The Rational Vote

[777300ER]

For those that may be on the fence, confused, scared, angry, or all of the above, below are some points to consider:

• Do not make your decision based on fear or duress. Good decisions are never made this way.
  
• Do not make your decision based on anger and resentment. Good decisions are never made this way.
  
• Make up your own mind based on the facts instead of what you hear. The angry crowd has the loudest voice and typically overpowers the rational voice. Refer to the replies below for evidence.
  
• Leverage is never permanent. The leverage that got us here is not likely to remain effective without additional measures.
  
• Regardless of which way the vote goes, our unity as a whole will be damaged due to the divisive nature of this decision. Without unity, our ability to affectively deal with the above point will be limited. Look no further than the GCs vote for an example.
  
• No airline is perfect.
  
• No working rules are perfect.
  
• No negotiation results in a 100% win for either side.
  
• Don't get hung up worrying about a specific clause. There will always be millions of ways that your employer could make your life difficult if they want to. No contract will address them all. Clause 7 for example is standard in any North American TA.
  
• Don't manufacture things to worry about. The ARAPA expiring in 2020 is a good example. This agreement has always had a rollover date. This TA extends the rollover date by 3 years and some people are considering this a problem.

This TA offers some improvements. Is it enough? Can you achieve better? Weigh the facts, avoid excess emotion, and vote accordingly.

[Oval3Holer]

CC is fun.

[goathead]

Ladies and gents,

It is confirmed, we are being sold a lemon

1. This entire TA is about getting rid of the TB/CC forever.
2. The HKPA is a short term bribe to get a yes vote. Management think a yes vote is a slam dunk with this bribe .
3. Once the TA is voted in, over the next 2 years they will get an excess of trainers by 30/40% then go to hourly training pay, they will even take unsuitable trainers just to biuild up the numbers so that the TB can never be used again.
4. It is all about clause 7, everything else is smoke and mirrors.
5. Dragon already have an expansion plan ready to go and recruits selected and this will be announced after the TA yes vote or used as a we told you so if an unexpected no vote happens.
6. Dragon and Qantas cannot train us in significant numbers.
7. Cathay had a significant training shortfall before the TB.
8. There is no big stick if this gets voted down.
9. Clause 7 is so vague and one sided that almost anything can be interpreted as industrial action.
10. If anybody thinks that the CMC will be good for pilots then talk to plots in Emirates. Without any industrial defences we are in for a rude shock.

WE HAVE ALL BEEN WARNED!

[goathead]

So in the event of a yes vote
I would like to thank all the Oxygen thieves out there .

[asianeagle]

And then there's Hupert Rogg's letter....
Just a tad 'intimidatory' if you ask me.

No Mr H... its not a good deal, thanks to 9th floor for getting the company into this mess!

[valhalla634]

A tad of panic perhaps? The live vote count is not looking good for them?

[1200firm]

Clause 7 specifically authorises the company to seek compensation from indivdiuals if it is deemed IA. Lets say you miss a duty for some reason and cause a delay or cancellation of a flight. Company deems it IA(at their discretion). They can then sue you to recover the lost money because you have agreed that they can by agreeing to clause 7. If they can show the delay costs $1m then they will happily spend $10m to get that $1m from you.

Also, under the TA, ARAPA will be dead by 30 Jun 18 if the company decide that the "Trial" is unsatisfactory(which they will)

[betpump5]

Proof of the Lemon?

The COO has written a personal email to all HK and NZ based pilots. That also includes a threat that a NO vote will not get us something better. Lets hope we don't fall for this.

[RAT Management]

You are Crazy if you vote anything other than NO. The whole thing is a big Lemon. Its a bribe and nothing less for very small short term gain by the pilots But with very big wins for CX Management.


The reality is this mess has been created by the management by multiple different contracts over many years all being cut and eroded and played off against each other. Once again the same recipe is being applied.
If you vote yes you are voting to fix the mess the company has created and you are voting for no improvement (guaranteed) or a decline in your working conditions with definite increases in fatigue without a leg to stand on.
Voting No says you are not willing to take the pineapple to fix the mess for the management and ensure their bonus. But you are saying I am not budging until there is something that ensures there is no further degradation in my conditions and a guarantee of improvement.


No clauses just straight up good faith and good will from both sides.


Don't believe the hype about the CMP as you shouldn't believe the Hype the A50 will fix everything for the Airbus guys as well..... Its here and I am still just as tired!

[Interested_Party]

The agreements contain improvements. May I ask the NO voters what they thought we brought to the negotiating table if it was not to trade industrial peace? What else did we have to offer? So if that is now included in the agreement then why are you surprised? Did you really expect improvements for nothing in return?

And actually is industrial peace such a bad thing for us as well?

