DEFO NO Vote
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 1999
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DEFO NO Vote
Well lets start a new one. With 86.8% of voters voting No, how will the GC spin this one??? As for the abstainers, the mind boggles!! Also, still looks like 200 or so didnt vote, case of i'm alright jack??
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Reality Check
By not voting or belonging to the AOA or Abstaining, you bolster the minority side of the argument. In other words if it takes more than 50% plus one or two thirds majority to change something then by not voting or not belonging to the AOA you are agreeing with the "minority" in this case RP07 the alleged minority is the NO vote.
In reality 1300 Pilots allowed the NO side to win.
Think about that when you complain about the AOA. If you want to get things done you have to get involved and vote. If not then you must accept what the voting members decide as you had the choice to vote and did not.
In reality 1300 Pilots allowed the NO side to win.
Think about that when you complain about the AOA. If you want to get things done you have to get involved and vote. If not then you must accept what the voting members decide as you had the choice to vote and did not.
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Asia
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Check reality check
Oh and one other thing. Let us assume that the non members are more company than not. I know there are some hard corfe that left the AOA in disgust but for a moment just suppose.
If that is the case then the company would actually benefit by letting it be known that they approve (or at least support) of having the AOA. Then new joiners and fence sitting worriers would see that it is ok to join. If you got 200-300 more joiners then the votes would probably follow a more company sympathetic direction.
While this may not be ideal in some eyes, it surley would be better at the negotiating table and iin the aftermath of any vote taken.
Not sure what I think of that possibility.
If that is the case then the company would actually benefit by letting it be known that they approve (or at least support) of having the AOA. Then new joiners and fence sitting worriers would see that it is ok to join. If you got 200-300 more joiners then the votes would probably follow a more company sympathetic direction.
While this may not be ideal in some eyes, it surley would be better at the negotiating table and iin the aftermath of any vote taken.
Not sure what I think of that possibility.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the land of chocolate
Posts: 440
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Five Green, I wouldn't naturally assume that non-members are pro-company as you say. It seems the aoa managed to pi$$ off people from both sides of the fence.
A sad state of affairs that hopefully will soon be rectified.
A sad state of affairs that hopefully will soon be rectified.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tifters
It is worth standing back a little now and focussing on what we in the AOA actually voted down.
We have comprehensively voted not to allow the Company to introduce lesser CoS for New Joiners.
That's all.
The Company has now advertised in a NTC, a significant number of FO basings positions in SYD and AMS in accordance with current basings agreements. Positions that are not taken up by currently employed eligible Officers will be filled up by recruiting in directly.
So the Company is still going ahead with DEFO recruitment - it simply remains to be seen what CoS will be offered. Will the Company offer New Joiners current CoS or will they, as some fear, disregard the sentiment of the vote that has just taken place and offer CoS07, or something similar, anyway?
I am looking forward to further updates by the AOA on this topic, and hope that the Company will confirm that it is offering current CoS to New Joiner DEFOs.
In the absence of such an assurance, it would be helpful if any prospective DEFO New Joiner reading this, who has been offered a position, could pass on the details of the contract they have been offered.
I am heartened that the vote was so comprehensive against the motion, and believe that it signals a strengthening of the unity of the AOA membership.
I hope more CX aircrew will be encouraged to join the AOA in the months ahead as a result. Certainly, those that join the Company after January 2007 can be shown demonstrably that the AOA stood up for their cause when they were yet only potential colleagues - powerful motive, I would think, to join such an organisation.
It is worth standing back a little now and focussing on what we in the AOA actually voted down.
We have comprehensively voted not to allow the Company to introduce lesser CoS for New Joiners.
That's all.
The Company has now advertised in a NTC, a significant number of FO basings positions in SYD and AMS in accordance with current basings agreements. Positions that are not taken up by currently employed eligible Officers will be filled up by recruiting in directly.
So the Company is still going ahead with DEFO recruitment - it simply remains to be seen what CoS will be offered. Will the Company offer New Joiners current CoS or will they, as some fear, disregard the sentiment of the vote that has just taken place and offer CoS07, or something similar, anyway?
I am looking forward to further updates by the AOA on this topic, and hope that the Company will confirm that it is offering current CoS to New Joiner DEFOs.
In the absence of such an assurance, it would be helpful if any prospective DEFO New Joiner reading this, who has been offered a position, could pass on the details of the contract they have been offered.
I am heartened that the vote was so comprehensive against the motion, and believe that it signals a strengthening of the unity of the AOA membership.
