AOA funding of UK retirement age appeal
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, it’s beginning to feel like I’m writing a book, but here goes…
Why didn’t we older blokes say something 10 years ago? Well, because…it wasn’t an option then. There was ONE common COS for all pilots. The rules were clear and inviolate! Everyone had a good provident fund, good pay and conditions. Nobody was allowed to stay beyond 55. There was only the one set of rules.
The rules also said junior crew were not allowed to jump seniority and do an early freighter command. Those of us, who were here then, can remember that the notion of jumping your mates in the Command queue was treated as nothing short of Blasphemy. It was forbidden by the Union, and those that did were shunned. ASL and early commands had a significant impact on many of us who ultimately had our Commands delayed for years (five years for me) with no bypass pay or compensation. If you weren’t here, then try to imagine telling your best mate you were going to jump him in the command queue. Friendships were ruined. Remember?
But undeniably, the game was beginning to change, whether we wanted to believe it or not.
Over the next 10 years or so, dozens of different COS and conditions evolved. To the point where today, quite frankly, it’s a mess! Today there are no longer one set of rules, but rather many options available for both the younger crew and older crew that were not available 10 years ago. These changes have mostly been for the junior crews, but for several years now, the older crew have been watching as large numbers continue to work beyond 55.
So naturally, given the wide range of packages out there, everyone examines his/her personal circumstances in that context. Should I take an early Command, should I work beyond 55, should I go on a base, take a joker, resign and rejoin on COS 08 so I can take a base, what are your conditions, what are my conditions, what are his conditions, etc, etc, etc. It’s a mess!
Many younger pilots have been all over the map while exploring different COS and career options within Cathay, because things have changed, industrial relations have soured, and different options are now commonplace. So, given the history, is it really fair for you same people, who have personally explored different options to which you joined on, disparage me and my mates nearing 55 for exploring the options open to us? Let’s be fair, honest, and consistent here.
What we need is a common set of conditions, like we used to have. By any moral standard, the Company must be convinced that a common set of working conditions is necessary for a stable and happy work force to exist. Otherwise, there will be an ultimate cost. Until then, until the AOA can sit down with the Company and hammer a deal out, well… we are all just trying to do what’s best for our families and us.
Why aren’t some of us better prepared for age 55? As I said in a earlier post, I marvel at how quickly 55 is approaching, and I can’t help but remember my earlier days, when all the senior pilots warned my group of how quickly the time will fly by. Quite frankly, I thought they were nuts!
So, in our defense, there are many reasons we might want to work beyond 55, but in summary most individuals nearing 55 would probably offer a variation of the following themes. Among them the degradation of pay and conditions over the years; or perhaps living in a high tax jurisdiction on a base; or, perhaps the current financial meltdown. Whatever. These and many other reasons prevail as to why the hopes of me and most people nearing the magic 55 may have waned.
As well, just look at the number of people who have extended or returned on reduced conditions. Canvass them and you’ll hear real life reasons as to why they admittedly "failed" retirement”. OK, we can self righteously disparage their failure, or we can ask ourselves, quite honestly, “there but for the grace of God…”
Quite honestly, and as I’ve said, I now feel that 55 is a ridiculously young age to retire. I love my job, I’m good at it and I’ve been doing it for 35 years, so given my explanation above, why should I go and do something else, or “get a life” as some of you say. Well…because this is my life!! And I like it, thank you very much, just the way it is? As long as I’m not hurting anybody, I see it as an eventual benefit open to us all. It may be you one day that needs or wants to continue beyond 55, it may not.
So I feel quite justified stating that this option is good for all members, young and old. The ability to continue to work, save, feed your family, etc. As long as bypass pay is given to those who deserve it.
If you’re entitled to BPP you should get it. Who decides who gets BPP (to answer Loopdelop)? Well, your COS decides. As I’m sure the labour tribunal will agree, very shortly, in the case brought before it by the S/O’s.
