C.O.S 08 - You're kidding me
BScaler,
I'm not going to answer all your points despite inaccuracies.
However
"My challenge to those in the GC considering whether or not to endorse CoS 08 to the AOA membership, is to present the entire argument for the membership's consideration. The pros and the cons. Leave nothing out, present both sides of the argument, and allow the membership to mull over the good and the bad equally.
I look forward to the release of further details of the agreement, and in particular the recommendation by the GC as to whether or not they believe ratification of CoS 08 to be in the best interests of the aircrew community."
needs correction. I can assure you that many of us would like the entire case, both sides, made public.
Whether or not the GC recommends this is not a measure of their support of it, but a measure of how much they want the membership (including the GC) to be able to vote on it.
I'm not going to answer all your points despite inaccuracies.
However
"My challenge to those in the GC considering whether or not to endorse CoS 08 to the AOA membership, is to present the entire argument for the membership's consideration. The pros and the cons. Leave nothing out, present both sides of the argument, and allow the membership to mull over the good and the bad equally.
I look forward to the release of further details of the agreement, and in particular the recommendation by the GC as to whether or not they believe ratification of CoS 08 to be in the best interests of the aircrew community."
needs correction. I can assure you that many of us would like the entire case, both sides, made public.
Whether or not the GC recommends this is not a measure of their support of it, but a measure of how much they want the membership (including the GC) to be able to vote on it.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now we are talking about something different, 55 - 65. If the company is willing to pay A scales for 55 - 65, then that what we all should get. I have been condemned to being paid less than the guy next to me for doing the same job so far at Cathay, but why should that be the case for 55 - 65 which is a whole new deal. It must be a common scale.
You know guys if you wanted proof the company were desperate to hire/keep Pilot's then look no further that A scalers extending on A scale.
They are desperate need every single Pilot and wouldn't have offered it otherwise.
Lets hold our ground, we will get a better offer.
BUSYB: what in BSCALERS post do find inaccurate? do tell as I'd love to know.
They are desperate need every single Pilot and wouldn't have offered it otherwise.
Lets hold our ground, we will get a better offer.
BUSYB: what in BSCALERS post do find inaccurate? do tell as I'd love to know.
From age 55 to 65 all A scalers will get an extra $30,000 mth x 120 months= $3,600,000 in their pay packet.
on the other hand I will lose $650,000 in travel fund over the same period.
yeah............... a good deal
Funny how a lot of the GC are A scale, I guess they will endorse the offer.
on the other hand I will lose $650,000 in travel fund over the same period.
yeah............... a good deal
Funny how a lot of the GC are A scale, I guess they will endorse the offer.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the fatigue curve
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NO.
Have another go.
Certainly not worth giving away other things for. And it will increase the effect on your pay if you are sick. (Which you probably won't be able to insure for, because you are still receiving your base wage)
NO
Have another go.
Certainly not worth giving away other things for. And it will increase the effect on your pay if you are sick. (Which you probably won't be able to insure for, because you are still receiving your base wage)
NO
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CoS 08
Hi BusyB,
As I said, my comments and points are based on the little that has been commented on in the latest negotiations update, and not the full agreement which has not yet been released. There are bound to be a few 'inaccuracies' and feel free to comment on them.
As far as the GC is concerned, I would like to see leadership from the GC one way or another. This is why.
BScaler
As I said, my comments and points are based on the little that has been commented on in the latest negotiations update, and not the full agreement which has not yet been released. There are bound to be a few 'inaccuracies' and feel free to comment on them.
As far as the GC is concerned, I would like to see leadership from the GC one way or another. This is why.
- Scenario #1. If the GC endorses CoS 08 and the membership votes the agreement in, this represents confidence by the membership in the judgement of the GC. This is a good thing and is the way things are supposed to happen.
- Scenario #2. If the GC endorses CoS 08 and the membership votes it down, (as it did comprehensively on the last DEFO agreement), it represents a lack of confidence by the membership in the judgement of the GC. This is not a good thing, as it demonstrates a disparity between the GC and the community it supposedly represents.
- Scenario #3. If the GC does not endorse CoS 08 but puts it to the membership for a vote anyway and the agreement is subsequently voted down, this acts as support to the GC in future negotiations, and will hopefully result in an improved agreement, (witness the DEFO portion of CoS 08, which, though still not acceptable in my view, is still an improvement on the original proposal). This is also the way things are supposed to happen if the final negotiated position is, in the judgement of the GC, unpalatable to the majority of the membership.
