you actually saying that half of our pilots cannot be bothered to operate under CX rules ?
No N. American here at CX is dangerously slack in their RT. As a N. American you will be expected to prove yourself when others might not have to.
As I am always open to learning something, perhaps you could explain a little further how a plane on approach would call lining up or rolling ?
And finally, do you think there is a probleem with the failure rate at CX ?
Speakers and headsets.
Originally Posted by electricjetjock
The majority of what I have read is NOT true and appears to be disinformation spouted by some "individuals" who have prejudiced views.
Originally Posted by electricjetjock
SOP's / NP's are written down, everything is written down and funnily enough you DO have to put some work in yourself.
Originally Posted by electricjeetjock
You cannot expect to be treated (and paid) like an adult if you want to be a child.
Originally Posted by eelectricjjetjock
It was the same for the Charter Airline I flew for in the UK before joining CX.
Originally Posted by electricjetjock
As for some trainers / checkers being "anal" about standards, why is it that the majority can comply but you "few" cannot. We have to allow you to be different!! Sorry not going to happen, if you cannot be bothered to operate under this airlines "rules" go and fly for another.
Originally Posted by electricjetjock
R/T & Ground communication standardisation is not just for us, but it is for the people we communicate with and for whom English is NOT their FIRST language. I am also sure many of you have been told that if a controller or someone else uses a different phrase then it is better to use that in replying to PREVENT confusion. As for good CRM by saying "good morning" etc, no problem with that if the frequency is not too busy and we do not get into what we had for breakfast etc etc. Guess what guys we are not the only ones using the frequency
Originally Posted by electricjetjock
A good example of non-standard R/T. Cleared to take off runway 31L at JFK, last month in a max weight A340-600, only to hear two calls within 10 seconds of each other of "XXXXX lining up 31L" and "XXXXX rolling onto 31L". Both from two jets making first contact with JFK tower having been handed over from approach. Very disconcerting for a heavy jet about to set take off thrust - **** have we missed something!
And finally, do you think there is a probleem with the failure rate at CX ?
Speakers and headsets.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: usa
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by BusyB
Electricjetjock,
Forget 5 Greens, he's obviously got a screw loose. You'll get more info by ignoring his posts.
Forget 5 Greens, he's obviously got a screw loose. You'll get more info by ignoring his posts.
Only someone with a screw loose would deny the childishness of the way juniors are treated by seniors here in the form of petty harassment in the training system.
A majority of pilots here would agree with this in a private bar discussion, but certainly would not air it publicly because their career would suffer.
We all know people very close who have had their lives disrupted in some severe ways as a result of this system, and occasionally it happens at every airline. Obviously in this business there are some who won't cut it, no big surprise. There is always three sides to every story: his, hers, and the truth. It just happens here way more often, to the point that it can't just be attributed to the poor skills, study habits, publications, attitude, you name it of the individual in question.
This ain't gonna change any time soon, and it's the price you pay here to fly the shiny stuff, and have some bucks to live a reasonable life, but it isn't a required ingredient of running a safe profitable airline. In fact, it's more of a hinderance and cx prospers in spite of it.
By the way, here is a similar thread of past:http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=156059
Five Green asks about the failure rates at cx. It obviously is magnitudes higher than at any other airline. Let me get this straight: They hand pick their command trainees after picking over the multitude of training, personal and other records (that most other airlines wisely don't keep!), and almost always after jumping over many perfectly suitable candidates of higher seniority. Then said candidate gets the honor of several months of exhaustive eras evaluations (too many to count!), including three major check rides and two convened boards to evaluate the progress. How many of these hand picked people make it through? Maybe 50-60%? Pretty impressive! I hope that a good percentage of these make it through eventually, but at what cost? What percentage of captains at cx have had a command or other major failure on their record? Pretty high I would guess. God forbid cx ever has a fatal incident in these modern times. Odds are pretty high the captain will have had some pretty juicy training files the media, surviving families and their new lawyer buddies would love to get hold of. I can see the headlines now: "Captain of fatal aircraft accident had a history of failure!" Sensational airplane drama has garnered quite a bit of world attention lately, and it will only be getting worse. Meanwhile the training system at cx continues to slap its young in the head and poke them in the eyes like Larry, Curly, and Moe. The problem is that some day a real adult is going to open the proverbial door and three wide-eyed and stiff upper-lipped stooges will have a real problem on their hands.