So given my explanation above, and the current wide range of options available to all crew, young and older, would it be fair for the AOA to only support the junior pilots in their personal struggles, desires, wants, and needs? Or should it support the entire membership and hammer out a deal that benefits us all? A common set of conditions that recognize fair compensation, i.e. BPP, and the right to work beyond 55 for us all!
P.S. to Dragon69, to answer your first point in your last post: Maybe there can be peace in Gaza if the bad guys stopped firing thousands of rockets and killing innocent civilians in Israel…..but let’s not go there!
Why didn’t we older blokes say something 10 years ago? Well, because…it wasn’t an option then. There was ONE common COS for all pilots. The rules were clear and inviolate! Everyone had a good provident fund, good pay and conditions. Nobody was allowed to stay beyond 55. There was only the one set of rules.
The rules also said junior crew were not allowed to jump seniority and do an early freighter command. Those of us, who were here then, can remember that the notion of jumping your mates in the Command queue was treated as nothing short of Blasphemy. It was forbidden by the Union, and those that did were shunned. ASL and early commands had a significant impact on many of us who ultimately had our Commands delayed for years (five years for me) with no bypass pay or compensation. If you weren’t here, then try to imagine telling your best mate you were going to jump him in the command queue. Friendships were ruined. Remember?
But undeniably, the game was beginning to change, whether we wanted to believe it or not.
Over the next 10 years or so, dozens of different COS and conditions evolved. To the point where today, quite frankly, it’s a mess! Today there are no longer one set of rules, but rather many options available for both the younger crew and older crew that were not available 10 years ago. These changes have mostly been for the junior crews, but for several years now, the older crew have been watching as large numbers continue to work beyond 55.
So naturally, given the wide range of packages out there, everyone examines his/her personal circumstances in that context. Should I take an early Command, should I work beyond 55, should I go on a base, take a joker, resign and rejoin on COS 08 so I can take a base, what are your conditions, what are my conditions, what are his conditions, etc, etc, etc. It’s a mess!
Many younger pilots have been all over the map while exploring different COS and career options within Cathay, because things have changed, industrial relations have soured, and different options are now commonplace. So, given the history, is it really fair for you same people, who have personally explored different options to which you joined on, disparage me and my mates nearing 55 for exploring the options open to us? Let’s be fair, honest, and consistent here.
What we need is a common set of conditions, like we used to have. By any moral standard, the Company must be convinced that a common set of working conditions is necessary for a stable and happy work force to exist. Otherwise, there will be an ultimate cost. Until then, until the AOA can sit down with the Company and hammer a deal out, well… we are all just trying to do what’s best for our families and us.
Why aren’t some of us better prepared for age 55? As I said in a earlier post, I marvel at how quickly 55 is approaching, and I can’t help but remember my earlier days, when all the senior pilots warned my group of how quickly the time will fly by. Quite frankly, I thought they were nuts!
So, in our defense, there are many reasons we might want to work beyond 55, but in summary most individuals nearing 55 would probably offer a variation of the following themes. Among them the degradation of pay and conditions over the years; or perhaps living in a high tax jurisdiction on a base; or, perhaps the current financial meltdown. Whatever. These and many other reasons prevail as to why the hopes of me and most people nearing the magic 55 may have waned.
As well, just look at the number of people who have extended or returned on reduced conditions. Canvass them and you’ll hear real life reasons as to why they admittedly "failed" retirement”. OK, we can self righteously disparage their failure, or we can ask ourselves, quite honestly, “there but for the grace of God…”
Quite honestly, and as I’ve said, I now feel that 55 is a ridiculously young age to retire. I love my job, I’m good at it and I’ve been doing it for 35 years, so given my explanation above, why should I go and do something else, or “get a life” as some of you say. Well…because this is my life!! And I like it, thank you very much, just the way it is? As long as I’m not hurting anybody, I see it as an eventual benefit open to us all. It may be you one day that needs or wants to continue beyond 55, it may not.
So I feel quite justified stating that this option is good for all members, young and old. The ability to continue to work, save, feed your family, etc. As long as bypass pay is given to those who deserve it.
