Bases ?
Trafalgar
There was an issue by inference with a contractual benefit of some KA pilots and the making up of some self-suiting story to the origin of the benefit in hope of its demise. Staff travel is fluid and there have been other changes to priority that appear to have gone unprotested such as the ability to be bumped out of J by an employee having bought only an economy ticket?
KA is CX. We don't have the independence afforded to a virtual airline model let alone the typical low-cost type off-shoot. It's a near a complete integration and sensible pilot unions should have been onto this obvious eventuality long ago.
There was an issue by inference with a contractual benefit of some KA pilots and the making up of some self-suiting story to the origin of the benefit in hope of its demise. Staff travel is fluid and there have been other changes to priority that appear to have gone unprotested such as the ability to be bumped out of J by an employee having bought only an economy ticket?
KA is CX. We don't have the independence afforded to a virtual airline model let alone the typical low-cost type off-shoot. It's a near a complete integration and sensible pilot unions should have been onto this obvious eventuality long ago.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trafalgar,
As has been said above, staff travel is a company wide perk to all under the CX banner, it's not specific to pilots, the KA groundstaff all got under that banner when CX purchased them years ago and those that joined KA before you and I have been ahead of us in priority for some years now. The fact that CX chose to leave the Cathay Dragon cockpit and cabin crew out and use staff travel as a bargaining tool is typical of CX, and now has some pilots against pilots, it's not a pilot only benefit it's a Cathay Pacific group benefit, which they can amend however they see fit. Our contract says we get access to staff travel it doesn't say we get any say in how it functions which is also why the AOA or any union has no say in the matter either. There's some 25,000+ people who have access to the staff travel system, I'm not sure why you think pilots get to make policy on staff travel?
As has been said above, staff travel is a company wide perk to all under the CX banner, it's not specific to pilots, the KA groundstaff all got under that banner when CX purchased them years ago and those that joined KA before you and I have been ahead of us in priority for some years now. The fact that CX chose to leave the Cathay Dragon cockpit and cabin crew out and use staff travel as a bargaining tool is typical of CX, and now has some pilots against pilots, it's not a pilot only benefit it's a Cathay Pacific group benefit, which they can amend however they see fit. Our contract says we get access to staff travel it doesn't say we get any say in how it functions which is also why the AOA or any union has no say in the matter either. There's some 25,000+ people who have access to the staff travel system, I'm not sure why you think pilots get to make policy on staff travel?
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Posts: 1,539
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand your point. However, I state again for the record: I am not blaming the KA pilots. I blame our management. We have only recently been 'merged', but in reality we are still two separate airlines. Again, it is a hard sell to suggest that 3000+ CX pilots (and other staff) should see employees of another airline bump us of our 'own' airplanes. You can rationalise it all you like, but the reality is that it shouldn't happen, and in 'proper' airlines it wouldn't. I don't wish to see any of your benefits stripped away. This is about CX employees having their own conditions degraded without any recourse. In a way, CX is pitting the KA staff against us, not the other way around. The real blame lies with the usual suspects, our out of touch, venal and incompetent management. I respect the KA pilots and the job they do, I just don't think that the impact on the CX staff is fair in this case.
Your investment in KA was going up in smoke and I understand a lot of money had been paid. The reason ? Contract compliance and people were walking in unsustainable numbers, scorched earth in their wake. Hint, hint BTW.
A team was sent over with a sloganed "Back on Board" campaign that included many contract improvements and the offer of a corporate staff travel scheme. I'm not sure of the timeline but soon after everyone at KA House bar a handful turned into CX employees without protest from the AOA, with their KA start dates preserved as a primer for seniority- this wasn't protested because they knew how you blokes who wear hats work. Then you had the fanfares, business class auctions and economy seated staff jumping your higher class of ticket on the stock-standard over sold flights. The Staff Travel scheme sold to help get us out of CC was turning into a lemon and yes, improvements were pursued by the DPA but of course, the PRI tickets were a surprise as it was a means to shed some of the travel fund. Anecdotally, your leadership knew and said whatever the arguments they would not support the issue in the direction it was going.
KA is CX, integrated under your nose, to advantage because folks like you were bellowing crap like "it's a takeover not a merger", as if the KA buyout was done to suit the sensibilities of the Aussie and Brit pilot group.
