CX Recruitment Ban
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone? Anyone?
.....again no one is willing to answer my question
"Where" has it been guaranteed in writing by the AOA OR better still "WHEN" will it be guaranteed , that for those who show loyalty to the ban , they will be looked after and secured a job with CX when the dust settles??
Anyone? Anyone?
FrankG - Professionals do not take upgrades / jobs of fellow work mates! plain and simple. This is why you have NO argument!!
FAN MAN
"Where" has it been guaranteed in writing by the AOA OR better still "WHEN" will it be guaranteed , that for those who show loyalty to the ban , they will be looked after and secured a job with CX when the dust settles??
Anyone? Anyone?
FrankG - Professionals do not take upgrades / jobs of fellow work mates! plain and simple. This is why you have NO argument!!
FAN MAN
Fan Man
Your blades are obviously not turning.
Th AOA is currently supporting the bulk of the 49'ers. That in my view meets your criterion.
As to guaranteeing to secure jobs at CX for the rest of those of conscience, the AOA will do what it can however a recommendation from the AOA to current management might not amount to much me thinks.
The case has been put on the issue of upgrades. You may choose to disagree but let me put it to you that most if not all of those that have taken upgrades since late 2001 would accept downgrades should that be required to make room.
The reality is that there is currently a major shortage in the system especially on the 400 and a bunch of guys are currently being dragged off the bus onto the 400. As I mentioned previously there is also a substantial bunch of guys in their early 50's who will leave over the next few years. The upgrade issue is a red herring.
Your blades are obviously not turning.
Th AOA is currently supporting the bulk of the 49'ers. That in my view meets your criterion.
As to guaranteeing to secure jobs at CX for the rest of those of conscience, the AOA will do what it can however a recommendation from the AOA to current management might not amount to much me thinks.
The case has been put on the issue of upgrades. You may choose to disagree but let me put it to you that most if not all of those that have taken upgrades since late 2001 would accept downgrades should that be required to make room.
The reality is that there is currently a major shortage in the system especially on the 400 and a bunch of guys are currently being dragged off the bus onto the 400. As I mentioned previously there is also a substantial bunch of guys in their early 50's who will leave over the next few years. The upgrade issue is a red herring.
Last edited by VR-HFX; 12th Jul 2002 at 01:31.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is a topic where there is obviously quite a bit of emotion surrounding the fact - and quite rightfully so. I couldn't imagine anything worse than the treatment your fellow staff were given, and in some cases continue to be given.
From another side of a coin though, try and remember back to what it was like for those of you who have the lifestyle associated with being in a large airline, back to what it was like when you worked for some piddly little tin-pot outfit crashing around in either a single or small multi engine PISTON-engined aircraft in the middle of the night, being paid absolute insulting pay - if any at all! You really can't blame young people for wanting to ignore the ban and come on board. Personally, I would hate to be in their shoes..... give up a damn good chance at getting ahead (even if using it as a stepping stone) or staying in an outfit that may end up killing you?
I may be talking through a hole in my head as I have not been privy to alot of the information that CX crews have - and I hope that it all gets sorted out sooner rather than later, as there are some really good pilots sitting on top of a really big manure heap that really need a job.....
From another side of a coin though, try and remember back to what it was like for those of you who have the lifestyle associated with being in a large airline, back to what it was like when you worked for some piddly little tin-pot outfit crashing around in either a single or small multi engine PISTON-engined aircraft in the middle of the night, being paid absolute insulting pay - if any at all! You really can't blame young people for wanting to ignore the ban and come on board. Personally, I would hate to be in their shoes..... give up a damn good chance at getting ahead (even if using it as a stepping stone) or staying in an outfit that may end up killing you?