The truth is, there are way too many people running around here with setbacks to overcome that when someone asks what the culture at cx, they should be told the truth. If it looks, smells, and tastes like it, it probably is!
Last edited by hog tied; 12th Aug 2006 at 04:41.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: daarn saarf
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just my cheeky 2 pence worth. I have nothing to do with Cx, though fly locos, but I do know a Captain with Cx, who ive known since long before my flying career begun.
All I can say is that reading this thread and recent ones comes as a bit of a shock, because for many years Cx looked like a very nice place to end up - to me this was due to this certain captain. My only impression of Cx came via him, and he would be more than welcome as my captain.. true Gent, very pleasant, talkative, relaxed and still very professional. Hense my very rosy view of Cx.
All this begs the point that you cant please everyone. If you end up with good legacy airline, some people will always moan. The same type of people winge about BA, Emirates, Virgin.... Shut up and cout your lucky stars you have got to where you are.
All I can say is that reading this thread and recent ones comes as a bit of a shock, because for many years Cx looked like a very nice place to end up - to me this was due to this certain captain. My only impression of Cx came via him, and he would be more than welcome as my captain.. true Gent, very pleasant, talkative, relaxed and still very professional. Hense my very rosy view of Cx.
All this begs the point that you cant please everyone. If you end up with good legacy airline, some people will always moan. The same type of people winge about BA, Emirates, Virgin.... Shut up and cout your lucky stars you have got to where you are.
Lets get this back on track
I wonder if we can get this thread back to Jett 15's initial post.
Jett, the concerns you air are all very valid and you raise questions that any sane prospective employee should wish to have answered.
My fear is that this thread has been hijacked by a couple of our collegues who, it would appear, have fallen foul of the training and checking system.
I can categorically tell you (as a training captain) that there is NO policy of discrimination between creed, colour or religion or even ability! We do discriminate, ruthlessly, against lack of effort. The problem is that a trainee may actually be working hard, but in the wrong direction! All Normal Procedures (SOPs) for each individual fleet are laid down in a book we call FCOM 3 and the Company bible is called Volume 2 part 2 which quite clearly lays out, amongst other things, standard PANS-OPS RT prcocedures. Now if some of the respondees to your thread are unable to find or recall what is laid down in these documents then we may be led to assume that they are either bone idle (expecting to be spoon-fed; which will definately not happen here) or they are working in the wrong direction!
A few people here have likened CX to the British Military, I think that you will find check (ERAS) reports objectively (and sometimes subjectively) score an individual's performance in many areas of the flight or sim. Pretty much as you would find on an officers annual confidential (fitness) report in the armed forces. My experience of exchange crews from our 'special cousins across the pond' is that the system there requires fairy tales to be written or else the reportee is considered a failure. Reading some of these posts makes me think the correspondents are a product of a system such as the one I describe.
Should you choose to join Cathay Pacific I am certain that provided you come with an open mind and a willingness to adhere to CX procedures then you will have a rewarding career. The trainers and checkers you will fly with will have the sole intention of getting you checked to the line as soon as possible, without any prejudice.
What you can be assured of is that you will fly superb aeroplanes and have the opportunity to live almost anywhere you wish so long as you are
prepared to do the commuting. We get to fly to great places with great people in great jets. Please don't listen to those who are unhappy here and would have you believe otherwise.
Finally, I unable entertain a train of thought that we should pass everyone in case they are one day involved in an incident, lest we fear the backlash of legal and journalistic action!
Jett, the concerns you air are all very valid and you raise questions that any sane prospective employee should wish to have answered.
My fear is that this thread has been hijacked by a couple of our collegues who, it would appear, have fallen foul of the training and checking system.