A complex, but wasted opportunity.
A team was sent over with a sloganed "Back on Board" campaign that included many contract improvements and the offer of a corporate staff travel scheme. I'm not sure of the timeline but soon after everyone at KA House bar a handful turned into CX employees without protest from the AOA, with their KA start dates preserved as a primer for seniority- this wasn't protested because they knew how you blokes who wear hats work. Then you had the fanfares, business class auctions and economy seated staff jumping your higher class of ticket on the stock-standard over sold flights. The Staff Travel scheme sold to help get us out of CC was turning into a lemon and yes, improvements were pursued by the DPA but of course, the PRI tickets were a surprise as it was a means to shed some of the travel fund. Anecdotally, your leadership knew and said whatever the arguments they would not support the issue in the direction it was going.
KA is CX, integrated under your nose, to advantage because folks like you were bellowing crap like "it's a takeover not a merger", as if the KA buyout was done to suit the sensibilities of the Aussie and Brit pilot group.
A complex, but wasted opportunity.
Last edited by Gnadenburg; 17th Dec 2016 at 05:42.
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally get your point but to be honest 'in reality' we are not a separate airline any more. How do we operate in that case with no Ops/Crew Control/Marketing/Planning etc? All those departments are in CX. The old 'you're a separate airline' argument doesn't really hold water that well anymore.
I've been turning up for flights and had CX staff with a one or two years of service in CX ahead of me for years. I used to think 'that's the way it is, I'm not CX' but that argument doesn't really look the same 10 years in to CX ownership of KA, things are changing. We've been on the receiving end of CX changes ourselves in the past: Our only European base summarily moved to CX years ago and access to that base closed down. Change hasn't always been positive for KA and this latest one didn't come free, some of us had to pay for it, otherwise we would be behind KA pilots who joined last month! What choice is that?!
What should have happened is that in 2006 (and the AOA should have listened to the DPA a little more closely) is that we should have been given ghost CX seniority numbers (if only for staff travel) in case anything like this happened in the future and all new joiners to CX made aware of the fact. I recall it was almost impossible for CX or the AOA to stomach the suggestion from the DPA at the time.
The last thing anybody in KA wants is to be at odds with our mates and colleagues in CX.
In 'proper' airlines the seniority lists would have been merged or a mechanism for avoiding situations like this put in place. Now the company have done it for us as far as staff travel goes. I wonder what's next?
I've been turning up for flights and had CX staff with a one or two years of service in CX ahead of me for years. I used to think 'that's the way it is, I'm not CX' but that argument doesn't really look the same 10 years in to CX ownership of KA, things are changing. We've been on the receiving end of CX changes ourselves in the past: Our only European base summarily moved to CX years ago and access to that base closed down. Change hasn't always been positive for KA and this latest one didn't come free, some of us had to pay for it, otherwise we would be behind KA pilots who joined last month! What choice is that?!
What should have happened is that in 2006 (and the AOA should have listened to the DPA a little more closely) is that we should have been given ghost CX seniority numbers (if only for staff travel) in case anything like this happened in the future and all new joiners to CX made aware of the fact. I recall it was almost impossible for CX or the AOA to stomach the suggestion from the DPA at the time.
The last thing anybody in KA wants is to be at odds with our mates and colleagues in CX.
In 'proper' airlines the seniority lists would have been merged or a mechanism for avoiding situations like this put in place. Now the company have done it for us as far as staff travel goes. I wonder what's next?
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My point is I wanted the option of saying I don't want better priority on KA so I can also keep my priority over KA pilots on CX.
This isn't an option and it should be.
Leave out the "KA pilots are wonderful" bull****, the DPA lobbied the company hard to get priority over us without any consultation with the AOA.
This isn't an option and it should be.
Leave out the "KA pilots are wonderful" bull****, the DPA lobbied the company hard to get priority over us without any consultation with the AOA.
The DPA lobbied to get what the rest of KA staff all got and CX management used it in negotiations something the rest of KA didn't even have to negotiate.
Try and keep your eye on the ball.
