COS 08 - This is not about pay
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the alternative
JTR - thanks for the PM - I remember;-)
OK lets look at the possible outcomes.
We vote YES.
Everything happens as expected. To the world and possible recruits they will see the harmony that exists between the employees and their paymasters! Some pilots will get up to double digit payrises. We no longer can refuse freighter flying, ASL move to the bottom of our seniority list. All officers can work to 65 on current terms - but no travel benefits after 55(that can amount to a months salary every year).
We vote NO.
The company may or may not recruit DEFOs on new contracts. It is almost certain they will recruit DEFOs but on what CoS/salary is open to conjecture.
They will offer (IMO) CoS08 contracts to all officers later this year. It will be voluntary. If you remain on CoS99 you will be entitled to receive bypass pay as long as you are HKG based. There may be a period of 4-18months where you can remain on CoS99 on the base and receive bypass pay - until onshoring occurs for your base area.
Payrises? Well, I think they will still apply them but that is purely my opinion since I have only seen them withhold one payrise - 1994 - even though almost every pay deal has been initially rejected. I would not base receiving more money on my opinion though;-/
The worldwide pool of recruitable pilots will be dismayed that we do not have excellent relations with CX and probably join anyway.
So really I can see good reasons to vote for and against the deal. My main issue is the disparity of bypass pay distribution dependant on domicile.
Pragmatic or idealistic, your choice.
OK lets look at the possible outcomes.
We vote YES.
Everything happens as expected. To the world and possible recruits they will see the harmony that exists between the employees and their paymasters! Some pilots will get up to double digit payrises. We no longer can refuse freighter flying, ASL move to the bottom of our seniority list. All officers can work to 65 on current terms - but no travel benefits after 55(that can amount to a months salary every year).
We vote NO.
The company may or may not recruit DEFOs on new contracts. It is almost certain they will recruit DEFOs but on what CoS/salary is open to conjecture.
They will offer (IMO) CoS08 contracts to all officers later this year. It will be voluntary. If you remain on CoS99 you will be entitled to receive bypass pay as long as you are HKG based. There may be a period of 4-18months where you can remain on CoS99 on the base and receive bypass pay - until onshoring occurs for your base area.
Payrises? Well, I think they will still apply them but that is purely my opinion since I have only seen them withhold one payrise - 1994 - even though almost every pay deal has been initially rejected. I would not base receiving more money on my opinion though;-/
The worldwide pool of recruitable pilots will be dismayed that we do not have excellent relations with CX and probably join anyway.
So really I can see good reasons to vote for and against the deal. My main issue is the disparity of bypass pay distribution dependant on domicile.
Pragmatic or idealistic, your choice.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Belgravia
Age: 71
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apple Tree Yard
The AOA membership only have two trump cards left in their hand; namely the FACA and the existing DEFO clause in our COS.
If we trade both of these for the 'instant gratification' of a 10% pay rise then it will be the last time the company EVER sits across from the AOA again to 'negotiate' pay. The reason we haven't had a pay rise since 2001 is that the company hasn't NEEDED to get any more concessions from us. Now it does.
The company cannot man the combined freighter/pax expansion without us firstly agreeing to integrate ASL, thereby voiding the FACA, and secondly agreeing to the new UFO scale. Currently the DEFOs on the AUS base are being paid pax salaries as per our existing contractual COS. With the imminent hiring of DEFOs on the NAM bases the company faces a major recruitment problem. Namely, how do you hire onto the 744F on reduced pay and conditions whilst simultaneously hiring onto the 777 on superior pay and conditions! I would argue that it will be next to impossible because it will be seen as inequitous by many pilots more accustomed to 'speed/wt' compensation.
This concession is a major NEED for the company. Without this they will be forced to raise the Freighter DEFO salary to match that on the 777; market forces in our favour for once! Now, this will REALLY upset the applecart as there must be a consequent upwards adjustment of the whole Freighter scale to match. Starting to get expensive eh!
As to RA65, well our COS only extend to age 55 after which the company is free to cut any deal it wishes with extendees I believe. However, consider this. Who is going to replace the current extendees on the Freighter when they return to the pax fleet on A-scales? Mainline guys of course but will they have enough 'volunteers' or are they more likely relying upon the demise of the FACA? Everything in this deal is interconnected.
