Daily Telex, 16 May...WARNING...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christep
Are you a failed Swire Prince then?? Is that the reason for your whining on this forum. Quite frankly we are not interested in having a discussion with you. Call it narrow minded - always a good argument that - claiming superiority, we are NOT interested in your opinions.
Are you a failed Swire Prince then?? Is that the reason for your whining on this forum. Quite frankly we are not interested in having a discussion with you. Call it narrow minded - always a good argument that - claiming superiority, we are NOT interested in your opinions.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I genuinely feel sorry for you SAD. If my past mistakes are all that keeps you going then god help you when I no longer work for CX. You obviously know who I am so I invite you to call me - my number hasn't changed since we were on the GC together!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shifting
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christep
(The following may not be representative of the general CX view)
Your remarks give new meaning to the phrase “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
Cantabrigian (Honours), you say.I happen to know a bit about the rigorous standard of scholarship that that entails. However, you seem to have strayed, significantly, from that standard. You seem to have taken a few bits of information and drawn a blanket (and in this case, erroneous) conclusion from them.
Being an airline passenger, and reading the SCMP, and feeling that you know the story of being an airline pilot, is a bit like watching a show on your personal entertainment system, and suggesting that you now know everything about the movie industry.
Simplistic analyses usually do nothing so much as reveal how much one is oblivious of (or ignorant of) a situation.
It is quite clear that there are factors involved, about which you have no idea; but you seem unprepared to simply say, “Oh. I didn’t know that. That does make a difference.” I suspect that your bold statements have issued a cheque that your scant fund of information can’t cash, and you don’t know how to extricate yourself, gracefully, from this minefield (please pardon the mixed metaphor).
You equate your US$200,000 annual salary to that of a Captain’s, and you point out that, while very few executives make very large salaries, there are thousands of pilots around the world wanting a great deal of money. Are you aware that, of the 2300 pilots at CX, the vast majority can’t even relate to the kind of money you make. You seem to know what a senior CX Captain makes (although, contrary to your claims in previous posts, most don’t have the cushy HK tax rates, or the housing allowance), so you must also know what a CX FO makes, and what a CX SO makes (almost all were Captains, before coming to CX). You say that you are a mid-level executive, earning your US$200K. Presumably, those above you are earning more. Why, then, do you think that at CX, those at the top should not earn more than you, a mid-level executive? And why do you fail to mention that mid-level CX pilots earn a fraction of what you do?
You remark on how few hours pilots work, compared with you. Do you have any idea why pilots work the monthly hours that they do? Surely, you must know that pilots are restricted as to the number of hours they can work in a month. Do you have any idea why? Do you have any knowledge about the dynamics of fatigue (and I’m not talking about a rigorous board meeting, where you finally decide that you all need a break)? Do you know what it is like to man a 13-hour night flight (other than to sit in First Class, and watch the tele)? Unless you are a heart surgeon (and if you are, more power to you!), do you know what it is like to have responsibility for the lives of 400 people (a bit different from having responsibility for the money of 400 people)? Food for thought.
Incidentally, what is your mandatory retirement age, and how often must you pass a rigorous physical examination? Oh, and how often do you have to prove your competence, under the watchful eyes of an examiner (failing to lead the company to financial ruin doesn’t count)?
I seem to recall that Cambridge required answers to most of the questions before drawing a conclusion.
All of the foregoing is an attempt to suggest that, if you want to present yourself as someone knowledgeable about the lot of CX pilots, you actually sit down and talk, at length, to some CX pilots, with a view to learning about the pilots’ situation, rather than telling them that, “they don’t know how lucky they are”.
Of course you won’t get a totally unbiased picture, but you will reduce your chances of sounding like you got your information from the Cliff Notes version of What it’s like to be a CX pilot.
I was going to suggest that you accept Apple Tree Yard’s very attractive proposition, but I see that you have already declined.
With all due respect,
CW
Your remarks give new meaning to the phrase “A little knowledge is a dangerous thing.”
Cantabrigian (Honours), you say.I happen to know a bit about the rigorous standard of scholarship that that entails. However, you seem to have strayed, significantly, from that standard. You seem to have taken a few bits of information and drawn a blanket (and in this case, erroneous) conclusion from them.
Being an airline passenger, and reading the SCMP, and feeling that you know the story of being an airline pilot, is a bit like watching a show on your personal entertainment system, and suggesting that you now know everything about the movie industry.
