Update on pay negotiations
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: hong kong
Posts: 192
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ULR said
My advice, get more FOs and SOs into the AOA so that we can reject or accept the deal inspite of the self interested recommendation of the GC.
Agree, and a recent update from the President stated there were still not enough volunteers to require an election so it is up to the members to apply.
I certainly disagree that the members join the GC for self interest, most do it as a sense of duty, it has no financial reward. When you consider the company sacked 3% of the workforce but that included a whopping 25% of the GC we should be very grateful for those that still choose to represent us. Instead there a few posters on this website who throw foul insults and accusations at these hard working representatives and attempt to draw all sorts of conclusions from spread of representives.
Based on those assumptions cast by some it could be argued that as there are no females on the GC that all the females in the company are going to be screwed by this new deal.........and thats why we should not vote for it!!!
The opportunity to consider the deal will come shortly as advised by the President. The members will vote on it accordingly after considering all the facts and it will either pass or fail....simple.
My advice, get more FOs and SOs into the AOA so that we can reject or accept the deal inspite of the self interested recommendation of the GC.
Agree, and a recent update from the President stated there were still not enough volunteers to require an election so it is up to the members to apply.
I certainly disagree that the members join the GC for self interest, most do it as a sense of duty, it has no financial reward. When you consider the company sacked 3% of the workforce but that included a whopping 25% of the GC we should be very grateful for those that still choose to represent us. Instead there a few posters on this website who throw foul insults and accusations at these hard working representatives and attempt to draw all sorts of conclusions from spread of representives.
Based on those assumptions cast by some it could be argued that as there are no females on the GC that all the females in the company are going to be screwed by this new deal.........and thats why we should not vote for it!!!
The opportunity to consider the deal will come shortly as advised by the President. The members will vote on it accordingly after considering all the facts and it will either pass or fail....simple.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bottom bunk
Age: 58
Posts: 43
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes all female pilots will be screwed because none of them are A scale CNs close to retirement. Thanks for helping to make my point Cyril.
I have had friends on the GC. I know they have given up time for the greater good. But in the past all votes have affected the entire membership reasonably equally (arguable on housing vote and 49ers). Point is there was no conflict of interest.
But now we have a deal coming that is to the great advantage of all CNs, particularly A scale, and no benefit to FOs or SOs - and if wombatico/bushcat are to be believed, no bypass pay for based FOs.
The last time I remember a conflict of interest vote was back in 93 or 94 when Tucknott pushed some basing deal...he then rushed off and took the basing, got paid $100K for his troubles.
So I will say again, how can we expect an impartial recommendation from a GC that has 14 people with so much to gain representing 750 people whilst the 1350 with so much to lose have 2 people representing them?
Will the GC A scale CN close to 55 or the GC B scale TC close to 55 reject the deal for the greater good????
I have had friends on the GC. I know they have given up time for the greater good. But in the past all votes have affected the entire membership reasonably equally (arguable on housing vote and 49ers). Point is there was no conflict of interest.
But now we have a deal coming that is to the great advantage of all CNs, particularly A scale, and no benefit to FOs or SOs - and if wombatico/bushcat are to be believed, no bypass pay for based FOs.
The last time I remember a conflict of interest vote was back in 93 or 94 when Tucknott pushed some basing deal...he then rushed off and took the basing, got paid $100K for his troubles.
So I will say again, how can we expect an impartial recommendation from a GC that has 14 people with so much to gain representing 750 people whilst the 1350 with so much to lose have 2 people representing them?
Will the GC A scale CN close to 55 or the GC B scale TC close to 55 reject the deal for the greater good????
a-ha
just tired of hearing freighter guys whingeing about delayed commands..transfer to the pax fleet...can't live where they want...didn't get the basing they wanted...etc etc...pretty much everything they did to the original cx f/o's when they turned up and took a job when cx was all out screwing the pax boys.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
to suggest moving B scale upwards would require common sense and solidarity. Why blame the company when you can point the finger at other people........."those freighter guys took my command" etc etc. At the end of the day if you are here at CX no matter what terms and conditions you work on , we need to get together to fight , not each other but the company.
We have no right to complain about people taking a job on any terms or conditions as they are probably better than the ones they had before.....................................AT the end of the day if we don't have the balls to withdraw our labour or co-operation in support of our justifiable cause, are we really stupid enough to expect people to refuse a job to support us...........???? ..............................
We have no right to complain about people taking a job on any terms or conditions as they are probably better than the ones they had before.....................................AT the end of the day if we don't have the balls to withdraw our labour or co-operation in support of our justifiable cause, are we really stupid enough to expect people to refuse a job to support us...........???? ..............................
