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

The End of Freighters

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.

The End of Freighters

Old 3rd Sep 2016, 07:54
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
The End of Freighters

"We expect the positive momentum to continue as we move into September, helped by some major project shipments starting to move out of China this week. Our Cargo team is arranging additional capacity from another major airfreight carrier this month, which will mainly be deployed to the Americas and India and will give us the ability to capture more of the growth in traffic".

I decided to make it it's own thread as to the importance of it.

I think this may be big!!! Two years ago, apparently, the airline decided to approach Atlas and ask if they would take ALL the freighters but they said they could not so, we kept them. Now this. I think this may be a sign of things to come and I might hazard a guess Atlas is where the freighters may be going. How do they fix the crewing problem, sell the freighters. It's a big shot across the bow. So much for reaching an agreement with us, more threats. Keep in mind this includes those places that agreements HAVE been signed. How do they also get out of those pesky freighter only bases they have been trying so hard to do for some time? Didn't someone raise this years ago with Air Hong Kong and Air China Cargo???

Now do keep in mind that Atlas is having big labor problems as well and their pilots have voted to strike. Our union should be reaching out to theirs.

Has anyone been reading all the diatribe from management lately? The recent GMF's NTC, the interview with AT in the "World" magazine. More threats and intimidation but wait, a new GC, OH BOY, yeah, lets' talk but we are going to make you fight for everything now. You better sign it this time or else. Rent a movie called "Outsourced".

My first instinct was it's a bluff but I am rethinking that now. If Atlas get all the freighters, sign a deal with their pilots, it could be big big lose for us! Keep in mind these are jobs and lots of them and more importantly, commands!

They really do double talk these people and one minute they say let's be friends and as soon as your turn your back!

Let's not let this out of the cross hairs as it could be a major issue.
The Visionary is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 07:56
  #2 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
Also, watch the freighter rosters be used against us and give the better flying to Atlas. Those poor senior guys that can't get off the damn thing will be doing late night China's and India's for a while. The freighter rosters have become very much like Airbus rosters lately.
The Visionary is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 09:18
  #3 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
This is gonna be good with Atlas Air. I mean yikes! Good idea Ms Thompson, keep em coming as you truly have no idea what you are doing.

Has anyone seen the pilot pal MS (Cargo sales) around lately? Was he not on our side, wanted to work with the pilots, bought dinners and drinks in ANC? I guess he gave up on us too. Thanks Mark.

http://www.pprune.org/freight-dogs/4...ew-help-9.html
The Visionary is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 13:48
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here and There
Posts: 167
Relax man,

Atlas provides CX with some short term flexibility, not more. CX do not like to give up control over their operation, which long term outsourcing would exatly do.

They would never get the kind of productivity from the Atlas crews. Also, CX would pay the fuel bill - the biggest cost item -, while not being able to control Atlas' fuel policy in the slightest. Not trivial and there is so much more. The devil is always in the detail, which is not exactly the strong point of the current management. I have seen quite a few Airlines getting frustrated by the ways of Atlas. The honeymoon lasted only a few month, followed by some long pain until contract fulfillment. Needless to say, CX would have to pay Atlas some profit as well. By the time all s said and done, it would be way more expensive, than inhouse.

What Atlas provides is flexibility, but at a price.


Then there is the matter of "putting all eggs in one basket".

So chill....

Cheers
Avius is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 13:50
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,544
'Relax man' and 'chill' ? You obviously havent worked here that long have you ?
Trafalgar is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 14:04
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Posts: 363
My be nothing to do with this, but very recently Atlas managment sent out a notice that they have agreed with Hong Kong authorities that any crew member that spends more than a cumulative period of time in HK in a tax year is liable for HK income tax and must file a HK tax return. Atlas have been flying through HK for a couple of decades so it seemed a tad strange and I was curious what precipitated this "arrangement" and again may just be coincidence.

Last edited by flite idol; 3rd Sep 2016 at 14:32.
flite idol is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 14:36
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Here and There
Posts: 167
Traf,

I've been here longer than you think. And I agree with you, that words like "relax" and "chill" in this context would normally make one cringe.

