Good cop bad cop
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: hong kong
Posts: 397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good cop bad cop
Rod , seriously ?
Are you falling for this rubbish?
Cmon!
Your not ready to debate the undebatable ?
We debated a year ago !
Dont Tell me you your turning all soft ? You should of been up there today with a golf club banging !
Advise us of any progress of what?? ! WTF ?
Shesus
Are you falling for this rubbish?
Cmon!
Your not ready to debate the undebatable ?
We debated a year ago !
Dont Tell me you your turning all soft ? You should of been up there today with a golf club banging !
Advise us of any progress of what?? ! WTF ?
Shesus
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Home
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I recall, not that long ago, the crap heaped on me for voting for DLC by my peers. RF's in town, the new sheriff, voted in on a wave of hysteria by all the RF wannabes. His mandate involved sitting on the sidelines slagging off everything DLC was doing. Easy to do. The same person who instigated the motion for CC because it damn well just wasn't happening fast enough.
Just yesterday I was informed (nudge nudge wink wink) that he had a killer move involving CC to stop the company in its tracks.
Then I wake up to the latest from the AOA.
I'm assuming the 51% that voted No for the TA also voted in RF for president.
The Emperor has no clothes..........
Just yesterday I was informed (nudge nudge wink wink) that he had a killer move involving CC to stop the company in its tracks.
Then I wake up to the latest from the AOA.
I'm assuming the 51% that voted No for the TA also voted in RF for president.
The Emperor has no clothes..........
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Treasure Island
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"One month of CC followed by one month of showing them what we are worth. "
I couldn't disagree more... that's just gonna prolong the whole ordeal and give the company time to develop tactics to prevent CC from being as effective...
I couldn't disagree more... that's just gonna prolong the whole ordeal and give the company time to develop tactics to prevent CC from being as effective...
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the land of chocolate
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They can only develop tactics if they know when it is happening.
Showing them both sides of the coin would show they would save money in the long term if we were properly motivated.
Besides, what is another 2 months?
Showing them both sides of the coin would show they would save money in the long term if we were properly motivated.
Besides, what is another 2 months?
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: smogville
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time will tell on that one.
Bargaining 101, make your last offer at the final second.
Chess, always think at least two steps ahead. Let pilots think the threat of CC will influence Mgts decisions.
Passing up an unconditional, back-dated pay-rise still allowing you to implement CC for any thing else you care to dispute for eg credit factors/overtime or anything that is a payrise in another guise. Well we'll see who is playing the long game soon enough!
Bargaining 101, make your last offer at the final second.
Chess, always think at least two steps ahead. Let pilots think the threat of CC will influence Mgts decisions.
Passing up an unconditional, back-dated pay-rise still allowing you to implement CC for any thing else you care to dispute for eg credit factors/overtime or anything that is a payrise in another guise. Well we'll see who is playing the long game soon enough!
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's give it a few days while it sinks in that this ain't 2001 and we have the resolve to do what it takes for a just contract in every respect--as well as take care of those who follow in our footsteps.
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: smogville
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Goathead, you may call me predictable and boring, I would prefer rational.
As a reasonably senior employee I feel it a duty to point out to other more excitable guys what I have learned from dealing with Swires for a decade and half. You then can go off and look for a bar room fight which will benefit no one, just remember your actions may well affect a lot of other people as well and not just financially.
What have they got to lose in this pay case? If a Swire prince/princess backs down to employees then that will probably end their swire career, in 2001 they had wet-lease crews flying during MSS if I remember at no small cost. So they will be willing to squander a lot of money to come out on top.
By announcing how close the results were we have shown that if they want to settle this in the future only a small increase should get it across the line. If we continue to tell them the results of votes we are playing poker with someone who can see your cards.
What has the Union to lose? Well if CC doesn't work then what bargaining chip do we ever have again in the future? You will lose more Pilots from the Union as a result and may well end up with no pay-rise, a depleted Union and the need for fresh elections. How many members currently NOT doing their own CC do you think are now going to start doing it? How much additional affect will that have on the Company?
I don't care what the Union decides to do as long as it is based on rational decisions not emotional and irresponsible actions that Goathead and others are advocating. That is my two cents worth.
As a reasonably senior employee I feel it a duty to point out to other more excitable guys what I have learned from dealing with Swires for a decade and half. You then can go off and look for a bar room fight which will benefit no one, just remember your actions may well affect a lot of other people as well and not just financially.