I hope more CX aircrew will be encouraged to join the AOA in the months ahead as a result. Certainly, those that join the Company after January 2007 can be shown demonstrably that the AOA stood up for their cause when they were yet only potential colleagues - powerful motive, I would think, to join such an organisation.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Australia
Age: 50
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tifters
I hope more CX aircrew will be encouraged to join the AOA in the months ahead as a result. Certainly, those that join the Company after January 2007 can be shown demonstrably that the AOA stood up for their cause when they were yet only potential colleagues - powerful motive, I would think, to join such an organisation.
I hope more CX aircrew will be encouraged to join the AOA in the months ahead as a result. Certainly, those that join the Company after January 2007 can be shown demonstrably that the AOA stood up for their cause when they were yet only potential colleagues - powerful motive, I would think, to join such an organisation.
Convoluted though it is to grasp all this, id like the extra weeks leave if nothing else down the track, let alone any pay differences.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Post-Pit and Lovin' It.
Posts: 863
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just received the invite for a DEFO interview. I applied without specifying FO or SO, I assumed DEFO was only for the freighter? Or is it possible it is now for pax as well? Sorry for joining the discussion late, if someone could point me to a relevant thread I am trying to catch up on the whole issue....
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B scaler, I think I know who you are and would love to discuss this further.
nolmitholdem....apply for and get what you can. If the vote had gone through you would have flown pax aircraft for about 90K AUD but since it failed you should end up being paid $120K.
Five greens...just my point of view but...people who dont vote normally don't care. SO they really have no effect on the % outcome but they do make the total voter outcome look bad. Since they dont care the % vote is probably representative. Th RP07 vote was 57% for and 43% against...that was based on 700 voters. Now does anyone have a good reason why those 700voters are not a good representation of 2100 pilots?
And heres a thought...lets say that the other 1000odd non members are company orientated...so what. It means we will have to start to live their lives. WHats the point of being in the minority...I would rather have 2000+ members adn do what is right!
nolmitholdem....apply for and get what you can. If the vote had gone through you would have flown pax aircraft for about 90K AUD but since it failed you should end up being paid $120K.
Five greens...just my point of view but...people who dont vote normally don't care. SO they really have no effect on the % outcome but they do make the total voter outcome look bad. Since they dont care the % vote is probably representative. Th RP07 vote was 57% for and 43% against...that was based on 700 voters. Now does anyone have a good reason why those 700voters are not a good representation of 2100 pilots?
And heres a thought...lets say that the other 1000odd non members are company orientated...so what. It means we will have to start to live their lives. WHats the point of being in the minority...I would rather have 2000+ members adn do what is right!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We all signed contracts directly with the company...we should all have a vote regardless of AOA membership. What we vote for can continue to be negotiated between the Company and AOA!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And where in the rest of the civilizied nations does this happen?????? You want representation but you are not prepared to pay for it. Dont use the excuse that you dont agree with past or present presidents etc etc........neither do I but I am still a member and therefore have the right to vote on YOUR future......
Just pay your dues.......peanuts now....and you can vote, SIMPLE. Stop friggin moaning......
Just pay your dues.......peanuts now....and you can vote, SIMPLE. Stop friggin moaning......
Let me ask you this...where else do you have a representing body negotiating changes to contracts for more people not members of the association? Or where else is there is no legal requirement to belong to an organisation which has exclusive rights to speak for you without your consent?
I'm all for a Union and all for CX making it mandatory to belong to the AOA but it's not like that is it?
The union is weak, I wish it wasn’t.
You can jump and scream at people to join and support the cause, but it won’t happen.
CX needs to make pilots join the AOA OR ask each individual to vote on contract changes.
cpdude
You seem to forget the company is already on record as saying it will only negotiate with the AOA. It doesn’t want to nor does it have the resources to negotiate with 2000 pilots individually. Therefore if you want to vote on your future conditions and have some say then the only means open to you at present is to join the AOA. Think of AOA membership like being a citizen of a democracy AND being registered to vote. If you don’t registered you CAN’T vote. Pretty simple really. Every pilot at CX has the right to join the AOA. If he/she chooses not to join that is his/her right as well. Just don’t complain though when those members then vote for something you don’t agree with. You have already made the choice not to have a say knowing full well the company only negotiates with the AOA.
