how Many are leaving ??
@babymike737,
it´s all done online these days. Just go to www.cathaypacific.com and fill out an application.
it´s all done online these days. Just go to www.cathaypacific.com and fill out an application.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: left or right seat
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LCCs are not the future
I disagree
LCCs always come and go but never stay.
The LCC is usually headed by one person who mismanages the company, takes the money and runs, gets absorbed sold or liquidated or is forced to fly puny routes due to the sake of governors ruling the routes in which the major airline flies to preserve 'quality' that a LCC never has or equipment restriction (range and capacity). You need an airplane bigger than a 737 to survive! This is one of the fate sealers of a LCC. Of course Sir Freddie did ok with a DC10 but where is he?
LCCs always are in training mode. When the employee has enough experience tucked under their belt, whether it be hours or years with a clean record they bolt for the major airline for better compensation and pension. This is how a LCC is run....cut labour costs and run a no-frills outfit and attract the minimum experience labourer.
Sometimes, a savvy owner might get smart with fuel hedging or some other form of diversification to keep the LCC alive and in competition but it usually is short lived.
The LCC if it survives evolves into something other than a LCC. Labour costs can only be controlled for a short while due to unions and the cyclical nature of hiring and furloughing in this industry. When you can't leave a LCC because no one is hiring then you stay...if you stay long enough it is sometimes better to remain there and let your union have more leverage through population of membership...and therefore through contracts increasing your wage and compensation raher than leave for a major airline.
I think that the statement should read:
LCCs have a small place in the future rather than LCCs are the future.
I am still looking for air wal-mart and air aldi's to start flying...
tnx for a great forum!
LCCs always come and go but never stay.
The LCC is usually headed by one person who mismanages the company, takes the money and runs, gets absorbed sold or liquidated or is forced to fly puny routes due to the sake of governors ruling the routes in which the major airline flies to preserve 'quality' that a LCC never has or equipment restriction (range and capacity). You need an airplane bigger than a 737 to survive! This is one of the fate sealers of a LCC. Of course Sir Freddie did ok with a DC10 but where is he?
LCCs always are in training mode. When the employee has enough experience tucked under their belt, whether it be hours or years with a clean record they bolt for the major airline for better compensation and pension. This is how a LCC is run....cut labour costs and run a no-frills outfit and attract the minimum experience labourer.
Sometimes, a savvy owner might get smart with fuel hedging or some other form of diversification to keep the LCC alive and in competition but it usually is short lived.
The LCC if it survives evolves into something other than a LCC. Labour costs can only be controlled for a short while due to unions and the cyclical nature of hiring and furloughing in this industry. When you can't leave a LCC because no one is hiring then you stay...if you stay long enough it is sometimes better to remain there and let your union have more leverage through population of membership...and therefore through contracts increasing your wage and compensation raher than leave for a major airline.
I think that the statement should read:
LCCs have a small place in the future rather than LCCs are the future.
I am still looking for air wal-mart and air aldi's to start flying...
tnx for a great forum!
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Hotels everywhere
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote from babymike737 a few posts back:
"Just a quick question for you if you can help. I would like to join Cathay Pacific. I love Hong Kong, I love Sim checks, and I love this forum..."
CX is gonna love you !!!!
"Just a quick question for you if you can help. I would like to join Cathay Pacific. I love Hong Kong, I love Sim checks, and I love this forum..."
CX is gonna love you !!!!
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: YVR
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have you ever heard of SouthWest Airlines??
36 years, 483 B737's, 3200 flights a day.
Wake up Europe boy.
36 years, 483 B737's, 3200 flights a day.
Wake up Europe boy.
Air South
Kiwi International Airlines
Pan American World Airways (not original)
Kiwi International Airlines
Sunjet International/Myrtle Beach Jet Express
Eastwind Airlines
Access Air
Tower Air
Pro Air
Legend Airlines
National Airlines
Midway Airlines
Vanguard Airlines
TransMeridian Airlines
Independence Air
Hooters Air
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: left or right seat
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LCCs
Sodapoop 
tsk tsk...calling me Europe boy...keep it grown up please.
SWA is an anomaly and a rarity ..I give you that.