What have they got to lose in this pay case? If a Swire prince/princess backs down to employees then that will probably end their swire career, in 2001 they had wet-lease crews flying during MSS if I remember at no small cost. So they will be willing to squander a lot of money to come out on top.
By announcing how close the results were we have shown that if they want to settle this in the future only a small increase should get it across the line. If we continue to tell them the results of votes we are playing poker with someone who can see your cards.
What has the Union to lose? Well if CC doesn't work then what bargaining chip do we ever have again in the future? You will lose more Pilots from the Union as a result and may well end up with no pay-rise, a depleted Union and the need for fresh elections. How many members currently NOT doing their own CC do you think are now going to start doing it? How much additional affect will that have on the Company?
I don't care what the Union decides to do as long as it is based on rational decisions not emotional and irresponsible actions that Goathead and others are advocating. That is my two cents worth.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CX HOR
The actions of 2001 were based on "Industrial Action" which was voted in by the membership. We had already been in Contract Compliance.
I agree that the Swire mentality is a major road block. But eventually it has to change right? Maybe this pilot body in this time will make them change a little more. The Swire culture does not like employees telling them what to do. And in the short term it will spend $10 to gain a dime of control away from pilots. But how do they fight CC? Everyone just doing their job? And it will hurt the bottom line as clearly they don't have enough pilots - oops, I mean they have enough pilots, just too many "shiny new jets".
The 49ers episode is highly unlikely to ever be repeated. That is the view of management(upper - Director level). We pilots, on the other hand, are free to dream up paranoid outcomes at will.
Union membership increased in 2000-2001 as things 'heated up' between pilots and management. And I don't just mean absolute increase in numbers - I mean as a percentage of the total pilot body as well.
Every Yes voter I have spoken to was doing so reluctantly - pretty much for the 'free money'. Now it was 49% that ended up voting Yes. And that was with very clear instructions in a few different HKAOA updates that the NC/GC recommended it. And the DFO was clearly recommending it too. If the NC/GC had recommended a NO vote, what would the percentages have been then?
Those reading the AOA forums would have seen robust discussion on the topic. But how many don't read it? The majority don't!
So what would have been more divisive - a marginal Yes vote or a marginal No vote? Given that the Yes voters were unhappy but voting for it for the 'free' money?
Did pilots leave the HKAOA after two 49er votes? After two RP07 votes? Why would they leave now?
A year ago 94% voted for CC. But now that the rostering is so much better, especially on the freighter, I am sure that percentage will be decimated in any further vote! (sarcasm alert!)
I personally would rather debate on AOA forums but I realise there are many non members, and members who choose not to look there. I'm happy to give more reasoning, facts and logic on those forums.
Lastly - the HKAOA GC is NOT run by emotion and rhetoric. There is lively debate and then 20 pilots, taking any external advice as needed from lawyers etc, come to make well reasoned decisions. They recommended the last Pay offer didn't they?
PS name me one time in the last 19 years where CX didn't impose their last offer when it was rejected? I don't know of one - but then I don't have a photographic memory. The last time I can recall was 1994(20 years ago)
I agree that the Swire mentality is a major road block. But eventually it has to change right? Maybe this pilot body in this time will make them change a little more. The Swire culture does not like employees telling them what to do. And in the short term it will spend $10 to gain a dime of control away from pilots. But how do they fight CC? Everyone just doing their job? And it will hurt the bottom line as clearly they don't have enough pilots - oops, I mean they have enough pilots, just too many "shiny new jets".
The 49ers episode is highly unlikely to ever be repeated. That is the view of management(upper - Director level). We pilots, on the other hand, are free to dream up paranoid outcomes at will.
Union membership increased in 2000-2001 as things 'heated up' between pilots and management. And I don't just mean absolute increase in numbers - I mean as a percentage of the total pilot body as well.
Every Yes voter I have spoken to was doing so reluctantly - pretty much for the 'free money'. Now it was 49% that ended up voting Yes. And that was with very clear instructions in a few different HKAOA updates that the NC/GC recommended it. And the DFO was clearly recommending it too. If the NC/GC had recommended a NO vote, what would the percentages have been then?
Those reading the AOA forums would have seen robust discussion on the topic. But how many don't read it? The majority don't!
So what would have been more divisive - a marginal Yes vote or a marginal No vote? Given that the Yes voters were unhappy but voting for it for the 'free' money?