BScaler
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: HK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX Strategy
Has anybody analysed why the management have decided on this path?
Do remember that they introduced B scale for a reason, and to extend A scale for ten years goes against this logic. So here's my theory ( or at least the theory of a B scale LEP who has a PHd or something like that).
They're extending the A scale for another ten years BECAUSE, its the only battle that they can win. There's nothing (within their reasoning) that they can throw at the B scale which will make them happy. Some chaps mentioned 20% increment, do you think they're going to offer that, NO WAY!!
So go after the only winning strategy, keep the A scale captains happy and F^&k the rest.
Thinking it through, makes perfect sense, they keep all the trainers, because no way they'll leave now; majority of B scalers will bitch and groan but will probably stay, minority of ballsy enough B scalers who leave, well no problem, ramp up the recruitment and replace them. Keep the A scalers and theres at least another ten years before you have to deal with it..
So as my friend puts it..400 FO's leave, who cares, 400 SOs will take their place.
So there you go, why give away money to A scalers instead of trying to give less money to B scalers, and there's your answer!!
Do remember that they introduced B scale for a reason, and to extend A scale for ten years goes against this logic. So here's my theory ( or at least the theory of a B scale LEP who has a PHd or something like that).
They're extending the A scale for another ten years BECAUSE, its the only battle that they can win. There's nothing (within their reasoning) that they can throw at the B scale which will make them happy. Some chaps mentioned 20% increment, do you think they're going to offer that, NO WAY!!
So go after the only winning strategy, keep the A scale captains happy and F^&k the rest.
Thinking it through, makes perfect sense, they keep all the trainers, because no way they'll leave now; majority of B scalers will bitch and groan but will probably stay, minority of ballsy enough B scalers who leave, well no problem, ramp up the recruitment and replace them. Keep the A scalers and theres at least another ten years before you have to deal with it..
So as my friend puts it..400 FO's leave, who cares, 400 SOs will take their place.
So there you go, why give away money to A scalers instead of trying to give less money to B scalers, and there's your answer!!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shifting
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
XCX/GoinHome
You're not voting YES, or anything else. You've already told us that you have a job elsewhere, and that you would have nothing to do with the AOA. That makes you either a liar, or a half-wit.
You complain, forever, about what a rotten place CX is, but, yet, spend years working here. That confirms that you either have a) not got the courage of your convictions, b) no spine, or c) both. One day, if you finally leave, you will pat yourself on the back for being alone in your bravery. It will be fitting, because no one else will care - your legacy for having contributed nothing during your time at Cathay.
COS08 is a terribly important matter to CX pilots. All intelligent perspectives and insights are appreciated. It is too important to waste time on the drivel of those who have nothing but harsh criticism for the AOA, which they announce as a "joke", and are constantly bleating about the AOA doing nothing for them. Do you not understand that, by choosing not to belong to the AOA, you have rendered yourselves irrelevant in this critical vote, and your comments in this matter are equally irrelevant. To not recognize this reveals you as either terminally stupid, or naive in the extreme.
By all means, don't join the Association, if that is your choice, but don't, then, be fool enough to complain that it has not done enough to improve your lot in life. It is only you (by belonging) that can give the AOA some teeth.
I think the company offering on COS08 is rotten, and I am willing to bet that someone as honest and forthcoming as Number Cruncher (in cognito) is not anxious to recommend its acceptance, but let us remember that this is not the Excited States or the "Untied" Kingdom, where unions have much more clout. The closest thing we can have to "union power" is for most CX pilots to belong to the AOA, and for the vote to overwhelmingly reject the company proposal.
ColdWar.
You complain, forever, about what a rotten place CX is, but, yet, spend years working here. That confirms that you either have a) not got the courage of your convictions, b) no spine, or c) both. One day, if you finally leave, you will pat yourself on the back for being alone in your bravery. It will be fitting, because no one else will care - your legacy for having contributed nothing during your time at Cathay.
