Confused...!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: www
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Confused...!
Ok, exactly WHAT is the deal with age 65? I read PW's letter to the troops...and I come away believing that age 65 is official effective Jan 1/08. I now read NR's friday DFO letter, and I am left believing that there is no age 65 as yet...and they will continue with 2 year extensions. Which is it?? 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Madrid
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Howdy apple,
as far as i can see, if you are honkie based then retirement age at the moment is still 55 and the only extensions will be for C&T's..if your on a base then it depends on the law of the land...age 65 isnt law here as i understand it so at the moment HK based guys can only work to 55...
However, i am sure that magically in the next year, RA65 will come into force here as well,
as far as i can see, if you are honkie based then retirement age at the moment is still 55 and the only extensions will be for C&T's..if your on a base then it depends on the law of the land...age 65 isnt law here as i understand it so at the moment HK based guys can only work to 55...
However, i am sure that magically in the next year, RA65 will come into force here as well,
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bad Air Sucker,
It is not quite that simple.
Age 65 on a base only WHEN the base goes on shore. 1 Apr 08 for LHR. No firm dates yet for any other bases.
More uncertainty!
It is not quite that simple.
Age 65 on a base only WHEN the base goes on shore. 1 Apr 08 for LHR. No firm dates yet for any other bases.
More uncertainty!
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Madrid
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As the COS stands now, if you take a base you go onto Cos 08 which means that you will have to abide by the RA in that base, thats how i read it..not sure if its the correct interpretation...
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: www
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok, thanks everyone for your replies. Unfortunately I am now no more enlightened about this issue than before. Nick and Phil, could you kindly both get together and agree on ONE notice to crew on this issue? Simple question: 'if someone is already on a base, does age 65 apply from Jan1 ? The fact that this is unclear is typical of the poor communication skills prevelant in this company.
clear as mud
It's obvious that 65 applies when the company goes 'ON SHORE' as they are then legally compelled to adhere to the law of that country(u.k. first)....something they've been avoiding (abusing) for nearly 15 years.
If you are (non C and T) 'A' scale in hong kong then you must retire at 55 and take a freighter payscale extension beyond 55 until the law changes regarding 65 retirement.
Of course there will magically be 'no available basings' for hong kong a-scale crew while the exchange rate continues to deteriorate.
I love the way P. 'Skywalker' phrased his notice to crew ...how the company was 'compelled to extend retirement age to 65' and how they magnanimously retained much of the 'AOA input'.
If it smells like it...it sure is!
If you are (non C and T) 'A' scale in hong kong then you must retire at 55 and take a freighter payscale extension beyond 55 until the law changes regarding 65 retirement.
Of course there will magically be 'no available basings' for hong kong a-scale crew while the exchange rate continues to deteriorate.
I love the way P. 'Skywalker' phrased his notice to crew ...how the company was 'compelled to extend retirement age to 65' and how they magnanimously retained much of the 'AOA input'.
If it smells like it...it sure is!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: far east
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's obvious that 65 applies when the company goes 'ON SHORE' as they are then legally compelled to adhere to the law of that country(u.k. first)....something they've been avoiding (abusing) for nearly 15 years.
If you are (non C and T) 'A' scale in hong kong then you must retire at 55 and take a freighter payscale extension beyond 55 until the law changes regarding 65 retirement.
Of course there will magically be 'no available basings' for hong kong a-scale crew while the exchange rate continues to deteriorate.
I love the way P. 'Skywalker' phrased his notice to crew ...how the company was 'compelled to extend retirement age to 65' and how they magnanimously retained much of the 'AOA input'.
If it smells like it...it sure is!
If you are (non C and T) 'A' scale in hong kong then you must retire at 55 and take a freighter payscale extension beyond 55 until the law changes regarding 65 retirement.
Of course there will magically be 'no available basings' for hong kong a-scale crew while the exchange rate continues to deteriorate.
I love the way P. 'Skywalker' phrased his notice to crew ...how the company was 'compelled to extend retirement age to 65' and how they magnanimously retained much of the 'AOA input'.
If it smells like it...it sure is!
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RA65 base - RA55 hkg
Lets see if I can unmuddy the waters;-)
Take a base after 1/1/08 - retirement age is 65. Stay in HKG on CoS99, RA55.
Now for the confusing bits. If you are on a base as of 31/12/07 you can stay on CoS99 or sign CoS08. But once on-shoring occurs, you will have to sign over to CoS08 or move back to HKG.
Even though there is no immediate legal imperative for it do so, CX is taking the position that all basings from 1/1/08 are with RA65 even though it might take another year or so to form the onshore company. Only those already on bases not wanting RA65 will be effected. They can stay on CoS99 till onshoring occurs....Apr08 for UK and sometime after for the rest.
For FOs in Australia, for example, if they can delay signing over to CoS08 till onshoring actually occurs, then they will be eligible to receive bypass pay subject to seniority whilst they remain on CoS99.
Hopefully clearer than mud;-/
Take a base after 1/1/08 - retirement age is 65. Stay in HKG on CoS99, RA55.
Now for the confusing bits. If you are on a base as of 31/12/07 you can stay on CoS99 or sign CoS08. But once on-shoring occurs, you will have to sign over to CoS08 or move back to HKG.
Even though there is no immediate legal imperative for it do so, CX is taking the position that all basings from 1/1/08 are with RA65 even though it might take another year or so to form the onshore company. Only those already on bases not wanting RA65 will be effected. They can stay on CoS99 till onshoring occurs....Apr08 for UK and sometime after for the rest.
For FOs in Australia, for example, if they can delay signing over to CoS08 till onshoring actually occurs, then they will be eligible to receive bypass pay subject to seniority whilst they remain on CoS99.
Hopefully clearer than mud;-/
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RA 65 On A Base
NC,
Much as I hope what you have said is correct regarding the option to sign over to COS 08 on 1 Jan if already based, I have not seen this in writing from CX.
PW said in his release that age 65 would only come into force as a legal requirement following "On Shoring" of individual bases.
Am I missing something?
Much as I hope what you have said is correct regarding the option to sign over to COS 08 on 1 Jan if already based, I have not seen this in writing from CX.
PW said in his release that age 65 would only come into force as a legal requirement following "On Shoring" of individual bases.
Am I missing something?
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mostly Harmless
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
...and another thing. When on-shoring does occur, what will be the precise mechanics of this signing over to CoS08 if one is already on a base? Will we have to sign, or merely stay on CoS99 and be granted the retirement age of the base by right of location, not contract.
When I joined, I had to sign 3 letters: the first was joining CX, the second was to immediately resign, and the third to join CXF. I often wondered what would have happened if I'd said, "Actually, no, I don't want to sign the other 2."
If only the 49ers hadn't happened, this would all have been so much easier...
BB
When I joined, I had to sign 3 letters: the first was joining CX, the second was to immediately resign, and the third to join CXF. I often wondered what would have happened if I'd said, "Actually, no, I don't want to sign the other 2."
If only the 49ers hadn't happened, this would all have been so much easier...
BB