Simplistic analyses usually do nothing so much as reveal how much one is oblivious of (or ignorant of) a situation.
It is quite clear that there are factors involved, about which you have no idea; but you seem unprepared to simply say, “Oh. I didn’t know that. That does make a difference.” I suspect that your bold statements have issued a cheque that your scant fund of information can’t cash, and you don’t know how to extricate yourself, gracefully, from this minefield (please pardon the mixed metaphor).
You equate your US$200,000 annual salary to that of a Captain’s, and you point out that, while very few executives make very large salaries, there are thousands of pilots around the world wanting a great deal of money. Are you aware that, of the 2300 pilots at CX, the vast majority can’t even relate to the kind of money you make. You seem to know what a senior CX Captain makes (although, contrary to your claims in previous posts, most don’t have the cushy HK tax rates, or the housing allowance), so you must also know what a CX FO makes, and what a CX SO makes (almost all were Captains, before coming to CX). You say that you are a mid-level executive, earning your US$200K. Presumably, those above you are earning more. Why, then, do you think that at CX, those at the top should not earn more than you, a mid-level executive? And why do you fail to mention that mid-level CX pilots earn a fraction of what you do?
You remark on how few hours pilots work, compared with you. Do you have any idea why pilots work the monthly hours that they do? Surely, you must know that pilots are restricted as to the number of hours they can work in a month. Do you have any idea why? Do you have any knowledge about the dynamics of fatigue (and I’m not talking about a rigorous board meeting, where you finally decide that you all need a break)? Do you know what it is like to man a 13-hour night flight (other than to sit in First Class, and watch the tele)? Unless you are a heart surgeon (and if you are, more power to you!), do you know what it is like to have responsibility for the lives of 400 people (a bit different from having responsibility for the money of 400 people)? Food for thought.
Incidentally, what is your mandatory retirement age, and how often must you pass a rigorous physical examination? Oh, and how often do you have to prove your competence, under the watchful eyes of an examiner (failing to lead the company to financial ruin doesn’t count)?
I seem to recall that Cambridge required answers to most of the questions before drawing a conclusion.
All of the foregoing is an attempt to suggest that, if you want to present yourself as someone knowledgeable about the lot of CX pilots, you actually sit down and talk, at length, to some CX pilots, with a view to learning about the pilots’ situation, rather than telling them that, “they don’t know how lucky they are”.
Of course you won’t get a totally unbiased picture, but you will reduce your chances of sounding like you got your information from the Cliff Notes version of What it’s like to be a CX pilot.
I was going to suggest that you accept Apple Tree Yard’s very attractive proposition, but I see that you have already declined.
With all due respect,
CW
Join Date: May 2002
Location: the fatigue curve
Posts: 129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diamond status
Last time I held it, I only needed to do 4 round the world business class trips in one year. When I stopped flying as SLF it then took me over 2 years to lose it despite not using it at all.
Based on my personal experience
I'd suggest to you that Diamond is actually quite easily achievable for a true travelling professional. It all depends on whether you are paying or the company is.
For instance many are paid an allowance and they choose to pocket the difference between an economy fare and the fare they are paid for.
I know a number of Professionals and consequently it suggest's to me that my opinion of how easy diamond is achievable is still correct.
60-80 hour office working weeks. Yep I've done them too.
I'd suggest to you that the only difference in your level of stress in that style of job vs an airline pilot is --- NOTHING . You might have a different type of stress ie office politics/ trading/ fatigue. Otherwise we are both equally worn out at the end of the month.
The other standard arguement. The accountant/lawyer/doctor has to read changes to legislation/operating procedures in their own time. Guess what - so does the airline pilot.
I've had 60-80 hour rosters that only give me 8-10 days off a month (that equals 4-5 weekends in a month - what a suprise)
SLF vs the front seat. (I've done both)
My opinion - It's much easy in the back. You can get on tired and go straight to sleep if you wish. You get the choice of what timezone to put yourself on. You can be drunk or sober. Sometimes you can't, you might have a presentation to work on. But at the end of the day you have choice if you manage your time.
I still think that the best description of this airline job is
Lock yourself in a small bathroom for 16 hours and turn on some radio hash background noise at a loud evel that requires you to want to use earplugs for fatigue and hearing protection. You are not allowed to have anything to drink (simulates the drying effect). You are only allowed 2 small TV dinners in that 16 hours.