COS08 is a terribly important matter to CX pilots. All intelligent perspectives and insights are appreciated. It is too important to waste time on the drivel of those who have nothing but harsh criticism for the AOA, which they announce as a "joke", and are constantly bleating about the AOA doing nothing for them. Do you not understand that, by choosing not to belong to the AOA, you have rendered yourselves irrelevant in this critical vote, and your comments in this matter are equally irrelevant. To not recognize this reveals you as either terminally stupid, or naive in the extreme.
By all means, don't join the Association, if that is your choice, but don't, then, be fool enough to complain that it has not done enough to improve your lot in life. It is only you (by belonging) that can give the AOA some teeth.
I think the company offering on COS08 is rotten, and I am willing to bet that someone as honest and forthcoming as Number Cruncher (in cognito) is not anxious to recommend its acceptance, but let us remember that this is not the Excited States or the "Untied" Kingdom, where unions have much more clout. The closest thing we can have to "union power" is for most CX pilots to belong to the AOA, and for the vote to overwhelmingly reject the company proposal.
ColdWar.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B scaler
Mate, I like your posts- well reasoned and set out.
I can assure you all that this has been an incredibly divisive issue amongst the GC. The GC is between a rock and a hard place. If we reject it, you don't even get the chance to vote. If we recommend it we look like rubber stamps for management. Trust me when I say, recommended or not, this package has been argued to death amongst the GC.
I can understand the natural suspicion that this was an A scaler driven package. It was not - we never steered it in that direction. In fact we even suggested doing what B scaler suggests - A scales stay frozen until B catches up.
My main issue with the deal is not the RA65 - I think that was inevitable. WHat I object to is bypass pay being earned contingent on where you choose to live. Bypass pay will not recover the earnings lost by later upgrades but it does ameliorate the losses substantially.
No I don't know how bypass pay will be dished out. I know in the past bypass pay has been paid to someone...how that was determined has shifted over time. I think with up to several hundred people receiving it within 3-5years the company will have to be a lot more transparent about how and to whom it pays. According the CoS you only don't receive it if you are Cat D(?). Maybe some recent receivers or non- receivers of bypass pay can enlighten us.
I know it is an A scaler GC - 50%. But think about it. What do I personally have to gain from this deal. I have over a decade to worry about RA55 ( I am younger than I look;-). I can assure you that all the GC I know have good intentions. You may disagree with the GC as a whole or individuals..thats fine...thats called democracy. But I can assure you that as far as I am concerned each and every GC member is acting in the best interests of our members. It just so happens that within the GC we disagree with what is in the best interests of the membership.
In my view the negotiated position was a long way from what we asked for. Its very easy to find a scape goat. Just remember that in 1999 and 2001 deals were imposed in spite of negotiation.
In summary.
You are not voting for RA65 and DEFOs - they will happen regardless of what you vote. A scales, on the bases at least, are likely to remain A scalers due to anti discrimination legislation.
You are voting on whether you are happy that the payrise(if you get one) is fair and if you want the FACA gone.
jobe - was I the only one not flying freighters? I thought there were more of us! I don't want 'interesting' flying anymore - had 20+ years of it already!
I can assure you all that this has been an incredibly divisive issue amongst the GC. The GC is between a rock and a hard place. If we reject it, you don't even get the chance to vote. If we recommend it we look like rubber stamps for management. Trust me when I say, recommended or not, this package has been argued to death amongst the GC.
I can understand the natural suspicion that this was an A scaler driven package. It was not - we never steered it in that direction. In fact we even suggested doing what B scaler suggests - A scales stay frozen until B catches up.
My main issue with the deal is not the RA65 - I think that was inevitable. WHat I object to is bypass pay being earned contingent on where you choose to live. Bypass pay will not recover the earnings lost by later upgrades but it does ameliorate the losses substantially.
No I don't know how bypass pay will be dished out. I know in the past bypass pay has been paid to someone...how that was determined has shifted over time. I think with up to several hundred people receiving it within 3-5years the company will have to be a lot more transparent about how and to whom it pays. According the CoS you only don't receive it if you are Cat D(?). Maybe some recent receivers or non- receivers of bypass pay can enlighten us.
I know it is an A scaler GC - 50%. But think about it. What do I personally have to gain from this deal. I have over a decade to worry about RA55 ( I am younger than I look;-). I can assure you that all the GC I know have good intentions. You may disagree with the GC as a whole or individuals..thats fine...thats called democracy. But I can assure you that as far as I am concerned each and every GC member is acting in the best interests of our members. It just so happens that within the GC we disagree with what is in the best interests of the membership.
