CX Redundancies
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: HK
Age: 24
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pilots only thinking of number one again. So stupid they believe the bs when it suits.
Oh, really, the IMT people that are being FIRED are really wanting to explore other avenues in this down market. wtf.
Grow up. 53/300 is fairly massive
Oh, really, the IMT people that are being FIRED are really wanting to explore other avenues in this down market. wtf.
Grow up. 53/300 is fairly massive
2longhk
You are quite correct. As far as I’m concerned more than one redundancy is a mass redundancy. I too could also see the BS given to staff for the redundancy of the 53 IT staff. It had all the spin of a politician trying to sell us a new tax.
You are quite correct. As far as I’m concerned more than one redundancy is a mass redundancy. I too could also see the BS given to staff for the redundancy of the 53 IT staff. It had all the spin of a politician trying to sell us a new tax.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a recent court case the Hon J Re**s stated on page 32
" In effect, both at trial and in the comments of MR Ty**r and Mr C**n at the time of the mass dismissal..........."
So it appears that the Hon Judge considers the number 49 to be MASS, so one must conclude that 53 is also MASS.
Sorry Tony you lie to us again, you c**t.
" In effect, both at trial and in the comments of MR Ty**r and Mr C**n at the time of the mass dismissal..........."
So it appears that the Hon Judge considers the number 49 to be MASS, so one must conclude that 53 is also MASS.
Sorry Tony you lie to us again, you c**t.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here and There
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not intending to add fuel to the fire here, but to assume, that any management enjoys to impose redundancies is simply a fallacy.
This is a case of restructuring and anyone, who understands a little about IT and computers knows that the IT world is moving at a breathtaking pace. IT staff are required to keep up to speed with the changes in order to remain competitive.
Many years ago, the mainframe specialists were highly paid positions and many of those specialists would frown on anything that did not have the word "IBM mainframe" in it. In those days, it was easily possible for one individual to understand an entire enterprise computer system. But this is a long distant past.
In today's world of distributed computing, the complexities have increased remarkably and today's IT staff needs to have an entirely different mindset, than it had just a decade ago.
I don't know the circumstances of this particular restructuring, but my suspicion is (based on former extensive IT experience as Manager), that those that were willing/able to adapt and commit to acquire the necessary skills would have been just fine. Unfortunately some just can't or more likely don't want to change.
We all know, that some of the former "classic" cockpit pilots had a difficulty to adjust to glass cockpits. Most did, but some just retired by choice or elected to work as contractors. This is really the same. We all can complain about progress, but no matter what we say or do, we will not be able to stop it. It is just the way - evolution.
Again, not wanting to upset anyone here, as I too feel for those who have to leave. It if is of any comfort, unlike us pilots, they will be able to move laterally into a new positions with pretty much the same pay - or perhaps better.
After all there are infinitely more IT jobs out there then pilot jobs.
Cheers
This is a case of restructuring and anyone, who understands a little about IT and computers knows that the IT world is moving at a breathtaking pace. IT staff are required to keep up to speed with the changes in order to remain competitive.
Many years ago, the mainframe specialists were highly paid positions and many of those specialists would frown on anything that did not have the word "IBM mainframe" in it. In those days, it was easily possible for one individual to understand an entire enterprise computer system. But this is a long distant past.
In today's world of distributed computing, the complexities have increased remarkably and today's IT staff needs to have an entirely different mindset, than it had just a decade ago.
I don't know the circumstances of this particular restructuring, but my suspicion is (based on former extensive IT experience as Manager), that those that were willing/able to adapt and commit to acquire the necessary skills would have been just fine. Unfortunately some just can't or more likely don't want to change.
We all know, that some of the former "classic" cockpit pilots had a difficulty to adjust to glass cockpits. Most did, but some just retired by choice or elected to work as contractors. This is really the same. We all can complain about progress, but no matter what we say or do, we will not be able to stop it. It is just the way - evolution.
Again, not wanting to upset anyone here, as I too feel for those who have to leave. It if is of any comfort, unlike us pilots, they will be able to move laterally into a new positions with pretty much the same pay - or perhaps better.
After all there are infinitely more IT jobs out there then pilot jobs.
Cheers
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Avius. Quite right. No one likes redundancies - management included. IT is an ever changing field. I think one of the problems in this case is that management came out to squash rumours of mass redundancies just a matter of days before the IT department rehash resulted in 50 odd redundancies. Hmmmm. Does it hinge on the meaning of the term 'mass'? I think the management just showed how stupid they think staff are - again.
Edited to add the word 'again' at the end.
Edited to add the word 'again' at the end.
Last edited by rick.shaw; 22nd Nov 2009 at 23:24. Reason: Editorial
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
rick
I think it's more a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.
Do remember the fiasco of the 743's coming back from a multi-million dollar refit and refurbishment "ready to deliver another decade of service" to CX only to be IMMEDIATELY leased to Pakistan?
The 772's "have to go"...
Sending the BCF's to the desert only to be told that we have an unprecedented demand for freight?
The 49'er fiasco?
etc., etc., etc.
I think it's more a case of the right hand not knowing what the left hand is doing.
Do remember the fiasco of the 743's coming back from a multi-million dollar refit and refurbishment "ready to deliver another decade of service" to CX only to be IMMEDIATELY leased to Pakistan?
The 772's "have to go"...
Sending the BCF's to the desert only to be told that we have an unprecedented demand for freight?
The 49'er fiasco?
etc., etc., etc.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 672
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have any of you actually tried dealing with the chaps in the IT department? Whereas I do not wish for anyone to lose their jobs, I think the department will benefit from a bit of an overhaul.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 163
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt Underpants. In many cases I would agree with you. However, in this case I can't. If whoever 'quashed' the rumour of mass redundancies didn't know about a significant number(50+) of redundancies in fact pending, then they either shouldn't be in the job or were simply lying. You make the judgement on that one.
Whether or not it can be defined as a mass redundancy or not, it is most certain a significant number of redundancies. I don't like how management play on words - just like the definition of 'normally' or 'roster disruption' in our contracts.
Whether or not it can be defined as a mass redundancy or not, it is most certain a significant number of redundancies. I don't like how management play on words - just like the definition of 'normally' or 'roster disruption' in our contracts.