Did pilots leave the HKAOA after two 49er votes? After two RP07 votes? Why would they leave now?
A year ago 94% voted for CC. But now that the rostering is so much better, especially on the freighter, I am sure that percentage will be decimated in any further vote! (sarcasm alert!)
I personally would rather debate on AOA forums but I realise there are many non members, and members who choose not to look there. I'm happy to give more reasoning, facts and logic on those forums.
Lastly - the HKAOA GC is NOT run by emotion and rhetoric. There is lively debate and then 20 pilots, taking any external advice as needed from lawyers etc, come to make well reasoned decisions. They recommended the last Pay offer didn't they?
PS name me one time in the last 19 years where CX didn't impose their last offer when it was rejected? I don't know of one - but then I don't have a photographic memory. The last time I can recall was 1994(20 years ago)
Last edited by Numero Crunchero; 12th Oct 2014 at 04:10. Reason: edited because I suck at grammar
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes well Numby Crunchy.. Here's one yes voter who didn't vote reluctantly. Had there been a F&ck YES button I'd have used it. Then again I haven't had a pay rise in 20 years. And have had nothing but decreases and attacks on my C of S ever since I joined. And what have the AOA done for my ( and my peers for that matter ) situation in all those years.? The square root of f'all actually. One could argue that that they may have prevented some greater excesses by the company, however we'll never know, will we.
I am far from convinced that our employers' have changed their spots. They've been forced to adapt ( more than grudgingly it must be said) to first world labour laws. ( You are a recipient of more than generous treatment as a result hence it must be easier to come on here and post in a vicarious way, you have f'all to lose after all.) And this is not intended to be an ad hominem attack, just that the truth needs to be said occasionally.
Our Edwardian employers will shut this place down in a flash, offer us new contracts and then where are the guys placed with mortgages, education, etc etc. If you have any doubt about that have a look at SWIRE shipping. Once the pride of the merchant marine.
The best we can hope for is that they impose the pay rise, which as you say they have tended to do in the past. Then they will spin it to portray us as greedy, venal ungrateful bastards, seeding further division amongst ourselves and the public, cabin crew, the guy with the honey cart etc. Greedy pilots given decent union sanctioned pay rise and still engaging in contract compliance etc etc. Although better phrased than that no doubt. Then see how successful our RP negotiations are.
All the best.
I am far from convinced that our employers' have changed their spots. They've been forced to adapt ( more than grudgingly it must be said) to first world labour laws. ( You are a recipient of more than generous treatment as a result hence it must be easier to come on here and post in a vicarious way, you have f'all to lose after all.) And this is not intended to be an ad hominem attack, just that the truth needs to be said occasionally.
Our Edwardian employers will shut this place down in a flash, offer us new contracts and then where are the guys placed with mortgages, education, etc etc. If you have any doubt about that have a look at SWIRE shipping. Once the pride of the merchant marine.
The best we can hope for is that they impose the pay rise, which as you say they have tended to do in the past. Then they will spin it to portray us as greedy, venal ungrateful bastards, seeding further division amongst ourselves and the public, cabin crew, the guy with the honey cart etc. Greedy pilots given decent union sanctioned pay rise and still engaging in contract compliance etc etc. Although better phrased than that no doubt. Then see how successful our RP negotiations are.
All the best.
Last edited by jacobus; 12th Oct 2014 at 06:32. Reason: Privacy
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: now a paxdoggiedog too...
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Instead I agree with Numero, well put.
I think that, with all respect to the senior crew who have dealt with our employer during the "troubles", amongst many who have joined since there is a general perception that enough is enough, and it's perhaps time to push back a little. Judiciously and rationally, but push back nonetheless. The old "it's their trainset" mentality has not served us well, has it?
When dealing with bully tactics, it's never a good idea to back down: best to face up to your adversary, even if he is much stronger. At the very least, you come away with some dignity intact. The leopard has definitely not changed spots, but we are operating in a somewhat different savannah now.
An increasing number of crew are no longer willing to live in fear. Yet many of us appear to suffer from "beaten woman" syndrome (he won't do it again, he promised). But he will. Until we either face up, or walk away.
I think that, with all respect to the senior crew who have dealt with our employer during the "troubles", amongst many who have joined since there is a general perception that enough is enough, and it's perhaps time to push back a little. Judiciously and rationally, but push back nonetheless. The old "it's their trainset" mentality has not served us well, has it?