In closing, I urge you not to encourage your fellow pilots to 'take what's on offer now and hope for more later'. There will be NO later. If we trade our last two remaining trump cards for the instant gratification of a 10% pay rise then I'll wager that neither you nor I will EVER witness the AOA and company around the 'negotiating' table again. After all, what will we have left to give but our kidneys and I wouldn't put it past SWIRE to have a NEED for them to!
Remember, there is NO later!
If we trade both of these for the 'instant gratification' of a 10% pay rise then it will be the last time the company EVER sits across from the AOA again to 'negotiate' pay. The reason we haven't had a pay rise since 2001 is that the company hasn't NEEDED to get any more concessions from us. Now it does.
The company cannot man the combined freighter/pax expansion without us firstly agreeing to integrate ASL, thereby voiding the FACA, and secondly agreeing to the new UFO scale. Currently the DEFOs on the AUS base are being paid pax salaries as per our existing contractual COS. With the imminent hiring of DEFOs on the NAM bases the company faces a major recruitment problem. Namely, how do you hire onto the 744F on reduced pay and conditions whilst simultaneously hiring onto the 777 on superior pay and conditions! I would argue that it will be next to impossible because it will be seen as inequitous by many pilots more accustomed to 'speed/wt' compensation.
This concession is a major NEED for the company. Without this they will be forced to raise the Freighter DEFO salary to match that on the 777; market forces in our favour for once! Now, this will REALLY upset the applecart as there must be a consequent upwards adjustment of the whole Freighter scale to match. Starting to get expensive eh!
As to RA65, well our COS only extend to age 55 after which the company is free to cut any deal it wishes with extendees I believe. However, consider this. Who is going to replace the current extendees on the Freighter when they return to the pax fleet on A-scales? Mainline guys of course but will they have enough 'volunteers' or are they more likely relying upon the demise of the FACA? Everything in this deal is interconnected.
In closing, I urge you not to encourage your fellow pilots to 'take what's on offer now and hope for more later'. There will be NO later. If we trade our last two remaining trump cards for the instant gratification of a 10% pay rise then I'll wager that neither you nor I will EVER witness the AOA and company around the 'negotiating' table again. After all, what will we have left to give but our kidneys and I wouldn't put it past SWIRE to have a NEED for them to!
Remember, there is NO later!
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: usa
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ATY.....
You should turn down the payrise because it's not really a payrise. It's not being being backdated, is grossly unfair and uneven between base areas and is, in the end FOR SOME and NOT OTHERS. The reality is that it (the HDP part at least, which is all some of us will get) covers only inflation expected in the next few years.
The whole concept of looking at what the market is paying and then comparing that with our current payscales as the only way to derive new scales is totally bogus. Take a look at what they came up with for USAB. Oh, but even playing their market comparison game is only on their terms. Did someone say FEDEX or UPS?? Lets play a game....it's called, "how many lame excuses can I come up with to continue to ignore FEDEX and UPS salaries and conditions of service".
I'll tell you why else you should knock back the "payrise". It has so MANY strings attached that are complete degredations for most. How about COS 08 being forced onto based pilot's for one. The rostering and lifestyle implications are staggering for 400 guys/gals. Any on shore basing company business is a smokescreen that is enabling the company to be bailed out of its freighter crewing issues. How about bypass pay being available for some and not others....and this only being based on where you choose to live.
The company have already had success in one way since details have emerged of this new "package". Its divided us all along based lines, A scale, B scale, Freighter, etc etc.
Time to stop bickering about the past and realise that we ALL deserve better. These issues can be dealt with separately. PAYRISES SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. That would be a good start.
The whole concept of looking at what the market is paying and then comparing that with our current payscales as the only way to derive new scales is totally bogus. Take a look at what they came up with for USAB. Oh, but even playing their market comparison game is only on their terms. Did someone say FEDEX or UPS?? Lets play a game....it's called, "how many lame excuses can I come up with to continue to ignore FEDEX and UPS salaries and conditions of service".
I'll tell you why else you should knock back the "payrise". It has so MANY strings attached that are complete degredations for most. How about COS 08 being forced onto based pilot's for one. The rostering and lifestyle implications are staggering for 400 guys/gals. Any on shore basing company business is a smokescreen that is enabling the company to be bailed out of its freighter crewing issues. How about bypass pay being available for some and not others....and this only being based on where you choose to live.
The company have already had success in one way since details have emerged of this new "package". Its divided us all along based lines, A scale, B scale, Freighter, etc etc.
Time to stop bickering about the past and realise that we ALL deserve better. These issues can be dealt with separately. PAYRISES SHOULD BE THE SAME FOR EVERYBODY. That would be a good start.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: www
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Giggleswick, FYI,
Very thoughtful posts from you both, thank you. If you read some of my other posts on this and other threads, I actually didn't say I would vote YES, only that I was asking 'why' I should not vote for the pay rise offered now. I do in fact agree with both of you that the offer is sorely lacking. I still feel however that there is always an inherent risk in rejecting any gain offered, no matter how meager. In this industry, it doesn't take much for a downturn to hit, and overnight you go from feast to famine! The ongoing tumult in the US and world markets has much more to come i'm afraid, and the eventual consequences could be far worse than anyone predicts. A US economy screeching to a halt will drastically effect the aviation market, and could very quickly put our management back in the ascendency. As I mentioned earlier, we would all then be regreting not taking the raises on offer now. I do however agree that as it stands, probably best to vote NO.
My main issue is with people like ACMS who seem intent on reducing the potential top level of pay in the company. That seems like a suicidal attitude towards your own profession. The higher the top scale, the better chance of the rest of us seeing better increases.
Very thoughtful posts from you both, thank you. If you read some of my other posts on this and other threads, I actually didn't say I would vote YES, only that I was asking 'why' I should not vote for the pay rise offered now. I do in fact agree with both of you that the offer is sorely lacking. I still feel however that there is always an inherent risk in rejecting any gain offered, no matter how meager. In this industry, it doesn't take much for a downturn to hit, and overnight you go from feast to famine! The ongoing tumult in the US and world markets has much more to come i'm afraid, and the eventual consequences could be far worse than anyone predicts. A US economy screeching to a halt will drastically effect the aviation market, and could very quickly put our management back in the ascendency. As I mentioned earlier, we would all then be regreting not taking the raises on offer now. I do however agree that as it stands, probably best to vote NO.
My main issue is with people like ACMS who seem intent on reducing the potential top level of pay in the company. That seems like a suicidal attitude towards your own profession. The higher the top scale, the better chance of the rest of us seeing better increases.
ACMS
are you suggesting B-scale get no housing??? and B-scale + 15% would exceed A-scale command pay..i DO agree in one payscale....everyone not on A scale should be 
which is what we were saying in 1993!!!
which is what we were saying in 1993!!!
blunderbus:
huh? My current B scale + 30% would just equal A scale.
I love A scalers like you that think there is little difference between A and B anymore. try $30,000 HKD per month bud.
So tell me.......what is A scale CN year 1?
are you suggesting B-scale get no housing??? and B-scale + 15% would exceed A-scale command pay.
I love A scalers like you that think there is little difference between A and B anymore. try $30,000 HKD per month bud.
So tell me.......what is A scale CN year 1?
BLUNDERBUS: I just went all the way back to page 1 and saw what you referred to in the above post.
I mean that all B scale should get an immediate 15% pay rise + the HDP rise of 2%. All A scale should get the HDP rise of 2%.
Then at age 55 all A scales move down to the NEW B scale ( above ) and also get all of the COS ( housing, education, staff travel, P fund etc )
This is a fair pay rise for us, and it's fair for you.
Remember that most of your A scale brothers ( more than 50 have extended so far ) accepted a lot worse than that to stay flying cargo here, so it's a win for you too.
That's what I meant.
I mean that all B scale should get an immediate 15% pay rise + the HDP rise of 2%. All A scale should get the HDP rise of 2%.
Then at age 55 all A scales move down to the NEW B scale ( above ) and also get all of the COS ( housing, education, staff travel, P fund etc )
This is a fair pay rise for us, and it's fair for you.
Remember that most of your A scale brothers ( more than 50 have extended so far ) accepted a lot worse than that to stay flying cargo here, so it's a win for you too.
That's what I meant.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 98
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good Morning
I think some of you are now just starting to get it. The vast majority of any pay raise, for many of us, is tied to productivity. Quite simply, you will have to work harder just to keep up with inflation. And what happens if there is a downturn? Your pay will drop just as quick as they reduce your hours.
Of course, if you offered a simple, across the board pay raise, everyone would be able to understand it. What part of that doesn't the AOA understand?
I think some of you are now just starting to get it. The vast majority of any pay raise, for many of us, is tied to productivity. Quite simply, you will have to work harder just to keep up with inflation. And what happens if there is a downturn? Your pay will drop just as quick as they reduce your hours.
Of course, if you offered a simple, across the board pay raise, everyone would be able to understand it. What part of that doesn't the AOA understand?