I may be talking through a hole in my head as I have not been privy to alot of the information that CX crews have - and I hope that it all gets sorted out sooner rather than later, as there are some really good pilots sitting on top of a really big manure heap that really need a job.....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was going to stay out of this lunatic asylum of a debate as my delicate sensitivities are easily offended by the vitriolic, unreasonable, puerile and child-like responses to anything perceived as 'anti dis-union'. But cripey the ban a red herring!!! I have rarely read such an arrogant remark tossed in so casually. It unfortunately epitomises the position of those militant few within the dis-union. The ban is NOT working, all courses are filled as far as the eye can see with new persons from all continents taking the slots. Even that icon of union virtue, the US of A is yielding candiates capable of meeting the requirements of CX. When those 50 ish year olds leave, their places will be grabbed by members of the AOA acceptable to management acceptable to management, and their places will be easily filled by aircrew who will not join and be apathetic to the dis-union and their places will be easily filled by aircrew who will not join and be apathetic to the union. Don't you get it, are you blind? The management is fragmenting the pilot body yet again and you are willing pawns to the action. When are you going to wake up and smell the coffee? And dear old polite Frankg says 'the ban makes sense', he would.
Shortly my dear chap
Seeming that you are so delicately sensitive, I would have expected you to be able to read.
Where in my post did I say that the ban was a red herring? What I said was that the issue of upgrades is a red herring. The two issues are quite different.
There seems to be a body of thought that those currently employed at CX are a bunch of hypocrites for continuing to take upgrades. What I was trying to point out is that accepting upgrades is the only way to preserve CX employment as a career for all. You talk of militancy and arrogance, I see measured restraint and as I said before all would gladly hand back the upgrade if it was required to settle the issue.
I do not wish to get into a debate on semantics as to whether the glass is half full or half empty but as far as I am concerned (and mine is just one opinion) the ban is not about stopping people seeking a job at CX but about allowing them to make an informed decision with all the facts to hand.
Life is too short for scab lists and and all the bile. It is unlikely that anyone joining in the current environment would forever be banned from anything. As history in the US has shown people mellow once things settle down.
I am sorry I lost the thread you were trying to weave in your last few sentences. Would you care to have another shot at translating what you are obviously trying so hard to express.
Seeming that you are so delicately sensitive, I would have expected you to be able to read.
Where in my post did I say that the ban was a red herring? What I said was that the issue of upgrades is a red herring. The two issues are quite different.
There seems to be a body of thought that those currently employed at CX are a bunch of hypocrites for continuing to take upgrades. What I was trying to point out is that accepting upgrades is the only way to preserve CX employment as a career for all. You talk of militancy and arrogance, I see measured restraint and as I said before all would gladly hand back the upgrade if it was required to settle the issue.
I do not wish to get into a debate on semantics as to whether the glass is half full or half empty but as far as I am concerned (and mine is just one opinion) the ban is not about stopping people seeking a job at CX but about allowing them to make an informed decision with all the facts to hand.
Life is too short for scab lists and and all the bile. It is unlikely that anyone joining in the current environment would forever be banned from anything. As history in the US has shown people mellow once things settle down.
I am sorry I lost the thread you were trying to weave in your last few sentences. Would you care to have another shot at translating what you are obviously trying so hard to express.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fair cop HFX, I find it difficult to differentiate between those people who took upgrades - ergo replacing the 49ers- and those who take jobs lower down the food chain to replace the upgradees and fill new slots made available by expansion. My point is that management at CX have effectively split the pilot body since the inception of B grade salaries, then ASL etc. I know that all courses are filled with well qualified newbies until early next year, I know that all interviews - both initial and final are also full, I know that all command courses are being readily filled. Therefore the ban is impotent. The bigger problem is that the newbies are joining the company and not the union, and all upgrades to replace the old farts will be at the Company's discretion and obviously only those deemed to be 'company loyal' will get a guernsey. You would give up your slot and more credit to you for that because I doubt the chance would come around again for you. But all the 'company loyal' folk would not, so once again, in my opinion, it would a vain sacrifice. This 'measured restraint' in industrial action has been ongoing now for about ten years and where has it got us? 50 odd good folk unemployed, an effective 4 per cent pay cut for AOA members and the company bottom line is well in the black. The contract issue day came and went with the company placing conditions of service in the manuals. They are smart, they didn't reduce anything. We must go forward and emotional as it was, publicity stunts like yellow bus trips won't cut the mustard. Have a chat to members of the public or ground staff and get an idea of the depth of feeling against the AOA. I will not slag the AOA executive but I honestly feel their strategies will not work in Hong Kong - or most anywhere else these days. We need common sense and good judgement now, we need to get back to the table with management and they won't be bullied back. Would a new committee be more effective? Maybe not, but it would be an indication on the AOA's part that they want to talk not fight. I have said for a long time now that all industrial action must be stopped - it's not working anyway. Thank you for your reasonable response and good luck.