When dealing with bully tactics, it's never a good idea to back down: best to face up to your adversary, even if he is much stronger. At the very least, you come away with some dignity intact. The leopard has definitely not changed spots, but we are operating in a somewhat different savannah now.
An increasing number of crew are no longer willing to live in fear. Yet many of us appear to suffer from "beaten woman" syndrome (he won't do it again, he promised). But he will. Until we either face up, or walk away.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Few place
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jacobus
There is no way CX would shut this down.
No way. That is fear mongering at its worst.
Yes they are Edwardian in their approach, but shutting down this airline just "because".....no chance.
And besides, with about 20+ of all crew now on a crap C scale, they are ever more able to flip the bird and walk off.
So many don't care, and I can't say I blame them. I'll leave as well. Past the point of caring now.
Jacobus, don't spread rubbish like that.
No way. That is fear mongering at its worst.
Yes they are Edwardian in their approach, but shutting down this airline just "because".....no chance.
And besides, with about 20+ of all crew now on a crap C scale, they are ever more able to flip the bird and walk off.
So many don't care, and I can't say I blame them. I'll leave as well. Past the point of caring now.
Jacobus, don't spread rubbish like that.
Silberfuchs
If your suggestion could be practically implemented by 60-70% of aircrew for say 6 months then I can assure you it would be extremely effective. All the little coloured charts would go haywire and every second month rostering would be in more of a shambles than usual.
The cost/benefit changes could not be pushed under the negotiating rug even by the willy wavers.
If your suggestion could be practically implemented by 60-70% of aircrew for say 6 months then I can assure you it would be extremely effective. All the little coloured charts would go haywire and every second month rostering would be in more of a shambles than usual.
The cost/benefit changes could not be pushed under the negotiating rug even by the willy wavers.
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: hong kong
Posts: 126
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well monster. We'll see as they say. And it's got f@ck all to do with Stockholm syndrome/ beaten wife syndrom or any other such bollocks.
As to our new demographic; yes they have less to lose. However where would 500, unemployable, unrecognizable licensed, f'all real experience candidates go.? The sand pit. ? Maybe a few however hardly a mass exodus. This sadly is still one of the best gigs in town and our employers know it.
As to posting "rubbish" it's a public forum,, I'll post what the fcuk I like so long as it's not libelous. Ta ta.
As to our new demographic; yes they have less to lose. However where would 500, unemployable, unrecognizable licensed, f'all real experience candidates go.? The sand pit. ? Maybe a few however hardly a mass exodus. This sadly is still one of the best gigs in town and our employers know it.
As to posting "rubbish" it's a public forum,, I'll post what the fcuk I like so long as it's not libelous. Ta ta.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
^ For retention, this juncture is critical for the company. If not treated well--having lived the situation first hand -- the '500' inexperienced pilots will either leave or bide time accumulating their licenses/ratings and THEN bolt. This would be the worst possible scenario in that the company makes a large investment in someone only to have them leave for greener pastures when they're needed most. The actions that happen now will transcend any future monetary incentives for years to come. One could not write an enforceable contract to keep them if they didn't like their conditions at that point.
If treated well, folks will stay.
Couple that with the many experienced folks who also have other options (return to previous airline or start over with another carrier) and there's strong incentive to do the right thing. It's hard to believe (but not impossible to believe) that any company would act so against its own self interests as to destroy itself simply to assert its ego and authoritaaaaaay. Or that it's partners in profit would tolerate it.
So the cards are relatively good if enough of the membership can stick together and overcome its fears to do what's right. After reading several posts here and elsewhere I HAVE been somewhat stunned at how fearful some are and some of these are not the folks I thought I knew. This can be such a wonderful job--it'd be hell for me if I had the same outlook on life and I'm grateful I don't. But I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer.
If treated well, folks will stay.
Couple that with the many experienced folks who also have other options (return to previous airline or start over with another carrier) and there's strong incentive to do the right thing. It's hard to believe (but not impossible to believe) that any company would act so against its own self interests as to destroy itself simply to assert its ego and authoritaaaaaay. Or that it's partners in profit would tolerate it.
So the cards are relatively good if enough of the membership can stick together and overcome its fears to do what's right. After reading several posts here and elsewhere I HAVE been somewhat stunned at how fearful some are and some of these are not the folks I thought I knew. This can be such a wonderful job--it'd be hell for me if I had the same outlook on life and I'm grateful I don't. But I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer.