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.

Thank you

Old 11th Oct 2014, 05:22
  #21 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Pun
Posts: 52
Behind the AoA in every respect.
I doubt it's in the companies interest to do zero with Christmas and CNY up the road....
Jim-J is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 09:50
  #22 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: In front of the PC
Posts: 298
[QUOTE]Behind the AoA in every respect.
I doubt it's in the companies interest to do zero with Christmas and CNY up the road..../QUOTE]

And come February, we will still be saying…we missed an opportunity
asianeagle is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 10:31
  #23 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: az
Posts: 230
With Communism coming down on HK, and civil unrest in the city, I doubt that 15/6/6 percent over three years would even be enough to keep many expats around too much longer. Surely the company knows this, so agreeing to 6/5/5 will be easy for them. After all, all they needed was an extra 4% of the vote.
airplaneridesrfun is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 11:07
  #24 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 1999
Location: Oztrailia
Posts: 2,797
What rubbish you write..........

Some people shouldn't be allowed out alone....
ACMS is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 15:34
  #25 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: az
Posts: 230
I'm ok with accepting an immediate 9% raise for last year and this year, and start negotiating for next year starting now. Then, we can see the companies P and L for this year, have professional accountants break down everything from how our assets are valued (mark to market), to whether all aircraft leases are legit and not grossly benefitting another party (I.e. Swire, CY Leung, directors, air china), and reconcile the results. We can also have our new AOA lawyers in charge of negotiations show up and whip things into motion.
airplaneridesrfun is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 15:43
  #26 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Over There
Posts: 745
Had they removed the housing component the pay rise would have passed. Any new agreement needs to address pay and housing separately.
cpdude is offline  
Old 12th Oct 2014, 23:09
  #27 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 835
Hear, Hear....!!!!
mngmt mole is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 01:50
  #28 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: hong kong
Posts: 397
And now both negotiating teams are left with egg on there faces , with the chief responsibility for this mess being the company for taking the nickel and diming one step too far ......
they have clearly reaped what they sowed
goathead is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 02:06
  #29 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Here
Posts: 460
They should have imposed 4.5%, just as the rest of the company had it imposed.
crwkunt roll is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 02:45
  #30 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Asia
Posts: 91
Try 'their behaviour', 'company's interest' and 'their faces'. My kids do better in primary school.

We are a group of people insufficiently educated to spell correctly in our native language, what hope is THERE that we can negotiate or cajole anything more from this company? The board must be laughing THEIR heads off at us as I'm sure they have been for years.

Talking about being granted a pay rise that protects us against inflation. Which salary/wage earners in the world have been so protected for a generation or more? Why would CX pay us a higher rate when hardly anybody is resigning? Surely this is what matters to them. Not negotiations with the AOA.

Why aren't they (we) resigning?
Because we are already getting the best deal we can.

I stand to be corrected because I don't know how many people are resigning. But anecdotically, it doesn't seem like many. Certainly not enough to worry CX.

But assuming I'm correct, why should protection against inflation be the goal? It's unobtainable. Take the money THEY'RE offering I say and if it's not enough go and take the better job which I'm sure everyone has waiting for them.
Bangaluru is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 02:58
  #31 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Honkytown
Posts: 205
It's not about market forces (i.e.. people leaving) at this stage, Bengaluru. That is a separate issue.

It is now about the cost/benefit analysis of paying us more versus paying us what we currently get.

As someone pointed out on a similar thread, it actually won't take much by way of an agreeable, inflation-matched pay rise to change the working habits and productivity of the pilot workforce.

Sickness rates will fall, goodwill will start to return. The cost reduction in achieving so, will be far greater than a few percent here and there.

Being as smart as you imply, I find it odd that you don't realise this.

To answer your question regarding inflation protection;

The entire company, except pilots and flight attendants have received unilaterally imposed, inflation matching pay rises on the first of Jan each year, for as long as I have been here.
McNugget is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 05:49
  #32 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 507
Bangaluru....
You joined this forum in Sept 2014 and this is your second post which is more a anti-pilot diatribe than it is a positive contribution. Hmmmmm.

I suspect you're not even a pilot but a middle manager with a chip on your shoulder.

Regards your last para....be careful what you wish for.
raven11 is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 06:33
  #33 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 40
Although I like to think that piloting is highly professional, I am taking a more realistic view that pilots are just highly trained factory workers. As with all factory workers, it will get replaced by automation, and eager young people from China, India, and all corners of the world. What is a higher trained job today, will become readily replaceable factors of production of tomorrow. Management knows this.

So the question is, do you hold out for a better offer, or do you take all the short term gains now? The caveat being the longer you hold out, the more time you giving to the company to find a replacement for you that will work for less. There are no better offers out there. CX is a the best gig going around. What's to come is a just race towards the bottom.
etopsmonkey is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 06:42
  #34 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Hong Kong, SAR.
Posts: 15
Wow, etopsmonkey... you must be one of those 'glass half full' kind of people.
Why don't we all just wrap our lips around the car exhaust, it's just no use.
Oasis is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 07:15
  #35 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: F370
Posts: 193
etopsmonkey,

Please read the report on the CX 780 incident, and get back to us with what you think the result would be if there were a couple of factory workers in the cockpit?

I'm looking forward to your reply.

CX will get the workers they are willing to pay for. Are they going to settle for "factory workers"? Those are the only ones that will join under the current conditions.
AtoBsafely is online now  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 08:30
  #36 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 40
RE: half-full / half-empty
It is not about seeing half-full or half-empty. Only just seeing the obvious market forces at work. No one (individual company, or employee group) can do anything to alter the path. It is an industry wide thing that what was once highly skilled would become "commoditize". If lots of people possess the same skills you have, then you are not highly skilled anymore. As with all commodity, the price is the same across the industry. Just the trend of the industry.

RE: CX780
So what questions were you asked during your hiring interview that can a predict a successful outcome in a untrained-for situation? What answer did you give that differentiate you from others? By your reasoning, all CX pilots have gone through a rigorous recruitment process, and so should have such a great level of skills and creative thinking, such that all CX pilots will have the same successful outcome in 780 situation? Lots future flyers applicants will have similar skills and experiences ON PAPER, how to look for those with exceptional out-of-the-box thinking? Point is that when company does hiring, it looks for a specific level of skills/experience (on paper) for the price offered .... gets back to my previous point of being a commodity. It will not give a premium to exceptional thinking (and how to test for out-of-the-box thinking anyway?). Safety is NOT the first thing on the minds of the executive management team. Their first priority is making the most profit for the company, and getting the most bonus for themselves in the process. Having good safety is just a tool to accomplish their first task.
etopsmonkey is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 08:58
  #37 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: cassiopea
Posts: 216
marine news

Schettino lawyer in a conference with the media yesterday said:
You get a helmsman from Sorrento you have to pay him 5000 Euros
one from Bali will cost the company only 1000….


http://www.news.com.au/travel/travel...-1226725604906
poydras is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 09:01
  #38 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Honkytown
Posts: 205
etopsmonkey

I don't disagree with the general idea of what you wrote, I must say.

That's not the topic of discussion, however. Right now, the company needs to attract vast numbers of pilots in the next few years. It also needs to keep the show on the road in the meantime.

Regarding the latter, it appears that goodwill is currently necessary for that to happen. If it doesn't happen, that is a very costly situation for the company. If that weren't the case, the company would simply refuse to negotiate from the outset.

Deliberately employing a lean workforce is a balancing act. It can work very well for both sides or it can be a disaster. Southwest being a good example of the gains available for both sides, in a lean operation.

If one wishes to employ a lean workforce, one has to realise that you are at the mercy of the 'over compliant' workforce continuing go the extra mile and to be willing to work harder. At this stage, whilst I am not unhappy here, I believe that morale is utterly broken at this place, and engagement levels & the willingness to help out are just not there to the extent needed to man a lean operation. CX could have made the choice to heavily over-man, like the US legacy carriers. They may need to raise the conditions in order to attract the numbers needed, but they would have far greater control over operational outcomes in the event of contract compliance, etc.. They have made their choice, and this (finding the lower limits of what keeps the rails on track) is a natural part of that cycle.

Market forces will dictate any external issues such as hiring/resignations, and this is, to me, a separate issue at this juncture.
McNugget is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 10:15
  #39 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Not for Sale
Posts: 330
CX do not have to raise the conditions AT ALL McNugget. You of all people are evidence of this. By disgracefully lowering to C-Scale those with experience and credentials walked away. Those with the new minimum experience (zero hours), or without the experience to be competitive previously now applied in their tens of thousands: worldwide, like yourself.

Market Forces? Come on, stop kidding yourself. Like yourself, there are always those willing to do it for less and scream and kick and debate their right to have willingly and proudly contributed to the downturn.

"I had to". "It was all that was available to me at the time". Rubbish. Utter rubbish. It was a choice.

You contributed to this rape of pilot terms & conditions and now seek a high horse and platform, let alone offer advice and direction? You have no credibility on this topic.
ChinaBeached is offline  
Old 13th Oct 2014, 11:04
  #40 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2
ChinaBeached,

I've just sat down and read your post. It made me think for a while and try and write a constructive reply but i couldn't get past this one…..

You are an absolute plonker!
Hugo Peroni the IV 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.