[Roger Greendeck]

I've made the point before but I think it's worth reiterating, they can take things because RP's are not currently binding. I want things back as they were too but the pilot group cannot force it because it doesn't form part of our agreement. That horse bolted last vote. At least it will be binding on the Company this time. I know there is still wriggle room with the wording but currently they don't even need to wriggle.

[The Visionary]

Actually Curtain, I believe it on the forum(s) now. The Rod and letters issue that is.

[Pain]

Originally Posted by Dan Buster

What did we bring to the table??? WTF? We're trying to get stuff back that was taken from us FFS!

No, we were not. Our goal was RP back into our COS. Period.

There was no mandate to require changes to O-days or 30-days of reserve or 5-4-3 or any of the other things we have lost over the years. We are trading industrial peace for RP back in the COS.

At what point do we as a group become self destructive in our drive for "revenge"?

[Pain]

Originally Posted by Curtain rod

What we are getting is an HKPA bribe bundled with 3 other TA's we knew nothing about, little time to decipher it all, plus all this with a gun to our heads about one deadline that passed without comment and another deadline that interferes significantly and negatively with our voting process, all while discovering mysterious side letters full of gotchas and every day another bomb exposing deception lands in our inboxes.... And to get an RP back into our COS, it must be RATIFIED BY US, which means it must be good enough to ratify. Period.

Rod. Are you suggesting, in all the time the NC was involved with the company, the NC knew nothing substantial about what was being discussed? Or that everything was suggested by the company and the NC went along? The NC never suggested "if you want this then we require that"?

The NC worked hard in the field of play with the company and the result is this TA. Whining about extras we come away with is ludicrous. They are extras we (or a segment of we) benefit from.

Are those benefits bribery to get an element of the pilot group to vote YES? Yes, of course they are. Did the NC work to make those elements beneficial? Of course they did. Could and should the benefit be better? Maybe...

[Oval3Holer]

The company is desperate, as evidenced by R. Hogg's email. That, alone, requires a NO vote!

[Some How I'm Tired]

The AOA (not Union) has been outplayed. The benefit to this company for a YES vote is immeasurable. Not only do they get to implement a woeful (for a pilot) RP, but they get to tie everyone's hands behind their back for the future.

Remember when we gave away 5-4-3? What's the chance of regaining that? And the AOA GC recommended it!

Remember when we gave away Credit Reserve? What's the chance of regaining that? And the AOA GC recommended it!

Do you see a pattern forming here?

The company Stockholm Syndrome's the NC Into recommending that you give up everything you are fighting for so we can have industrial peace. They get everything, WE GET NOTHING!!!

How often have you seen the COO (NON-PILOT WHO HAS PREVIOUSLY NOT GIVEN A SH1T) beg for a YES vote????

ALARM BELLS ANYONE?????????

If you vote YES to this, then there is no hope. My career finishes soon. You guys will be regretting this 30 years down track. Guaranteed watershed moment.

[Zapp_Brannigan]

An improvement over what?
Over the RPs that were imposed last year, but not so much over the ones they took away from us.

3-pilots to Europe (or anywhere else): still there

3 days of stby (+ O days): still there

You "YES" guys are pathetic.
They took so much away from us when they imposed their RPs last year that you call it a win when we get a little bit back.

What exactly else is a win?
MDC that never triggers?

In all honesty, the only 'win' is the HKPA raise.
And it's not what we were in CC for.

[Farman Biplane]

The HKPA signing bonus is coercion to vote YES, regardless of the TA content.

If the AOA, or anyone else, offered you circa $70000 to vote NO, would the company find that acceptable?

[kenfoggo]

I am sure that B777ER has sound judgement in his urging us to use common sense and to consider the pragmatic view and accept the TA. But to do that we have to trust the Company. Trust is still in short supply between the pilots and the Management. It is a failing in the Management that they have done little to rebuild and foster trust. In fact since the 49ers what bridge building have they engaged in? The COO states that this is the time to show trust and move forward together. I would like that. But do I trust a Management who in the last year unilaterally removed agreed Rostering Practices? What do I think about a Management who trust me with their expensive equipment and 400 of their clients lives yet do not trust me to determine whether I am unfit for duty for four days and so institute a sickness management programme? Do I trust a Management who over the last two years have refused to grant my contractual required leave? This does not fill me with a warm, trusting feeling. No.

[RAT Management]

Yet Guys ho are non HKPA are still voting "YES". Their justification is they want things to get better and believe NO will only make things worse. Kind of warped way of making things better. I cant see any other option than vote NO but its everyone else that is the issue and the big stick after the fact that is swaying the vote.


At this stage I am not hopeful it will be an overall NO. It seems the vocal minority are NO but the silent majority are worn down and are willing to vote YES.


Sorry but I hear the fat lady singing!