Please cite some more examples of LCCs that haven't turned into a legacy carrier or went tango uniform...SWA is on the verge (maybe already is) of being a legacy carrier with its labour costs increasing every year/every contract. They too will soon feel a pinch like every other major airline does. Oh...AirTran..just around a few years and limited on growth due to the FAA imposed restriction on ValueJet and yet they even had to take a paycut after 9-11...otherwise they would have furloughed...keep labour costs low, it is the only card the LCC can play or not grow regionally.
I posted as well that in order to keep competitive on a global scale you need something other than a small jet like the 737 and LCCs do not offer the 'quality' that passengers desire on long hauls. Peanuts and pick your own seat doesn't cut it from London to Hong Kong but it might from Dallas to Las Vegas.
It needs to be more than that we are talking people here not cattle.
Like I said you can make a great bet when the fuel is priced low but sooner or later you have to pay the same high price as every other cheap airline or turn to solar panels but then not fly at night.
Remember that SWA also had a very tidy agreement with the city of Dallas and the Governor of Texas...no landing fees, no parking fees, monopoly on that field...it allowed it a great deal of room to make a profit for many years while other LCCs came and went without having the same advantage.
Herbie did pretty good with that 'Love'bug and all he had to do was do a touch and go at neighbouring state.
Very tidy indeed.
Again, thanks for a great forum...it gets better everyday.
EuropeBoy signing off. lol
tsk tsk...calling me Europe boy...keep it grown up please. SWA is an anomaly and a rarity ..I give you that.
Please cite some more examples of LCCs that haven't turned into a legacy carrier or went tango uniform...SWA is on the verge (maybe already is) of being a legacy carrier with its labour costs increasing every year/every contract. They too will soon feel a pinch like every other major airline does. Oh...AirTran..just around a few years and limited on growth due to the FAA imposed restriction on ValueJet and yet they even had to take a paycut after 9-11...otherwise they would have furloughed...keep labour costs low, it is the only card the LCC can play or not grow regionally.
I posted as well that in order to keep competitive on a global scale you need something other than a small jet like the 737 and LCCs do not offer the 'quality' that passengers desire on long hauls. Peanuts and pick your own seat doesn't cut it from London to Hong Kong but it might from Dallas to Las Vegas.
It needs to be more than that we are talking people here not cattle.
Like I said you can make a great bet when the fuel is priced low but sooner or later you have to pay the same high price as every other cheap airline or turn to solar panels but then not fly at night.
Remember that SWA also had a very tidy agreement with the city of Dallas and the Governor of Texas...no landing fees, no parking fees, monopoly on that field...it allowed it a great deal of room to make a profit for many years while other LCCs came and went without having the same advantage.
Herbie did pretty good with that 'Love'bug and all he had to do was do a touch and go at neighbouring state.
Very tidy indeed.
Again, thanks for a great forum...it gets better everyday.
EuropeBoy signing off. lol
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: N/A
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spoke with some of our colleagues that attended a briefing earlier this year, where one of the Managers indicated that we started to lose crew back into NAM carriers at the rate of 2 per week from mid November 2006.
From my post elsewhere in the Forum, some relevant information:
Situation
Expansion in progress, aircraft fleet growing markedly, 30+ wide-body aircraft confirmed due by the end of Q1-2010, more orders "in the wings"
Crew required in "increasing" numbers, PAX and FTR
Recruiting situation "increasing" in difficulty - CX unable to source the crew they want and need.
Solution
Resume FO recruitment onto PAX fleets, utilising bases outside HKG where there are existing reductions in remuneration and benefits.
Dependant upon CX priorities and applicant experience, current recruitment streams are
SO - HKG - PAX fleets
FO - Based - FTR fleets, further "integration" at "Company discretion"
FO - Based - PAX fleets, if type rated
For those considering the PAX vs. FTR entry decision, the following variations in conditions specifically apply to the FTR;
** Additional reduction in remuneration and benefits below existing HKG and based PAX B-Scale whilst on the FTR fleets, i.e. C-Scale
** Numerous, specific rostering practice differences, reducing certain conditions and protections below current PAX fleet practices
** Integration into PAX after a "general" minimum of 3 years "checked to line" service, but only at Company discretion
** Further integration restrictions based on other normally expected events; e.g. base changes or FTR type change
NB: After 7-1/2 years of the FACA/FABA agreements detailing integration, CX still has crew being denied PAX fleet integration due FTR crew constraints
mmmm......