If you’re entitled to BPP you should get it. Who decides who gets BPP (to answer Loopdelop)? Well, your COS decides. As I’m sure the labour tribunal will agree, very shortly, in the case brought before it by the S/O’s.
So given my explanation above, and the current wide range of options available to all crew, young and older, would it be fair for the AOA to only support the junior pilots in their personal struggles, desires, wants, and needs? Or should it support the entire membership and hammer out a deal that benefits us all? A common set of conditions that recognize fair compensation, i.e. BPP, and the right to work beyond 55 for us all!
P.S. to Dragon69, to answer your first point in your last post: Maybe there can be peace in Gaza if the bad guys stopped firing thousands of rockets and killing innocent civilians in Israel…..but let’s not go there!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raven11
I nice post that explains your position. It disappoints and frustrates that many critisize those who wish to fly beyond 55; the most vaild reason is they want to and coincidently the company wants (some of) them to.... the rest is their private business.
The problem is the company will only offer flying to all over 55 year olds when the pilot body drop the BPP. Unless you are promoting that as an idea (I believe you are not) we have a stalemate. Do you or anyone else have any idea as to how break this stalemate?
PS.. who wants to live to 100.... every 99 year old!!
The problem is the company will only offer flying to all over 55 year olds when the pilot body drop the BPP. Unless you are promoting that as an idea (I believe you are not) we have a stalemate. Do you or anyone else have any idea as to how break this stalemate?
PS.. who wants to live to 100.... every 99 year old!!
Dragon69
You're quite entitled to your version of what being a Captain means on your flight deck but spare us the lectures about the use of the word 'Captain' or 'Commander'.
I was offered an extension. I took it. Why I took it is my business and nothing to do with you. Quite a few people were given extensions 10 years ago too.
Normal retirement age is a legal right as life has moved on from the days of the 'mill owner' (!). Age discrimination is illegal in most countries.
The transition may extend a few people in their time to Command but so would a mass exodus from the Training Department.
65RA is coming. Get over it but please do us a favour and resign at 55 so that you can enjoy your life/friends/family/hobbies etc.
Bet you don't!
You're quite entitled to your version of what being a Captain means on your flight deck but spare us the lectures about the use of the word 'Captain' or 'Commander'.
I was offered an extension. I took it. Why I took it is my business and nothing to do with you. Quite a few people were given extensions 10 years ago too.
Normal retirement age is a legal right as life has moved on from the days of the 'mill owner' (!). Age discrimination is illegal in most countries.
The transition may extend a few people in their time to Command but so would a mass exodus from the Training Department.
65RA is coming. Get over it but please do us a favour and resign at 55 so that you can enjoy your life/friends/family/hobbies etc.
Bet you don't!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Raven11
I was here when people were jumping seniority to take an early freighter command with ASL. It was a blow and a reminder to us all that principals and moral values took a back seat to personal gains.
You're quite right, up until then we had one CoS and therefore one goal. With the introduction of bases, B scale, ASL, etc.. people took what suited them the most at that given time, and it was the start of a downward spiral.
Very fair comment and most, including our junior crews, will agree with you.
Personally I cannot fathom how one would want to work beyond 55, certainly not in the current climate. Rostering, FTLM, every aspect of our CoS is being eroded to get the most productivity. Do I really want to do an overnight Delhi followed by an overnight Dubai when I am 60? Perhaps you are on base and enjoy a slightly better roster, but what if three man long haul is introduced, or the threshold is increased to 92 hours, would you be so keen to extend??
Although it is a difficult task, I hope an agreement is reached that will satisfy old and new.
For those that want to extend beyond 55, I am always reminded of a letter written by the late Capt. Matheson to the AoA. I am sure you recall that letter Raven, but for some of our younger crews it is a poignant reminder of how precious life is and how there is more outside of Cathay.
