42 Days
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Lots of Different Places
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shep69 - A good quote from Rand. Worth thinking about.
I resigned from the AOA the week after they blatantly ignored the membership's vote on Contract compliance. This was a weak, pathetic bypass of a democratic process worthy of some third world dictatorship.
The moment they respect this decision of the membership, them I am back in the fight. But I am not going to side myself with an organization that sees its place in the fight as more important than winning the fight.
I resigned from the AOA the week after they blatantly ignored the membership's vote on Contract compliance. This was a weak, pathetic bypass of a democratic process worthy of some third world dictatorship.
The moment they respect this decision of the membership, them I am back in the fight. But I am not going to side myself with an organization that sees its place in the fight as more important than winning the fight.
Yeah, that showed 'em. Good luck on your own, especially if you are involved in an accident or incident.
Last edited by Captain Dart; 5th Nov 2014 at 06:48.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Honkytown
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True, but;
Given how the union have conducted themselves, is it any wonder we have members like this?
There's really very little from the AOA to demonstrate they listen to the wishes of the membership.
Given how the union have conducted themselves, is it any wonder we have members like this?
There's really very little from the AOA to demonstrate they listen to the wishes of the membership.
Join Date: Oct 2014
Location: Lots of Different Places
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captain Dart - It didn't show them anything. If the AOA ignores 90+% of the membership, then they don't give a toss about me.
But its myself I have to live with, and I can't justify supporting a body that is acting contrary to what I believe is in my best interests.
Dan Buster - I joined the AOA when I joined the company, and stuck with them till this point. I will be back in when I see myself getting value for money out of my union fees.
McNugget - I agree the AOA has conducted themselves poorly on a number of issues.
To quote Kenny Rogers - You have to know when to hold em, and when to fold em.
But its myself I have to live with, and I can't justify supporting a body that is acting contrary to what I believe is in my best interests.
Dan Buster - I joined the AOA when I joined the company, and stuck with them till this point. I will be back in when I see myself getting value for money out of my union fees.
McNugget - I agree the AOA has conducted themselves poorly on a number of issues.
To quote Kenny Rogers - You have to know when to hold em, and when to fold em.
Last edited by bridgeport; 5th Nov 2014 at 08:31.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: az
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back on topic.
The DFO says there is only so much in the pot for his bonus, and that we should believe him.
Apparently, the company is ok with 6/4/4 across the board, with an additional 50% HDP (15% total) beginning Jan 1 2015. If the company makes a total profit of more than $8 Billion HKD for this year on they have also conceded they will pay at least 1 month profit share; and anything over 13 Billion, at least 2 months. Not quite good enough, but at least they are budging. Only because they have to in order to retain pilots who give a crap.
The profit this year is set to be huge, so upper mgt is keen to have the pilot contract behind them by March 2015. They could care less about Christmas.
In other news,some of the aircraft leases that are leased from 3rd parties have some interesting financing arrangements. Mark to market is not fair value but mgts implied value.... The numbers are cooked, so that other related entities profit (ex directors, air china, and Swire pacific, Bermuda, BVI, etc). Tell me something I didn't know. Check the finance plates on the aircraft and that will have you scratching your head.
Finally, SK and AT are having an internal battle over who is really in charge. Apparently, SK is very arrogant.
The DFO says there is only so much in the pot for his bonus, and that we should believe him.
Apparently, the company is ok with 6/4/4 across the board, with an additional 50% HDP (15% total) beginning Jan 1 2015. If the company makes a total profit of more than $8 Billion HKD for this year on they have also conceded they will pay at least 1 month profit share; and anything over 13 Billion, at least 2 months. Not quite good enough, but at least they are budging. Only because they have to in order to retain pilots who give a crap.
The profit this year is set to be huge, so upper mgt is keen to have the pilot contract behind them by March 2015. They could care less about Christmas.
In other news,some of the aircraft leases that are leased from 3rd parties have some interesting financing arrangements. Mark to market is not fair value but mgts implied value.... The numbers are cooked, so that other related entities profit (ex directors, air china, and Swire pacific, Bermuda, BVI, etc). Tell me something I didn't know. Check the finance plates on the aircraft and that will have you scratching your head.
Finally, SK and AT are having an internal battle over who is really in charge. Apparently, SK is very arrogant.