Finally Pay rates - You suggest the airline pilots are one of the few jobs that have pay increments to match years worked. Well the other industries I've worked suggests to me that this practice is spread wider than you might perceive.
But at the end of the day this is all an opinion, just like yours is.
Based on my personal experience
I'd suggest to you that Diamond is actually quite easily achievable for a true travelling professional. It all depends on whether you are paying or the company is.
For instance many are paid an allowance and they choose to pocket the difference between an economy fare and the fare they are paid for.
I know a number of Professionals and consequently it suggest's to me that my opinion of how easy diamond is achievable is still correct.
60-80 hour office working weeks. Yep I've done them too.
I'd suggest to you that the only difference in your level of stress in that style of job vs an airline pilot is --- NOTHING . You might have a different type of stress ie office politics/ trading/ fatigue. Otherwise we are both equally worn out at the end of the month.
The other standard arguement. The accountant/lawyer/doctor has to read changes to legislation/operating procedures in their own time. Guess what - so does the airline pilot.
I've had 60-80 hour rosters that only give me 8-10 days off a month (that equals 4-5 weekends in a month - what a suprise)
SLF vs the front seat. (I've done both)
My opinion - It's much easy in the back. You can get on tired and go straight to sleep if you wish. You get the choice of what timezone to put yourself on. You can be drunk or sober. Sometimes you can't, you might have a presentation to work on. But at the end of the day you have choice if you manage your time.
I still think that the best description of this airline job is
Lock yourself in a small bathroom for 16 hours and turn on some radio hash background noise at a loud evel that requires you to want to use earplugs for fatigue and hearing protection. You are not allowed to have anything to drink (simulates the drying effect). You are only allowed 2 small TV dinners in that 16 hours.
Finally Pay rates - You suggest the airline pilots are one of the few jobs that have pay increments to match years worked. Well the other industries I've worked suggests to me that this practice is spread wider than you might perceive.
But at the end of the day this is all an opinion, just like yours is.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: crewbag
Age: 51
Posts: 318
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christep....
I'll gladly make a deal with you. Allow me to play by the same rules as you do. I WANT to be able to offer my services to the company offering the best package, I want to be a free comodity.
I've got a couple of friends working as lawyers for fairly decent lawfirms; and their employer knows that if they don't pay them market rate, they'll join someone who does. The new company will look at these guys' experience, be that 4 years of international finance deals or ship brokerage, and indeed pay them their net worth based on that experience. What they're not gonna do is to offer them a starting salary 100,000HKD/month less than their current emplyer, with the promise of a rising pay-scale which in 18 years time will put them back to their current salary.
But that's the reality for us. If no airline had a preset rising payscale, we would be free to move between airlines and play them against each other in hopes of getting the best deal from our experience. While I realize that you do not understand it, the job we do in our first year is not the same job we do in our tenth year, and that very experience is what is keeping our aiplanes on time, keeping our fuel burn to a minimum, and what is keeping us from repetedly making the same costly mistakes over and over again.
You're comparing apples and oranges here, because you do not understand the pivotal importance of seniority. Remove the payscales and seniority system, and you might even have a point.
.
As I understand it, when you are talking about increases, that means moving all the points on the pay scale upwards, in addition to the increase you get automatically each year just for holding on to exactly the same job.
Those of you who have never worked in any other field may not appreciate how unusual this is and how envious many people are of you getting, say, 15% more money now than you did 6 years ago for doing exactly the same job
Those of you who have never worked in any other field may not appreciate how unusual this is and how envious many people are of you getting, say, 15% more money now than you did 6 years ago for doing exactly the same job
I've got a couple of friends working as lawyers for fairly decent lawfirms; and their employer knows that if they don't pay them market rate, they'll join someone who does. The new company will look at these guys' experience, be that 4 years of international finance deals or ship brokerage, and indeed pay them their net worth based on that experience. What they're not gonna do is to offer them a starting salary 100,000HKD/month less than their current emplyer, with the promise of a rising pay-scale which in 18 years time will put them back to their current salary.
But that's the reality for us. If no airline had a preset rising payscale, we would be free to move between airlines and play them against each other in hopes of getting the best deal from our experience. While I realize that you do not understand it, the job we do in our first year is not the same job we do in our tenth year, and that very experience is what is keeping our aiplanes on time, keeping our fuel burn to a minimum, and what is keeping us from repetedly making the same costly mistakes over and over again.
You're comparing apples and oranges here, because you do not understand the pivotal importance of seniority. Remove the payscales and seniority system, and you might even have a point.
.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,096
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My brother in law got a 1/1 or equivalent at Cambridge too, went on to MSc, PhD and is a brilliant academic and untouchable in his chosen field but sadly has a woefully inadequate grasp of reality.
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Away
Posts: 300
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My bro is with CX, which is why I'm reading this thread; I'm with SQ. Bona fides out of the way, this guy is a lost idiot. Ignore him. He will eventually be recalled to his village. What was my clue? You mean, apart from his first post? Pretending to speak for the rest of the travelling public in terms of acceptance of pilotless airplanes had a bearing, as did self-aggrandizing about Cambridge. Go back to your village, idiot.
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 606
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And on the Cambridge question, I didn't bring the matter up - someone else suggested that I might have not achieved much academically, so I was simply putting him right.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Shifting
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christep
Would you say that it is fair and accurate to state that, although you have spawned this debate, you respond very quickly, when you think you can score points, but ignore arguments which seem to pose a problem for your position?
CW
CW
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Mostly Harmless
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Personally I cannot see the fully automated thingy happening. If something goes wrong, I want someone up the front...hang on, I mean in the flight deck who has as much interest in staying alive as I have.
Back to thread, yes, the fuel warnings are hard to take at face value what with hedging and surcharges to take into account. Hard times have a habit of being used against the workforce. When we have to tighten our corporate belts, we are asked for cutbacks, but how many are returned once the lean times are over? Even in the forces we had Leave Travel Warrants. These were then changed to a 'Get You Home' Scheme, which meant that no-one was surprised when a couple of years later the admin side were able to use the amended title to remove the entitlement from the married personnel living close to base - they didn't need to 'get home' as they were already there.
Personally, in the last 7 years or so I've seen 49 people fired with no D&G procedure (wasn't it 52?), been treated like a 10 year old by trainers/checkers who hide their inability behind a management position, and have seen my health deteriorate with long-term fatigue. Nothing would surprise me; like others I will be squeezed until such time as I choose to move on.
The Box
Back to thread, yes, the fuel warnings are hard to take at face value what with hedging and surcharges to take into account. Hard times have a habit of being used against the workforce. When we have to tighten our corporate belts, we are asked for cutbacks, but how many are returned once the lean times are over? Even in the forces we had Leave Travel Warrants. These were then changed to a 'Get You Home' Scheme, which meant that no-one was surprised when a couple of years later the admin side were able to use the amended title to remove the entitlement from the married personnel living close to base - they didn't need to 'get home' as they were already there.
Personally, in the last 7 years or so I've seen 49 people fired with no D&G procedure (wasn't it 52?), been treated like a 10 year old by trainers/checkers who hide their inability behind a management position, and have seen my health deteriorate with long-term fatigue. Nothing would surprise me; like others I will be squeezed until such time as I choose to move on.
The Box
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Christep,
Nice thing about an anonymous forum, I can say I am Superman however no one will be able to discount it, much like your Cambridge claim. Most likely you went to Cantridge but were too stupid to realize the difference.
Nice thing about an anonymous forum, I can say I am Superman however no one will be able to discount it, much like your Cambridge claim. Most likely you went to Cantridge but were too stupid to realize the difference.
Nemo Me Impune Lacessit
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Derbyshire, England.
Posts: 4,096
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main reason that the flight deck will never, ever be fully automated on a commercial pax aircraft is security and nothing to do with advancing technology.
It would be all too easy for terrorists to disable the legitimate ground control and substitute it's own with disastrous results, (and software designed to prevent this happening can also be disabled).
As long as aircraft leave the ground and contain human fare paying pax they will have human pilots aboard.
It would be all too easy for terrorists to disable the legitimate ground control and substitute it's own with disastrous results, (and software designed to prevent this happening can also be disabled).
As long as aircraft leave the ground and contain human fare paying pax they will have human pilots aboard.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We start at well bellow what our profession should earn.
You start at what the company is willing to pay, nothing more, nor less.
Don't like it?
Apply somewhere else.
OR, you could be just like the BA pilots...stomp your feet, propose 'union' action, then retire to the corner, defeated...just like the whimps that the BA pilots are, and likely will remain.