The gist of the letter is that frustrated and fed up with Cathay he made a spur of the moment decision to leave Cathay in the mid 90s. He eventually found a job as a fire bombing pilot in an old converted WW2 bomber and having a time of his life. But for many years he often looked back and pondered whether leaving his A scale salary was the right move. That question that had been nagging him for some time was clearly answered the day he was diagnosed with cancer. Ultimately whithout any doubt he realized that his spur of the moment decision was the best decision he has ever made.
You may feel ridiculously young, but your body isn't! If you were told you had five years to live, how would you live your life?
I was here when people were jumping seniority to take an early freighter command with ASL. It was a blow and a reminder to us all that principals and moral values took a back seat to personal gains.
You're quite right, up until then we had one CoS and therefore one goal. With the introduction of bases, B scale, ASL, etc.. people took what suited them the most at that given time, and it was the start of a downward spiral.
So given my explanation above, and the current wide range of options available to all crew, young and older, would it be fair for the AOA to only support the junior pilots in their personal struggles, desires, wants, and needs? Or should it support the entire membership and hammer out a deal that benefits us all? A common set of conditions that recognize fair compensation, i.e. BPP, and the right to work beyond 55 for us all!
Personally I cannot fathom how one would want to work beyond 55, certainly not in the current climate. Rostering, FTLM, every aspect of our CoS is being eroded to get the most productivity. Do I really want to do an overnight Delhi followed by an overnight Dubai when I am 60? Perhaps you are on base and enjoy a slightly better roster, but what if three man long haul is introduced, or the threshold is increased to 92 hours, would you be so keen to extend??
Although it is a difficult task, I hope an agreement is reached that will satisfy old and new.
For those that want to extend beyond 55, I am always reminded of a letter written by the late Capt. Matheson to the AoA. I am sure you recall that letter Raven, but for some of our younger crews it is a poignant reminder of how precious life is and how there is more outside of Cathay.
The gist of the letter is that frustrated and fed up with Cathay he made a spur of the moment decision to leave Cathay in the mid 90s. He eventually found a job as a fire bombing pilot in an old converted WW2 bomber and having a time of his life. But for many years he often looked back and pondered whether leaving his A scale salary was the right move. That question that had been nagging him for some time was clearly answered the day he was diagnosed with cancer. Ultimately whithout any doubt he realized that his spur of the moment decision was the best decision he has ever made.
You may feel ridiculously young, but your body isn't! If you were told you had five years to live, how would you live your life?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Get over it but please do us a favour and resign at 55 so that you can enjoy your life/friends/family/hobbies etc.
Bet you don't!
Bet you don't!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normal retirement age is a legal right as life has moved on from the days of the 'mill owner' (!). Age discrimination is illegal in most countries
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
StillAlbotross
Spare me your sarcasm. Either post mature comments or non at all.
When you or the S/O's get BPP, it will be more than I got, and you will lose nothing. As well, you will have the same option to continue to work when you turn 55. In other words, you'll have it all.
Unless it really isn't bypass pay that bothers you but rather the delay in upgrade.
If you want, I could tell you what I was told to do when I complained about the delay to my upgrade.
Please reread my earlier post.
Spare me your sarcasm. Either post mature comments or non at all.
When you or the S/O's get BPP, it will be more than I got, and you will lose nothing. As well, you will have the same option to continue to work when you turn 55. In other words, you'll have it all.
Unless it really isn't bypass pay that bothers you but rather the delay in upgrade.
If you want, I could tell you what I was told to do when I complained about the delay to my upgrade.
Please reread my earlier post.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: England
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jagman, enforcing a contract that ends at 55 is not age discrimination, it's exactly what it says on the tin, the end of a contract freely entered into by both parties as me learned friends say.... what IS age discrimination, certainly here in UK, is to pay someone less for the same job due to his/her age....... perhaps the HKAOA is fighting on the wrong front........ 
Kits
Yes I agree except that forcing someone to retire at age 55 is illegal in the UK. It's not the end of a contract - it's retirement from CX. The RA is 65. What you say is correct and, had the AOA shut up about where the aircraft was registered, all UK extendees would have reverted to their original salary, aircraft type, and COS once they had fulfilled certain criteria (ie if ext on freighters they had to do 3 yrs).