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Age: 57
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't understand ,if the union won't or refuses to do what the majority of the members want, then just start CC on your own , it's not difficult , why is everyone waiting for the AOA when clearly they are not listening to the members
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 352
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pucka, I assume you're joking!
SK is one of the root problems as it's not possible to come to an agreement when he's in the room. I understand he was annoyed when RH walked the last offer into the AOA on the eve of our focus night a few weeks ago and of course he would appear to be angry on the surface.
SK's job is to negotiate for the company to get the best deal he can. He will never sit in a room with our NC and come to an agreement as by his definition, if we agree then there must be room for him to do better. That's why the rostering talks went very quickly to mediation. In this instance he knew that we wouldn't find any common ground so just wanted it over as quickly as possible to get to the next stage.
Pay was different. We want that resolved more quickly so he can just sit there giving unacceptable offers, not budging position and just wait it out until we've gone through the whole GFBA steps followed by our voting process knowing he's on a win-win at the end because either:
a. He'll have managed to get a sub standard pay deal done or
b. The company will go behind his back and do a fair deal while he's not in the room. In this case, he'll just sit back and say they'd have done better had they listened to him.
Either way he's done a great job!
It's not possible to come to a fair agreement while SK is in the room so we can expect a last minute out of the room deal every time.
I think AT would prefer to be more grown up and negotiate like a first world company which may be why there's a bit of an internal battle going on at the moment.
SK is one of the root problems as it's not possible to come to an agreement when he's in the room. I understand he was annoyed when RH walked the last offer into the AOA on the eve of our focus night a few weeks ago and of course he would appear to be angry on the surface.
SK's job is to negotiate for the company to get the best deal he can. He will never sit in a room with our NC and come to an agreement as by his definition, if we agree then there must be room for him to do better. That's why the rostering talks went very quickly to mediation. In this instance he knew that we wouldn't find any common ground so just wanted it over as quickly as possible to get to the next stage.
Pay was different. We want that resolved more quickly so he can just sit there giving unacceptable offers, not budging position and just wait it out until we've gone through the whole GFBA steps followed by our voting process knowing he's on a win-win at the end because either:
a. He'll have managed to get a sub standard pay deal done or
b. The company will go behind his back and do a fair deal while he's not in the room. In this case, he'll just sit back and say they'd have done better had they listened to him.
Either way he's done a great job!
It's not possible to come to a fair agreement while SK is in the room so we can expect a last minute out of the room deal every time.
I think AT would prefer to be more grown up and negotiate like a first world company which may be why there's a bit of an internal battle going on at the moment.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong K ong
Posts: 231
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fly on the Wall
I'd love to be a fly on the wall - when the vote is walked into the office by Rod.
All together now !
Due to full loads ST - is still only waitlisted on his last FOC home.
All together now !
Due to full loads ST - is still only waitlisted on his last FOC home.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From SCMP:
Cathay pilots set for Christmas work-to-rule protest as pay row rumbles on
PUBLISHED : Thursday, 06 November, 2014, 3:40pm
Cathay Pacific pilots are set to press ahead with industrial action during the busy Christmas season after union members, disappointed with the level of pay rise offered by the airline, voted overwhelmingly in favour of working to rule.
More than 90 per cent of the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers Association’s (HKAOA) 1,900 members voted in an online poll which asked if they wanted to press ahead with a work-to-rule protest, according to a letter sent to the members and obtained by the South China Morning Post.
The letter showed that 93 per cent voted in favour of the motion, while 7 per cent voted against it. The result was released on Thursday morning.
The motion did not state when the work-to-rule, or contract compliance, protest would take place. But another letter from the association said that the action “must” commence within 42 calendar days after the result of the vote was announced.
The association’s general secretary Chris Beebe said that the pilots are targeting Christmas to make their point.
“I don’t believe the plan is to drop to contract compliance immediately,” he told the Post on Tuesday, before voting closed. He said then that he expected the motion to be passed.
The protest would involve pilots working according to what their contract requires. For example, pilots would refuse to work on rostered days off.
One source with knowledge of Cathay’s operations said that the impact of a work-to-rule protest on passengers would be “significant”, especially in unexpected situations such as a typhoon, because Cathay did not have enough pilots on standby.
Flight cancellations and delays could be expected if the actions eventually took place, the source said.
Under the airline’s proposal announced in September, Hong Kong-based crew members would get pay increases of 4 per cent this year, 3 per cent next year, and 3 per cent in 2016.