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Europe
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote:"as to Oasis. Big gonads required. Their cashflow situation is frightening and I am not sure how deep the pockets are. Their seat costs must be at least 1.5 times ours"
Hi VR-HFX,
You must be a top insider.
Could you share all your financial secrets with us, I'm quite interested.
Cheers,
Xavier
Hi VR-HFX,
You must be a top insider.
Could you share all your financial secrets with us, I'm quite interested.
Cheers,
Xavier
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Their cashflow situation is frightening
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: 'tween a rock and a hard place
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
404 does not know them too well!
One guy has recently come out of the closet and wants to move with his partner to a country that does not frown on their lifestyle choice, the other has amassed a small fortune from an internet porn site, and does not need to work. I would post the web address but the bastard has made enough!
One guy has recently come out of the closet and wants to move with his partner to a country that does not frown on their lifestyle choice, the other has amassed a small fortune from an internet porn site, and does not need to work. I would post the web address but the bastard has made enough!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately there is no option re RA65 as it age discrimination law in most countries CX have a base!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure that Cyril would agree that he's helping ULR make his point.
ULR continues to bash the committee whilst Cyril correctly points out that those few who dare to serve on OUR UNION's representative body get no thanks for it whatsoever. ULR still manages to allege self-interest.
Ah, Tucknott. So presidents going back that far were also into self interest? Tucknott did not go onto a base until some years after the original basings deal was signed and he didn't get the $100,000 that the early based guys did. That was stopped in 1993. But what has fact got to do with committee bashing?
The point ULR is if you are unhappy at who's on the committee do something about it. You have had friends who have done so, why don't you have a go? The life of a left hand seat armchair critic is much easier and carries no responsibility - we know.
Back to Harry Potter.
ULR continues to bash the committee whilst Cyril correctly points out that those few who dare to serve on OUR UNION's representative body get no thanks for it whatsoever. ULR still manages to allege self-interest.
Ah, Tucknott. So presidents going back that far were also into self interest? Tucknott did not go onto a base until some years after the original basings deal was signed and he didn't get the $100,000 that the early based guys did. That was stopped in 1993. But what has fact got to do with committee bashing?
The point ULR is if you are unhappy at who's on the committee do something about it. You have had friends who have done so, why don't you have a go? The life of a left hand seat armchair critic is much easier and carries no responsibility - we know.
Back to Harry Potter.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Need I say more....
Yes please. Would you provide a list of every decent airline that has an annual increment based on inflation?
Fact not fiction please.
I'm sure that all the readers of pprune who are about to jump ship from cx would appreciate this infermation.
Fact not fiction please.
I'm sure that all the readers of pprune who are about to jump ship from cx would appreciate this infermation.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: In between...
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bobrun.
very interesting point. Talking to one of the K1W1's just now, NZ has had age discrimination laws for years. Apparently it lead to a huge slow down in promotion for the Air New Zealand pilots. This hasn't affected the AKL based Cx pilots has it? Funny how this comes up as a scare mongering tacti9c now.....
very interesting point. Talking to one of the K1W1's just now, NZ has had age discrimination laws for years. Apparently it lead to a huge slow down in promotion for the Air New Zealand pilots. This hasn't affected the AKL based Cx pilots has it? Funny how this comes up as a scare mongering tacti9c now.....
Cpt Undies
Perhaps my choice of financial terminology was not precise enough.
Any sector can be cash positive if the pax revenue exceeds outgoings for that journey.
The big hole is start up and capital costs and how you account for support costs.
Currently they have two routes, 7 a week to LGW and 6 a week to YVR. 3 a/c plus committments on 3 more ex All Nippon.
With the fares they are charging and their seat mile costs and the time to critical mass it is only a matter of time before they become another Air HK.
This is a hard cruel game and there aren't many airports you can put a 744 into that will pay you land there a la Michael O'Leary.
FWIW
Perhaps my choice of financial terminology was not precise enough.
Any sector can be cash positive if the pax revenue exceeds outgoings for that journey.
The big hole is start up and capital costs and how you account for support costs.
Currently they have two routes, 7 a week to LGW and 6 a week to YVR. 3 a/c plus committments on 3 more ex All Nippon.
With the fares they are charging and their seat mile costs and the time to critical mass it is only a matter of time before they become another Air HK.
This is a hard cruel game and there aren't many airports you can put a 744 into that will pay you land there a la Michael O'Leary.
FWIW