In my view the negotiated position was a long way from what we asked for. Its very easy to find a scape goat. Just remember that in 1999 and 2001 deals were imposed in spite of negotiation.
In summary.
You are not voting for RA65 and DEFOs - they will happen regardless of what you vote. A scales, on the bases at least, are likely to remain A scalers due to anti discrimination legislation.
You are voting on whether you are happy that the payrise(if you get one) is fair and if you want the FACA gone.
jobe - was I the only one not flying freighters? I thought there were more of us! I don't want 'interesting' flying anymore - had 20+ years of it already!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 382
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Victimizing A scalers
Hey B scaler Whilst I agree that the pay offer is an insult to everyone , what makes you think that the A scale salary should be frozen .
You wrote “ bearing this in mind, I cannot see any justification for an increase in A-Scale remuneration at this time,
Inflation has been increasing in HK for years and we have suffered nothing but pay cuts for years . Yes we were fortunate to sign on when the pay and conditions were better but the cost of everything is going up . A trip to the grocery store should confirm that . So let us have what we deserve and you should fight for a good increment to your pay and conditions. Don’t try to drag us down elevate your position instead
You wrote “ bearing this in mind, I cannot see any justification for an increase in A-Scale remuneration at this time,
Inflation has been increasing in HK for years and we have suffered nothing but pay cuts for years . Yes we were fortunate to sign on when the pay and conditions were better but the cost of everything is going up . A trip to the grocery store should confirm that . So let us have what we deserve and you should fight for a good increment to your pay and conditions. Don’t try to drag us down elevate your position instead
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: HK
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oriental Flyer
I understand that you feel a bit put upon by the B scalers, however, would it be fair to say that you're unlikely to be rejecting the proposal?
You see, if you do reject the proposal, and want to stay on, you're shooting yourself in the foot. I f you vote yes, then you manage to keep yourself in a relatively more comfortable lifestyle than any B scaler. So yes you may gripe about BScaler being a bit "vindictive". But in the end, do you really care what he says considering you'll be kept in your lifestyle for at least the next ten years.
If you feel that I 'm picking on you, then I'm sorry, however, just trying to highlight why management have decided to go down this path
I understand that you feel a bit put upon by the B scalers, however, would it be fair to say that you're unlikely to be rejecting the proposal?
You see, if you do reject the proposal, and want to stay on, you're shooting yourself in the foot. I f you vote yes, then you manage to keep yourself in a relatively more comfortable lifestyle than any B scaler. So yes you may gripe about BScaler being a bit "vindictive". But in the end, do you really care what he says considering you'll be kept in your lifestyle for at least the next ten years.
If you feel that I 'm picking on you, then I'm sorry, however, just trying to highlight why management have decided to go down this path
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
why has everyone been brainwashed into thinking A scales are "too much" B scales are where we all should be , RIGHT ??
WRONG...................A scales worked fine when there was only A scales, so the thing we should be talking about is getteing EVERYBODY onto A scales and then adjusting A scales for inflation since the last increas
Ferk, have we all be completely brainwashed by Cathay or what???
WRONG...................A scales worked fine when there was only A scales, so the thing we should be talking about is getteing EVERYBODY onto A scales and then adjusting A scales for inflation since the last increas
Ferk, have we all be completely brainwashed by Cathay or what???
oriental flyer: Don't get me wrong, I think we need to rise B scales up to A.
But mate, $30,000 per month more than me not to mention $800,000 HK per year of service waiting in your defined benefit P fund.
You A scalers don't budget for the grocery store, you budget for the Ferrari or Porsche store. How many Gold Rolex's do you think I can afford pal.
Get real.
But mate, $30,000 per month more than me not to mention $800,000 HK per year of service waiting in your defined benefit P fund.
You A scalers don't budget for the grocery store, you budget for the Ferrari or Porsche store. How many Gold Rolex's do you think I can afford pal.
Get real.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CoS 08
oriental flyer
I wrote in my submission:
I don't think this is an unfair assessment, oriental flyer. In fact, I would put money on the fact that some A-Scalers in the GC would altruisically promote this school of thought in negotiations on behalf of all B-Scalers.
Should CoS 08 be presented to the membership and voted down, then perhaps this position could be put to the Company a little more forcefully.
oriental flyer, you stand to gain 10 years of bonus A-Scale employment if CoS 08 is passed - would you not be prepared to forgo 2% HDP to help out your junior colleagues?
BScaler
I wrote in my submission:
some A-Scale colleagues are currently accepting less than B-Scale conditions to extend their employment. 'Market Forces' would suggest that the proposal under CoS 08 for full A-Scale remuneration and expat terms for continuation of employment of these officers to age 65, is generous, particularly seeing as the A-Scale Provident Fund was designed to provide for a comfortable retirement at age 55;
bearing this in mind, I cannot see any justification for an increase in A-Scale remuneration at this time, until B-Scale reaches A-Scale salary scales. Note that I do not advocate a reduction in A-Scale pay, just a hold until B reaches A. It has been 14 years since the introduction of B-Scales and the 'advance A-Scales at all costs and eventually bring B up to A...' argument has run it's course and been found wanting. I believe, therefore, that the amount allocated to increasing A-Scale remuneration in this agreement should be applied to B-Scales first, in an effort to bring aircrew pay scales into line with each other, and then have the scales progress upwards together in unity. Any fair-minded A-Scale officer could not have any serious issue with this proposal, especially as A-Scale officers stand to gain 10 bonus years of employment;
bearing this in mind, I cannot see any justification for an increase in A-Scale remuneration at this time, until B-Scale reaches A-Scale salary scales. Note that I do not advocate a reduction in A-Scale pay, just a hold until B reaches A. It has been 14 years since the introduction of B-Scales and the 'advance A-Scales at all costs and eventually bring B up to A...' argument has run it's course and been found wanting. I believe, therefore, that the amount allocated to increasing A-Scale remuneration in this agreement should be applied to B-Scales first, in an effort to bring aircrew pay scales into line with each other, and then have the scales progress upwards together in unity. Any fair-minded A-Scale officer could not have any serious issue with this proposal, especially as A-Scale officers stand to gain 10 bonus years of employment;
Should CoS 08 be presented to the membership and voted down, then perhaps this position could be put to the Company a little more forcefully.
oriental flyer, you stand to gain 10 years of bonus A-Scale employment if CoS 08 is passed - would you not be prepared to forgo 2% HDP to help out your junior colleagues?
BScaler
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: in the air
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lets all bitch at each other, that will teach em a lesson
There is a huge amount of information in this update. Don't be fooled and get caught up in the minutia.
For anybody who is not yet a captain, this is a pay CUT and its a bad one. You will earn less over the course of your career, then be forced to work more years to make up the difference.
For Captains on the B scale, this will force you to fly freighters and further divides and weakens us all.
A Scale captains, this deal may be tempting compared to the lousy extensions previously offered, but it is time for all of us to stand together.
The company will always push for dividing pay scales. Based guys vs. Hong Kong, A vs B scale, even now the want to divide us again with COS99 vs COS08. We need to push for unification. Real unifiaction. Same scale for everyone. Local pilots should get housing. NO MORE DIVISIONS. We simply can not allow a new COS for new joiners and take the, "it's ok it doesnt afect me" attitude. It screwed the A scale and they will try to screw the B scale with it too.
The definition of stupidity / insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
Let's stop doing the same thing. Band together, vote this down. when they give us a re vote, vote it down too unless it is actually better.
If they want to force this on us then let them do it. At least then we have legal recourse for breach of contract, and it will hurt the recruitment.
This deal is pathetic. It will barely match inflation anywhere over the next 2 years. Then it stops?!?!? No more increments?! If this was a pay discussion it would deal with pay for more than 2 years. This is about age 65. It is not mandated today by law. Until it is, they will have to make the pay break even at least, including remuneration and lifestyle losses.
We have to stop bitching and start talking about courses of action. Then we have to ACT. Each and every one of us. This is the missing step in us getting anything done.
Numero C, I commend the work that you do and all the work the GC does. All of the guys who are bitching about the GC should either stand for the GC or shut up. You are as bad as all the non HKAOA members complaining about what the union should do when they wont even pay to join and vote.
So this leaves us with the question of what can we do?
In the immediate, vote this down. This is obvious, but necessary for several reasons. Not only will it prevent a terrible pay cut going through, but it will also show that there is perhaps a hint of resolve in this broken battered pilot group.
As much as I deplore the extension of the RPo4 / 07 and the subsequent re vote it caused, it still was voted through by the membership. Why did this happen? If the AOA body had shown any resolve, we would have re voted it down and then the company would have had no choice but to improve or impose, which brings us back to legal recourse at worst, and a better deal at best.
Everytime we vote something down, they threaten something worse and we run back to the first deal. This is a surefire way to show them that they never need to give us a good offer in the first place, and they never have to negotiate in good faith. No wonder the AOA negotiating team can't make any progress. The membership keeps cutting the ground out from under them every time we put through a revote.
Isn't it pathetic that we already know there will be a revote on this? Think about that!
The awnser is simple guys
No, then No again.
Its time to start rebuilding the HKAOA to the point where it is worth being a member.
Hoolio
(Dues paid in full from day 1)
For anybody who is not yet a captain, this is a pay CUT and its a bad one. You will earn less over the course of your career, then be forced to work more years to make up the difference.
For Captains on the B scale, this will force you to fly freighters and further divides and weakens us all.
A Scale captains, this deal may be tempting compared to the lousy extensions previously offered, but it is time for all of us to stand together.
The company will always push for dividing pay scales. Based guys vs. Hong Kong, A vs B scale, even now the want to divide us again with COS99 vs COS08. We need to push for unification. Real unifiaction. Same scale for everyone. Local pilots should get housing. NO MORE DIVISIONS. We simply can not allow a new COS for new joiners and take the, "it's ok it doesnt afect me" attitude. It screwed the A scale and they will try to screw the B scale with it too.
The definition of stupidity / insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results.
Let's stop doing the same thing. Band together, vote this down. when they give us a re vote, vote it down too unless it is actually better.
If they want to force this on us then let them do it. At least then we have legal recourse for breach of contract, and it will hurt the recruitment.
This deal is pathetic. It will barely match inflation anywhere over the next 2 years. Then it stops?!?!? No more increments?! If this was a pay discussion it would deal with pay for more than 2 years. This is about age 65. It is not mandated today by law. Until it is, they will have to make the pay break even at least, including remuneration and lifestyle losses.
We have to stop bitching and start talking about courses of action. Then we have to ACT. Each and every one of us. This is the missing step in us getting anything done.
Numero C, I commend the work that you do and all the work the GC does. All of the guys who are bitching about the GC should either stand for the GC or shut up. You are as bad as all the non HKAOA members complaining about what the union should do when they wont even pay to join and vote.
So this leaves us with the question of what can we do?
In the immediate, vote this down. This is obvious, but necessary for several reasons. Not only will it prevent a terrible pay cut going through, but it will also show that there is perhaps a hint of resolve in this broken battered pilot group.
As much as I deplore the extension of the RPo4 / 07 and the subsequent re vote it caused, it still was voted through by the membership. Why did this happen? If the AOA body had shown any resolve, we would have re voted it down and then the company would have had no choice but to improve or impose, which brings us back to legal recourse at worst, and a better deal at best.
Everytime we vote something down, they threaten something worse and we run back to the first deal. This is a surefire way to show them that they never need to give us a good offer in the first place, and they never have to negotiate in good faith. No wonder the AOA negotiating team can't make any progress. The membership keeps cutting the ground out from under them every time we put through a revote.
Isn't it pathetic that we already know there will be a revote on this? Think about that!
The awnser is simple guys
No, then No again.
Its time to start rebuilding the HKAOA to the point where it is worth being a member.
Hoolio
(Dues paid in full from day 1)
Guest
Posts: n/a
Well said, however!
The AOA should NOT put this to the membership! They should stop it dead in it's tracks. They have to know that it is not a good deal. Yes lets' band together but we need our leaders/GC to know when to say NO. This is one of those times. Leaving it up to us I do not think appropriate. What happens if the same issue comes up like RP07. "Well, they kind of said no but let's revote". Sorry but that was wrong. We all need to write the AOA and ask that this not even come to us for a vote and if it does, WE MUST SAY NO. If you are not in the AOA I strongly suggest you join cause this is huge and will affect a lot of careers folks. Winge all you'd like but here is the chance for all of us to really band together.