Pilots based in Europe would get a worse deal, with wage increases of 3 per cent, 2 per cent and 3 per cent. Those based in New Zealand would see their pay go up by only 1 per cent each year. Cathay has around 2,900 pilots.
A Cathay spokesman said on Thursday afternoon that the airline had not been informed by the association of the result of the vote but added that “if the results are as suggested, then we are disappointed”.
“We have been in regular communication with the negotiating committee of the HKAOA and look forward to further discussions later this month,” he said.
He also said that the nature of Cathay’s business requires the airline to prepare resources to cover any operational irregularities.
“We will do our best to make sure that we continue to operate our flight services as scheduled,” he added.
A Cathay pilot, who asked not to be named, said on Thursday that the pilots would refuse to work on their days off during a work-to-rule protest.
Other sources said that many pilots, especially the junior ones, were being called in on days off two or three times a month, disturbing their time with friends and family.
The last time Cathay pilots pressed ahead with industrial action was in July 2001, which led to the sacking of 51 pilots. They have become known collectively as the 49ers because 49 were sacked on one day.
Three months into the action in 2001, the association cited an analyst as saying that Cathay had lost HK$800 million as a result. But Tony Tyler, then Cathay’s director of corporate development, said the action had stopped having any effect on passenger numbers or flight delays after three months.
Cathay pilots set for Christmas work-to-rule protest as pay row rumbles on
PUBLISHED : Thursday, 06 November, 2014, 3:40pm
Cathay Pacific pilots are set to press ahead with industrial action during the busy Christmas season after union members, disappointed with the level of pay rise offered by the airline, voted overwhelmingly in favour of working to rule.
More than 90 per cent of the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers Association’s (HKAOA) 1,900 members voted in an online poll which asked if they wanted to press ahead with a work-to-rule protest, according to a letter sent to the members and obtained by the South China Morning Post.
The letter showed that 93 per cent voted in favour of the motion, while 7 per cent voted against it. The result was released on Thursday morning.
The motion did not state when the work-to-rule, or contract compliance, protest would take place. But another letter from the association said that the action “must” commence within 42 calendar days after the result of the vote was announced.
The association’s general secretary Chris Beebe said that the pilots are targeting Christmas to make their point.
“I don’t believe the plan is to drop to contract compliance immediately,” he told the Post on Tuesday, before voting closed. He said then that he expected the motion to be passed.
The protest would involve pilots working according to what their contract requires. For example, pilots would refuse to work on rostered days off.
One source with knowledge of Cathay’s operations said that the impact of a work-to-rule protest on passengers would be “significant”, especially in unexpected situations such as a typhoon, because Cathay did not have enough pilots on standby.
Flight cancellations and delays could be expected if the actions eventually took place, the source said.
Under the airline’s proposal announced in September, Hong Kong-based crew members would get pay increases of 4 per cent this year, 3 per cent next year, and 3 per cent in 2016.
Pilots based in Europe would get a worse deal, with wage increases of 3 per cent, 2 per cent and 3 per cent. Those based in New Zealand would see their pay go up by only 1 per cent each year. Cathay has around 2,900 pilots.
A Cathay spokesman said on Thursday afternoon that the airline had not been informed by the association of the result of the vote but added that “if the results are as suggested, then we are disappointed”.
“We have been in regular communication with the negotiating committee of the HKAOA and look forward to further discussions later this month,” he said.
He also said that the nature of Cathay’s business requires the airline to prepare resources to cover any operational irregularities.
“We will do our best to make sure that we continue to operate our flight services as scheduled,” he added.
A Cathay pilot, who asked not to be named, said on Thursday that the pilots would refuse to work on their days off during a work-to-rule protest.
Other sources said that many pilots, especially the junior ones, were being called in on days off two or three times a month, disturbing their time with friends and family.
The last time Cathay pilots pressed ahead with industrial action was in July 2001, which led to the sacking of 51 pilots. They have become known collectively as the 49ers because 49 were sacked on one day.
Three months into the action in 2001, the association cited an analyst as saying that Cathay had lost HK$800 million as a result. But Tony Tyler, then Cathay’s director of corporate development, said the action had stopped having any effect on passenger numbers or flight delays after three months.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Europe
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three months into the action in 2001, the association cited an analyst as saying that Cathay had lost HK$800 million as a result. But Tony Tyler, then Cathay’s director of corporate development, said the action had stopped having any effect on passenger numbers or flight delays after three months.