I don’t think that's going to do it, do you?
Dragonfly
Expansion in progress, aircraft fleet growing markedly, 30+ wide-body aircraft confirmed due by the end of Q1-2010, more orders "in the wings"
Crew required in "increasing" numbers, PAX and FTR
Recruiting situation "increasing" in difficulty - CX unable to source the crew they want and need.
Solution
Resume FO recruitment onto PAX fleets, utilising bases outside HKG where there are existing reductions in remuneration and benefits.
Dependant upon CX priorities and applicant experience, current recruitment streams are
SO - HKG - PAX fleets
FO - Based - FTR fleets, further "integration" at "Company discretion"
FO - Based - PAX fleets, if type rated
For those considering the PAX vs. FTR entry decision, the following variations in conditions specifically apply to the FTR;
** Additional reduction in remuneration and benefits below existing HKG and based PAX B-Scale whilst on the FTR fleets, i.e. C-Scale
** Numerous, specific rostering practice differences, reducing certain conditions and protections below current PAX fleet practices
** Integration into PAX after a "general" minimum of 3 years "checked to line" service, but only at Company discretion
** Further integration restrictions based on other normally expected events; e.g. base changes or FTR type change
NB: After 7-1/2 years of the FACA/FABA agreements detailing integration, CX still has crew being denied PAX fleet integration due FTR crew constraints
mmmm......
I don’t think that's going to do it, do you?
Dragonfly
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Freighter Problem
I think CX are trying to "plug the dyke" short term by offering a Sydney roster for -400 guys. This is a short term roster to crew the freighter on passenger pay. Of course the shortage is not a Sydney base problem as such - its a Freighter wide shortage, so while your family might be based in Sydney for a few months, you will more than likely be spending most of your time disrupted around North America !
They are also drafting alot of airbus pilots onto the -400 right now. The assumption is I think that many of them might also crew the -400 freighter, as alot of the existing -400 crew have removed their names from the freighter operators list.
The history behind the current freighter problem is from when they employed alot of North American furloughed pilots. CX made them resign from their previous positions, but under the furlough rules no resignations are recognised. These chaps are now steadily being offered their old positions back in order of seniority. CX freighters is the lowest paying North American -400 operator, so its difficult to attract new pilots beyond the short term. There are always those who come for a type rating and the typical 1000 hours on type. So, the current pilots are leaving, fewer new pilots are joining, and the passenger pilots don't want to crew the freighter either. (Well, some do, there are always those who don't see the big picture)
This might finally be time for CX to raise the freighter pay scales if the supply/demand forces prevail.
They are also drafting alot of airbus pilots onto the -400 right now. The assumption is I think that many of them might also crew the -400 freighter, as alot of the existing -400 crew have removed their names from the freighter operators list.
The history behind the current freighter problem is from when they employed alot of North American furloughed pilots. CX made them resign from their previous positions, but under the furlough rules no resignations are recognised. These chaps are now steadily being offered their old positions back in order of seniority. CX freighters is the lowest paying North American -400 operator, so its difficult to attract new pilots beyond the short term. There are always those who come for a type rating and the typical 1000 hours on type. So, the current pilots are leaving, fewer new pilots are joining, and the passenger pilots don't want to crew the freighter either. (Well, some do, there are always those who don't see the big picture)
This might finally be time for CX to raise the freighter pay scales if the supply/demand forces prevail.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: depends on the mood
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
guys well said..i donno where u are but i am pretty sure , from what i see, that in 10 years time theres gonna be 4-5 conventional carriers around europe and the rest will be LCCs.And flying for a good,big,organized LCC isnt bad at all!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Down The Rabbit Hole
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone seen this?
A340/A330 operator to fly out of Oz.
www.skyairworld.com and go to careers.
Interesting food for thought!
www.skyairworld.com and go to careers.
Interesting food for thought!
Moderator....
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New york based F/O just resigned over Easter and a few more letters will be on the way upstairs soon................unless they decide to play it smart and give the 20% pay increase that Emirates just got !!!!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hey, why let the truth spoil a good rumour.........................??? The point is we are Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long, long,Long, long, long,...............phew, overdue a considerable INCREASE..............like 5 or 6 years at 3% per annum = ????