Having caused this problem (thread title) the least the AOA can do is to help one of its' Senior members. Yes - I know the AOA was 'only pointing out' etc etc but if they hadn't, the resulting advantage to a lot of people would have been a great start.
Yes I agree except that forcing someone to retire at age 55 is illegal in the UK. It's not the end of a contract - it's retirement from CX. The RA is 65. What you say is correct and, had the AOA shut up about where the aircraft was registered, all UK extendees would have reverted to their original salary, aircraft type, and COS once they had fulfilled certain criteria (ie if ext on freighters they had to do 3 yrs).
Having caused this problem (thread title) the least the AOA can do is to help one of its' Senior members. Yes - I know the AOA was 'only pointing out' etc etc but if they hadn't, the resulting advantage to a lot of people would have been a great start.
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jagman
It's the company that pointed out the country of a/c reg in defense of their NRA 55 case with CM.
Are you referring to the fact that the AOA pointed out that the takeover of aircrew by CX UK must be covered by TUPE regulations? If so, don't rest this against the AOA door. What PW stated in his misguided "going onshore brief" was that the conditions you state would apply to the senior crew and that all bypass pay would cease for UK based crew. This was clearly a degradation to all F/O's CoS, so an F/O friend of mine sought independent legal advice that stated the same as that which the AOA uncovered. It was going to happen under TUPE regs whether the AOA wanted it to or not!
It's the company that pointed out the country of a/c reg in defense of their NRA 55 case with CM.
Are you referring to the fact that the AOA pointed out that the takeover of aircrew by CX UK must be covered by TUPE regulations? If so, don't rest this against the AOA door. What PW stated in his misguided "going onshore brief" was that the conditions you state would apply to the senior crew and that all bypass pay would cease for UK based crew. This was clearly a degradation to all F/O's CoS, so an F/O friend of mine sought independent legal advice that stated the same as that which the AOA uncovered. It was going to happen under TUPE regs whether the AOA wanted it to or not!
Join Date: May 2006
Location: mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If time to command does increase to 14+ years, my guess there wont be many knocking on HKGs doors. I am sure there will be plenty of other opportunities out there, with short time to command, EK is one of them.
HKG was a place to come for a good career with rapid promotion, now it is just a stepping stone. So nothing to worry about there. Sure I like HKG and dont like moving. But there will be other opportunities, especially when things pick up.
You wont catch me flying long haul past 55 yrs, that's one reason I came to cx. Age 65 is upon us and will be a permanent fixture soon. I dont think cx realize that people wont come here unless they have something to offer, and now that time to upgrade equates to retirement age, my bet is most will just stay at home with their home carriers or go to the sand where the real opportunities will exist in the next up cycle.
So I give full support to the AOA upholding everyones contractual rights, which are printed in black in white. I dont however see why we support anything outside the scope of the contract. Sure it may be legal to retire at 65, but we all joined on a contract that states 55.
Good luck to all of us, in getting what we want, one way or the other though it will be at our collegues expense.
HKG was a place to come for a good career with rapid promotion, now it is just a stepping stone. So nothing to worry about there. Sure I like HKG and dont like moving. But there will be other opportunities, especially when things pick up.
You wont catch me flying long haul past 55 yrs, that's one reason I came to cx. Age 65 is upon us and will be a permanent fixture soon. I dont think cx realize that people wont come here unless they have something to offer, and now that time to upgrade equates to retirement age, my bet is most will just stay at home with their home carriers or go to the sand where the real opportunities will exist in the next up cycle.
So I give full support to the AOA upholding everyones contractual rights, which are printed in black in white. I dont however see why we support anything outside the scope of the contract. Sure it may be legal to retire at 65, but we all joined on a contract that states 55.
Good luck to all of us, in getting what we want, one way or the other though it will be at our collegues expense.
Well the way things are going I wont be able to afford to retire at 55 and then somehow live another 30+ years on.....................
I just wont be able to do it.
So if CX offer me an extension I will have no choice unfortunatly.