Last edited by Avinthenews; 17th Dec 2016 at 07:02.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: York International
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are a broken record. Get over it. We are all now quite rightly enjoying the benefits of the Cathay Group. It is not all about white male pilots you know. The PEN and KL commuting cabin crew are very pleased about the new group staff travel. So too others from Taiwan, Japan etc.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm starting to think the whole 'basings' thing is and largely has been a ploy to ensnare a few folks who have other options with false hopes until they have too much skin in the game.
There is no reason they shouldn't have gone large by now in several venues. The economics fully support it--especially if you're trying to cut costs and save money.
This place sometimes seems to me to be really good at getting folks to chase fleeting needles (or moving goalposts if you prefer) at the expense of other more important things in life.
Sometimes the character traits of strong motivation and drive can become a liability when they stray in the wrong direction.
Although what DOES amaze me is after 2 years the powers that be haven't figured out that unstable rosters work both ways, cut in all directions, and really hurt productivity as well as increase costs.
There is no reason they shouldn't have gone large by now in several venues. The economics fully support it--especially if you're trying to cut costs and save money.
This place sometimes seems to me to be really good at getting folks to chase fleeting needles (or moving goalposts if you prefer) at the expense of other more important things in life.
Sometimes the character traits of strong motivation and drive can become a liability when they stray in the wrong direction.
Although what DOES amaze me is after 2 years the powers that be haven't figured out that unstable rosters work both ways, cut in all directions, and really hurt productivity as well as increase costs.
Last edited by Shep69; 19th Dec 2016 at 13:53.
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Nirvana
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With unstable rosters you get to really show who is calling the shots. That's important. Like fuel hedging, if you pay more for it, you've got be impressed by the outstanding management practices that clearly show they have a brilliant understanding of the market. Market leaders and not followers. I am suitably impressed, as they are themselves.
Join Date: Mar 2016
Location: America
Posts: 134
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crew control also uses rostering as a punishment tool. This is why the CMP will be nothing but a trick to make you think you have a say. The only way to fix it is to leave. The ship is going down anyway and there are just better things in life than dealing with these muppets. Basings will have strings attached and just like before, the lambs will show up for the slaughter. The yanks still, even though they signed the CBA, do not have an A day program. Why, because the FRMS, and that idiot NM, said no! I cannot stand her.
Why do people keep signing anything with these people? It's like they know how easy most will fall in line. It is also why they will take away housing next year. You watch.
Why do people keep signing anything with these people? It's like they know how easy most will fall in line. It is also why they will take away housing next year. You watch.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sickening silence from the AOA. Which admittedly is slightly more welcome than the one line from a GC member 8 or so months back stating "we can't do anything".
If the AOA put out a survey asking "why are you a member of the AOA?", I'm willing to bet my 13th Month that the answer is "For the Insurance". That's my answer anyway.
If the AOA put out a survey asking "why are you a member of the AOA?", I'm willing to bet my 13th Month that the answer is "For the Insurance". That's my answer anyway.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: VHHH Ocean 2D
Posts: 726
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh wow, I don't think I've ever heard that one before.
I've heard that during the induction of new GC members, they are told to say that exact response when backed into a corner.
I've heard that during the induction of new GC members, they are told to say that exact response when backed into a corner.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
shortly2:
SCMP 23 December 2016
Smog takes huge toll on health in China
Study suggests nearly one-third of deaths in the country are related to air pollution
Alice Yan
[email protected]
Smog is related to nearly one-third of deaths on the mainland, putting it on a par with smoking as a threat to health, according to an academic paper based on the study of air pollution and mortality data in 74 cities and published in an international journal.
The findings by Nanjing University's School of the Environment, which were published in the November edition of the journal Science of the Total Environment, provide the latest estimates of the health cost of the nation's notorious smog.
The latest bout of smog began last Friday, affecting about half a BILLION people on the mainland.
Previous research work has found equally alarming results about the country's toxic air.
The International Energy Agency published it's first study on air pollution in Juneand estimated that severe air pollution has shortened life expectancy by 25 months.
An academic paper in 2013, co-authored by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute Of Technology in the United States, Tsinghua University, Peking University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, concluded that bad air had cut life expectancy by an average of 5.5 years in the North of the country.
There are so far no concrete or widely agreed estimates on the impact of air pollution on health partly because it's complicated to measure and there is little historical precedent for prolonged exposure to such high levels of air pollution.
