Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

JFK 777 Base on new FTLS

Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

JFK 777 Base on new FTLS

Old 4th Sep 2012, 00:59
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Parallel Universe
Posts: 53
After Release

Once their time has been serves they have complete the requisite training for a management position.
joejet is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 03:30
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 309
Cumguzzler

The US visa's are company sponsored L1A visa's. No individual pilot applied for a visa. All visa's where collectively applied for by the company and not as an individual. Actually, Canadian citizens with a Canadian residence do not need a US visa if employed by a foreign company, operating foreign registered aircraft, starting and ending their pairings in the US as long as they do not live in the US and commute from Canada. However, CX made it company policy to require a US visa because of US tax liability concerns. As you might have heard all Canadians with a US base file and pay income tax in Hong Kong, Canada and the US due to how CX approached the whole issue. All Americans with a Canadian base do not need a Canadian visa at the present time as there seem no tax implications for CX.
GTC58 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 03:57
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Gold Coast
Posts: 66
So do Mexicans also not need a US visa to be based in the US? How about Germans, or Yemenis?
jriv is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 05:38
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 955
Don't see a problem with Germans or Yemenis, but those darn Azerbaijanis and Armenians are a pain in the butt...
Cpt. Underpants is online now  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 14:37
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Victoria, Canada
Age: 60
Posts: 100
The US visa's are company sponsored L1A visa's. No individual pilot applied for a visa. All visa's where collectively applied for by the company and not as an individual.
Well, now we know it was done right
Cumguzzler is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 16:30
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 5
Uh huh. And the FOIA enquiry will see if CX was 'honest' in their representations to the US Immigration authorities. What do you want to bet on that outcome??
mngmt mole is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2012, 21:06
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
One of those who has been issued a visa told me that some of the information on the application was most certainly misleading and untrue.
Oval3Holer is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2012, 17:21
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Crew bunk
Posts: 133
Could anyone confirm if any FOs had their visas approved?
Pogie is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2012, 20:36
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: cassiopea
Posts: 216
Visas...

Do you have problems with DEGO' s AKA euro trash?
poydras is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 01:15
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
joejet, Friday has come and gone and you (as well as CX) are eerily quiet...
Oval3Holer is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 02:56
  #51 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Parallel Universe
Posts: 53
Next Friday...

Results were released from the 8th Floor to the 7th, it takes time to go all the way to the basement where we are.

Uhmmm, don't forget this is PPRuNe, not the BBC.
joejet is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 04:38
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 4
If it were BBC, it would be even less accurate with more bias...

Heard the new FTLs are a "rolling" 84 hours. If you fly 74 one month, they get you for 94 the next without EFP, etc.

I say no way to this ever! I don't care what base is at stake.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 06:26
  #53 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: hong kong
Posts: 193
RUBBISH

the 84 hours is in your COS.....nothing to do with FTL's,
CYRILJGROOVE is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 06:30
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 317
EFP has NEVER been part of the FTL's.

You'd be a little more credible if only you made sense cxorcist.

If the accuracy of your posts is anything to go by the BBC must be some sort of information guru.

Last edited by Progress Wanchai; 9th Sep 2012 at 06:37.
Progress Wanchai is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 18:56
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 4
Sorry guys. What I meant to say (had a couple rough long haul days) was that I heard a rumour the company was going to pursue, for the "new JFK base" or otherwise, a "rolling" credit hour concept as previously laid out. I realize that this has nothing to do with FTLs, but it could become part of an RP negotiation or "new contract" or "sign or be fired," etc. To clarify, I would be against such a change and understand it has nothing to do with FTLs except that new FTLs could be an impetus for new negotiations / contracts.

Last edited by cxorcist; 9th Sep 2012 at 19:21.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 21:08
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
cxorcist, would you still be against such a change if it only applied to those on or wanting to go on a JFK base?
Oval3Holer is offline  
Old 9th Sep 2012, 22:32
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: nfa
Posts: 124
Just asking to be abused -

You have three weeks leave next month. How many hours do you think they'll roster this month? You'll spend most of your leave recovering from the 120hrs that CC would dump on you.

Without very specific wording, it won't just be limited to long haul either.
bm330 is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2012, 02:12
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Here
Posts: 338
Why are they always pushing to make things worse in this place, nothing ever changes for the better, the AOA are nigh on useless. Every few years there is a major change to contracts or ftls, what will it be like in 10 years time, rolling hours, overtime at 120, 6 days off a month, min rest everywhere. Something has to give, greed has a limit, doesn't it?

Last edited by Threethirty; 10th Sep 2012 at 02:13.
Threethirty is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2012, 02:55
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 4
Oval,

Yes, wouldn't you?

Seeing as how we are all on individual contracts though, I'm not sure there is much either of us could do about it. If someone is willing to agree to that as a precondition for the base, would we have recourse? On the basis of seniority and our existing contract, I hope the AOA could stop it but that did not happen when freighter commands on bases were first offered.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 10th Sep 2012, 04:18
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Where You Aren't
Posts: 506
cxorcist,

Why would I be against something which would be beneficial to some pilots and not detrimental to others? I would NOT be against it.

What do you mean, "I hope the AOA could stop it?"

WE are the AOA. Why would the AOA want to stop it? "Normal" airlines have alls sorts of special rules to which the employees agreed, some of which benefit only certain groups but do not harm others.

Why would you want to see your fellow pilots not be able to get a base in JFK?
Oval3Holer is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.