I can categorically tell you (as a training captain) that there is NO policy of discrimination between creed, colour or religion or even ability! We do discriminate, ruthlessly, against lack of effort. The problem is that a trainee may actually be working hard, but in the wrong direction! All Normal Procedures (SOPs) for each individual fleet are laid down in a book we call FCOM 3 and the Company bible is called Volume 2 part 2 which quite clearly lays out, amongst other things, standard PANS-OPS RT prcocedures. Now if some of the respondees to your thread are unable to find or recall what is laid down in these documents then we may be led to assume that they are either bone idle (expecting to be spoon-fed; which will definately not happen here) or they are working in the wrong direction!
A few people here have likened CX to the British Military, I think that you will find check (ERAS) reports objectively (and sometimes subjectively) score an individual's performance in many areas of the flight or sim. Pretty much as you would find on an officers annual confidential (fitness) report in the armed forces. My experience of exchange crews from our 'special cousins across the pond' is that the system there requires fairy tales to be written or else the reportee is considered a failure. Reading some of these posts makes me think the correspondents are a product of a system such as the one I describe.
Should you choose to join Cathay Pacific I am certain that provided you come with an open mind and a willingness to adhere to CX procedures then you will have a rewarding career. The trainers and checkers you will fly with will have the sole intention of getting you checked to the line as soon as possible, without any prejudice.
What you can be assured of is that you will fly superb aeroplanes and have the opportunity to live almost anywhere you wish so long as you are
prepared to do the commuting. We get to fly to great places with great people in great jets. Please don't listen to those who are unhappy here and would have you believe otherwise.
Finally, I unable entertain a train of thought that we should pass everyone in case they are one day involved in an incident, lest we fear the backlash of legal and journalistic action!
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am employed by CX , and have to agree with Max Reheats comments. I have found CX to be a great place to work, the check & trainers are excellent, the aircraft great, and the people I have had the pleasure of working with, to be some of the most dedicated professionals I have ever met.
If you fall foul of the system here, it is of your own doing, if you come here expecting to do it the way you used to, you won't last long. If you have a "better way" of doing the job, the same applies. Everything is laid down in the manuals, or the web site. Yes there are sometimes fleet practices that are not laid down, the reason I believe, is to allow some degree of flexibilty in the operation.
To anyone who has been offered a job here, take it. The pay is good, and you can take a basing in the country of your choice. If you put the work in, you will find that everyone in the training dept has a single goal, to get you
checked to line.
This would be one of the better jobs around, to those who don't like it here, or find the system not of their liking, would you please leave! I know of a dozen guys who would give anything to be part of a growing airline that makes a profit, year in, year out.
If you fall foul of the system here, it is of your own doing, if you come here expecting to do it the way you used to, you won't last long. If you have a "better way" of doing the job, the same applies. Everything is laid down in the manuals, or the web site. Yes there are sometimes fleet practices that are not laid down, the reason I believe, is to allow some degree of flexibilty in the operation.
To anyone who has been offered a job here, take it. The pay is good, and you can take a basing in the country of your choice. If you put the work in, you will find that everyone in the training dept has a single goal, to get you
checked to line.
This would be one of the better jobs around, to those who don't like it here, or find the system not of their liking, would you please leave! I know of a dozen guys who would give anything to be part of a growing airline that makes a profit, year in, year out.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Max Reheat
standard PANS-OPS RT prcocedures. Now if some of the respondees to your thread are unable to find or recall what is laid down in these documents then we may be led to assume that they are either bone idle (expecting to be spoon-fed; which will definately not happen here) or they are working in the wrong direction!
As an aside on RT. In CAA 413 RT manual it is a requirement to use the prefix "heavy" when operating in the heavy class, it is also a requirement to call when begining your descent, when given a descent at pilot's discretion. The former is never used, and the latter is regularily left out, and this by the same people who get worked up about "Daysemal" and "Fife".
Originally Posted by Max Reheat
The trainers and checkers you will fly with will have the sole intention of getting you checked to the line as soon as possible, without any prejudice.
Originally Posted by Max Reheat
Finally, I unable entertain a train of thought that we should pass everyone in case they are one day involved in an incident, lest we fear the backlash of legal and journalistic action!
So I will try the question one more time for you sir. Do you think that the current failure rate on JFO and Captain's courses is acceptable ?
Cheers
Last edited by Five Green; 16th Aug 2006 at 11:14.