I just wont be able to do it.
So if CX offer me an extension I will have no choice unfortunatly.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: mars
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not a personal attack, but maybe cx or the AOA need to start running courses for personal budgets. If you cant afford to retire after a career with cx at age 55 (hkg based with housing), sounds like people are living outside what they can really afford...
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly747
True; but if a Court rules that to force someone to retire based solely on their age then the UKCAA will not be able to enforce an ICAO limit. If you pass your medical, you can fly in UK airspace at any age.
Should the ruling be a EU ruling; then the game opens right up.
Overarching all this, the UK/ EU will be obliged to lobby ICAO to remove the restriction.
But don't fret..... Jagman1 wont answer questions from a pesky Junior Officer... He's a Captain... he asks the questions.....
Should the ruling be a EU ruling; then the game opens right up.
Overarching all this, the UK/ EU will be obliged to lobby ICAO to remove the restriction.
But don't fret..... Jagman1 wont answer questions from a pesky Junior Officer... He's a Captain... he asks the questions.....
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HUMBER 10 don't be sanctimonious. You have no idea what other peoples personal situations are, you may be lucky enough to have a secure financial outlook others do not, for whatever reason that may be. Do not crow about the housing as some of you have benefited from joining at a time when the company relaxed the rules and more importantly HK relaxed the rules and took away the requirement for a 30% deposit, not the money back schemes which have benefitted some of the SO's and FO's. Luck on the date of joining, much the same as to whether you were A / B / C or D scale or whether you had / will have 3 or 9 or X years to command. Please tell me where it staes in our COS that you are guaranteed a quick time to Command. Anyway as another contributor has said I thought all this "Command" thing was bad CRM or wanting to walk around with 4 bars on all the time, when we are just joe schmoes.
For all those out there thinking the approaching 55's should be planning ahead, you do not know if they are not! Perhaps the offer of an extension was there prior to this financial bxxxs up and now it has been withdrawn. Perhaps the extension offer on degraded terms was actually better than what is on offer elsewhere and thus less stress on ones family. Perhaps some of the approaching 55's have had there COS unilaterally changed and lost financially as a result during their time as an FO.
When will you "A Scale" bashers grow up. All Captains are not on A scale and all those approaching 55 are not on A scale. Plus A Scalers have had there fair share of cuts imposed on them. How many of you on there now whinging about time to command joined during the dispute, when there was a recruitment ban nicely helping the management scxxw our COS as it was then!
For all those that do not want to fly past 55, nor do long haul great I am pleased for you, however some of us actually enjoyed our "job" so please don't put your mindset is the best or what everyone would like. If you are fit, pass the checks then RA65 it should be for those that want it.
For all those out there thinking the approaching 55's should be planning ahead, you do not know if they are not! Perhaps the offer of an extension was there prior to this financial bxxxs up and now it has been withdrawn. Perhaps the extension offer on degraded terms was actually better than what is on offer elsewhere and thus less stress on ones family. Perhaps some of the approaching 55's have had there COS unilaterally changed and lost financially as a result during their time as an FO.
When will you "A Scale" bashers grow up. All Captains are not on A scale and all those approaching 55 are not on A scale. Plus A Scalers have had there fair share of cuts imposed on them. How many of you on there now whinging about time to command joined during the dispute, when there was a recruitment ban nicely helping the management scxxw our COS as it was then!
For all those that do not want to fly past 55, nor do long haul great I am pleased for you, however some of us actually enjoyed our "job" so please don't put your mindset is the best or what everyone would like. If you are fit, pass the checks then RA65 it should be for those that want it.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iceman50
You say RA65 should be there for those who want it. Clearly, that will delay promotion for the Junior Guys. The company have indicated that they will not introduce RA65 for all until the pilot group drop the BPP clause from the contract. Should the Junior Guys "suck it up" or do you have a solution to break the stalemate?
Jagman1..... are you up early or going to bed late?
.. oops.. another question
Jagman1..... are you up early or going to bed late?
.. oops.. another question