The six researchers from Nanjing University said they conducted the study because air pollution was the "most severe and worrisome environmental problem in China", but knowledge of it's health effects was insufficient.
...Over the past week, hundreds of flights were grounded, schools suspended classes, private cars were banned from city roads in the north, highways were closed and hospitals were jammed with patients suffering from a level of air pollution that, in many places, exceeded the limit of air quality monitoring devices.
...Even though the government pledged to scale down production, factories are still stepping up operations and local authorities are worried that production suspensions may lead to an economic downturn.
Average life expectancies:
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.
Smog takes huge toll on health in China
Study suggests nearly one-third of deaths in the country are related to air pollution
Alice Yan
[email protected]
Smog is related to nearly one-third of deaths on the mainland, putting it on a par with smoking as a threat to health, according to an academic paper based on the study of air pollution and mortality data in 74 cities and published in an international journal.
The findings by Nanjing University's School of the Environment, which were published in the November edition of the journal Science of the Total Environment, provide the latest estimates of the health cost of the nation's notorious smog.
The latest bout of smog began last Friday, affecting about half a BILLION people on the mainland.
Previous research work has found equally alarming results about the country's toxic air.
The International Energy Agency published it's first study on air pollution in Juneand estimated that severe air pollution has shortened life expectancy by 25 months.
An academic paper in 2013, co-authored by researchers from the Massachusetts Institute Of Technology in the United States, Tsinghua University, Peking University and the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, concluded that bad air had cut life expectancy by an average of 5.5 years in the North of the country.
There are so far no concrete or widely agreed estimates on the impact of air pollution on health partly because it's complicated to measure and there is little historical precedent for prolonged exposure to such high levels of air pollution.
The six researchers from Nanjing University said they conducted the study because air pollution was the "most severe and worrisome environmental problem in China", but knowledge of it's health effects was insufficient.
...Over the past week, hundreds of flights were grounded, schools suspended classes, private cars were banned from city roads in the north, highways were closed and hospitals were jammed with patients suffering from a level of air pollution that, in many places, exceeded the limit of air quality monitoring devices.
...Even though the government pledged to scale down production, factories are still stepping up operations and local authorities are worried that production suspensions may lead to an economic downturn.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: hk
Age: 67
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PL,
Too much champagne over Xmas? I was merely pointing out that these Perth base slots are going to some very senior pilots (i.e. requiring a seniority number which is still in A-scale territory).
Happy 2017
AB
Too much champagne over Xmas? I was merely pointing out that these Perth base slots are going to some very senior pilots (i.e. requiring a seniority number which is still in A-scale territory).
Happy 2017
AB
Last edited by AQIS Boigu; 28th Dec 2016 at 12:06.
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, PL and AB, I think it's going to be the opposite.
Not arguing that one is going to have to be senior, it's just not going to be as senior as you may think.
I have had a look at where I would be in the base allocation position, and to my surprise, it was fairly high up in the rankings. Given that I know where I stand on the seniority list, it became obvious to me that there may have been only one or two "A scalers" requesting the base. The rest of the "requestees" are from the middle of the B scale pack.
This has lead me to think that maybe these guys are on COS99, and would wish to extend, but cannot in HKG. Et viola, they can on a base.
Not arguing that one is going to have to be senior, it's just not going to be as senior as you may think.
I have had a look at where I would be in the base allocation position, and to my surprise, it was fairly high up in the rankings. Given that I know where I stand on the seniority list, it became obvious to me that there may have been only one or two "A scalers" requesting the base. The rest of the "requestees" are from the middle of the B scale pack.
This has lead me to think that maybe these guys are on COS99, and would wish to extend, but cannot in HKG. Et viola, they can on a base.
Last edited by OK4Wire; 28th Dec 2016 at 23:29. Reason: added AB
[QUOTE]Average life expectancies:
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.[QUOTE]
If you are so bereft of any common sense that you can look out the window and still believe that tripe then you really shouldn't be flying an aeroplane.
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.[QUOTE]
If you are so bereft of any common sense that you can look out the window and still believe that tripe then you really shouldn't be flying an aeroplane.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Average life expectancies:
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.
Hong Kong 83.48, Australia 82.10, USA 78.74 etc etc. I am happy here.
China fog alert: Beijing issues first-ever red alert for fog - CNN.com