By the way compulsory union membership in HK is illegal so the company can’t and won’t make you join the AOA. It does though have the right to say that it will only negotiate with the AOA and nobody else. You have the right to be a part of those negotiations. If you choose not to that is your right also. Just don’t complain if as I have said before something is voted in that you don’t agree with.
You seem to forget the company is already on record as saying it will only negotiate with the AOA. It doesn’t want to nor does it have the resources to negotiate with 2000 pilots individually. Therefore if you want to vote on your future conditions and have some say then the only means open to you at present is to join the AOA. Think of AOA membership like being a citizen of a democracy AND being registered to vote. If you don’t registered you CAN’T vote. Pretty simple really. Every pilot at CX has the right to join the AOA. If he/she chooses not to join that is his/her right as well. Just don’t complain though when those members then vote for something you don’t agree with. You have already made the choice not to have a say knowing full well the company only negotiates with the AOA.
By the way compulsory union membership in HK is illegal so the company can’t and won’t make you join the AOA. It does though have the right to say that it will only negotiate with the AOA and nobody else. You have the right to be a part of those negotiations. If you choose not to that is your right also. Just don’t complain if as I have said before something is voted in that you don’t agree with.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cpdude
You seem to forget the company is already on record as saying it will only negotiate with the AOA. It doesn’t want to nor does it have the resources to negotiate with 2000 pilots individually. Therefore if you want to vote on your future conditions and have some say then the only means open to you at present is to join the AOA. Think of AOA membership like being a citizen of a democracy AND being registered to vote. If you don’t registered you CAN’T vote. Pretty simple really. Every pilot at CX has the right to join the AOA. If he/she chooses not to join that is his/her right as well. Just don’t complain though when those members then vote for something you don’t agree with. You have already made the choice not to have a say knowing full well the company only negotiates with the AOA.
By the way compulsory union membership in HK is illegal so the company can’t and won’t make you join the AOA. It does though have the right to say that it will only negotiate with the AOA and nobody else. You have the right to be a part of those negotiations. If you choose not to that is your right also. Just don’t complain if as I have said before something is voted in that you don’t agree with.
You seem to forget the company is already on record as saying it will only negotiate with the AOA. It doesn’t want to nor does it have the resources to negotiate with 2000 pilots individually. Therefore if you want to vote on your future conditions and have some say then the only means open to you at present is to join the AOA. Think of AOA membership like being a citizen of a democracy AND being registered to vote. If you don’t registered you CAN’T vote. Pretty simple really. Every pilot at CX has the right to join the AOA. If he/she chooses not to join that is his/her right as well. Just don’t complain though when those members then vote for something you don’t agree with. You have already made the choice not to have a say knowing full well the company only negotiates with the AOA.
By the way compulsory union membership in HK is illegal so the company can’t and won’t make you join the AOA. It does though have the right to say that it will only negotiate with the AOA and nobody else. You have the right to be a part of those negotiations. If you choose not to that is your right also. Just don’t complain if as I have said before something is voted in that you don’t agree with.
What I did say is if the company and/or the AOA want to vote on a change of the contract then we should all vote on it and not 700 or so members. I trust you do understand the difference between voting and negotiating.
Oh, citizens of countries don't have legal contracts for specified conditions with their governments but we all have a legal contract signed directly with this company. Too bad someone wasn’t willing to take that to court!
Lastly, don't make it sound like it's so terrible just for those not in the AOA not to have a voice. It is just as much a hardship for those in the AOA as those out of the AOA that membership isn't 100%. All you have to do is look at the RP07 vote as an example. I would like something done to change that!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well said 404titan.
CPdude
I dont know how many morons(sorry, concerned citizens) voted for George W but I bet there are many out there in the US that wish that had voted against him and then maybe they wouldn't be in this god awful iraqi mess!
I have no problem with abstenstions or people not voting...as a statistician it tells me that they don't care which way the vote goes. As for the 1000 or so nonmembers....well unfortunately for them I can influence their lives and they can't do a thing about it without joining the AOA!
CPdude
I dont know how many morons(sorry, concerned citizens) voted for George W but I bet there are many out there in the US that wish that had voted against him and then maybe they wouldn't be in this god awful iraqi mess!
I have no problem with abstenstions or people not voting...as a statistician it tells me that they don't care which way the vote goes. As for the 1000 or so nonmembers....well unfortunately for them I can influence their lives and they can't do a thing about it without joining the AOA!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the fatigue curve
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on the topic
There will be no direct recruitment of Officers by any Basing company into any Base Area.
Or is it the simple answer of, lets break the contract.