In this case, I have some insider knowledge and feel some confidence in what I posted above.
Avius is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 15:18
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Bluegrass
Posts: 11
I doubt that CX crews have anything to worry about with their flying coming to Atlas. We can barely staff the flying we have now and with supposed 19 more 767's to crew for Amazon in 2017, I just don't see that we will have the capability in the foreseeable future. Our attrition is high due to our sub par CBA and management has ceased negotiations with no sign of them returning to the table.
LongBeachTrijet is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 15:39
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: England
Posts: 577
Nothing to do with extra capacity due to a major shipping line gone bust in China as the Christmas crap starts rolling towards Europe/USA then...
Kitsune is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 16:36
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: In a Bar
Posts: 179
I suspect more to do with CX f*****g up the lease renewals on the remaining -400Fs.
Jn14:6 is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 20:58
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 2,010
Bingo John 14:6!!! It has nothing to do with crewing levels on the 747.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 22:07
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 57
Posts: 610
I'm at Atlas:
As posted, we are short crews. In the past 2 yrs, saudia wanted us to fly all their 747 freighters, and emirates wanted us to fly all their 777 freighters. We could not do either, due to lack of crews.

Unless we get a great contract, we cannot do much...not enough pilots in the US.
atpcliff is offline  
Old 3rd Sep 2016, 22:10
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: KGRB, but on the road about 1/2 the time.
Age: 57
Posts: 610
Also, South Korean container shipper just folded. 8% of trans-Pacific capacity. I think w will ALL be busy flying their freight.
atpcliff is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2016, 05:21
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: My Kitchen...
Posts: 85
Originally Posted by flite idol View Post
My be nothing to do with this, but very recently Atlas managment sent out a notice that they have agreed with Hong Kong authorities that any crew member that spends more than a cumulative period of time in HK in a tax year is liable for HK income tax and must file a HK tax return. Atlas have been flying through HK for a couple of decades so it seemed a tad strange and I was curious what precipitated this "arrangement" and again may just be coincidence.
The IRD consider you having a presence in HK as soon as wheels touch the runway, no matter if you are on GD or you clear immigration or not!

More than 60 days a year rings a bell, but happy to be corrected on that.

To top it off, they have the right to claim 6 years of back tax. Immigration and the IRD speak from two different sides of the fence, so don't expect immigration to back up your "presence" in HK either.
b747heavy is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2016, 14:08
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 20
What a load of crap. If the Company sent the Freighters to Atlas they would find themselves in an industrial sh!tstorm.

If they had planned to get rid of the Freighters they would want to make sure they had the AOA by the short and curlies and would have placed some words in the recent TA to make sure the ability for Industrial Action was gone.

Oh... wait a minute....
Liam Gallagher is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2016, 16:54
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Liam,

At least someone gets it. Unfortunately 47% didn't which is extremely worrying.

The sad thing is what you mentioned is the tip of the iceberg. CX had a lot more plans based on Clause 7.
betpump5 is offline  
Old 4th Sep 2016, 19:45
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 2,010
Very true CR. Only need another packet or two of Splenda, and it gets over the line. Surely CX knows this as it is by their design. However... how much time, money and how many "missed opportunities" have been lost in this silly process? Was it worth it? The goodwill lost forever is worth untold tens of millions. Perhaps that pales in comparison to fuel hedging losses. What of the training backlog? Years to recover, if ever. How much will that cost in terms of missed growth and under-utilized aircraft? If I were a real Swire with the last name Swire, I'd be pissed beyond words. Heads would be rolling and somebody who knows what he is doing would be brought in. How the Swires think these clowns have things under control is beyond comprehension. Maybe they just don't care anymore.

Imagine Warren Buffett owning CX. Do you think he would tolerate this management team? I think not!
cxorcist is offline  
Old 5th Sep 2016, 02:11
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
In a for profit company the carrot always works much better than the stick.

Then again, it appears there is confusion from time to time of which end to insert the carrot into. When they get it right this place could become very productive.
Shep69 is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


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.