Shortly
Thanks for the expanded critique.
As we have found, there is far more commonality in our view of the world than difference. The sad truth is, this also applies to the company as a whole.
I certainly agree that the B scale has proved divisive. The erosion to the A scale has also created mischief and misguided perceptions. It is time to put everything into one volume.
The ban is probably impotent but I see it more as a 'caveat emptor' than intimidatory tool.
What I was suggesting is that many if not all would revert back to their old slot on the seniority tree if it would help resolve that one niggling issue of due process. I say this because many are in essence doing so already via increased subs to the AOA.
Demographics and growth guarantee that RHS time will gradually reduce from its near all time high so there is going to be more than enough slots to go around.
I wish I knew the trigger that would get a sensible resolution. I agree with you on publicity stunts. They may be good for internal morale but often have a negative effect on public perception.
A leap of faith is required from both sides. The question is who goes first. On current form it will have to be the AOA.
Good luck to you too.
Thanks for the expanded critique.
As we have found, there is far more commonality in our view of the world than difference. The sad truth is, this also applies to the company as a whole.
I certainly agree that the B scale has proved divisive. The erosion to the A scale has also created mischief and misguided perceptions. It is time to put everything into one volume.
The ban is probably impotent but I see it more as a 'caveat emptor' than intimidatory tool.
What I was suggesting is that many if not all would revert back to their old slot on the seniority tree if it would help resolve that one niggling issue of due process. I say this because many are in essence doing so already via increased subs to the AOA.
Demographics and growth guarantee that RHS time will gradually reduce from its near all time high so there is going to be more than enough slots to go around.
I wish I knew the trigger that would get a sensible resolution. I agree with you on publicity stunts. They may be good for internal morale but often have a negative effect on public perception.
A leap of faith is required from both sides. The question is who goes first. On current form it will have to be the AOA.
Good luck to you too.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: HK
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AOA was clear in 2000 and 2001, Cathay management needed to be punished, to be shown that the AOA wasn’t toothless. A “militant” committee seemed to look forward to, and welcomed a showdown, blaming a lack of industrial muscle for the 93 and 99 contracts. Goal posts in negotiations shifted from rosters to remuneration & benefits. The AOA RP negotiation team withdrew their offer to CX in May 2001, on the basis that that AOA now had the upper hand, so should go for more than rostering.
The new demands were well thought out, something for everyone in the AOA, whatever scale or base, to ensure all onside. The LIA was well planned, well thought out, and well executed. A rational management would work out that the new contract would cost X, the LIA Y, and once Y> X, would cave in. That’s how it works in the States. Captain Demery said himself “it will end when someone high up in the organization will say “This is stupid and inefficient, its costing us money…”
So, a year or so ago the AOA turned down a “best and final offer” from CX management. Not only was it turned down, but full page newspaper adverts were in the papers ridiculing Swire management, questioning the right for a UK based firm to run a HK airline, thus ensuring that any residual goodwill London might feel for “their boys” evaporated. In a face based society, delivering a public insult to the top wasn’t the best idea. Especially when the LIA strategy depended on someone senior in the organisation stepping in…
One problem emerged. CX management wasn’t rational. X and Y would never be calculated. The CX negotiating team had reported back that the AOA wanted everything on the wish list, no compromise likely
AOA newsletters predicted victimisation, promised retaliation and full support, with no resolution to the dispute until all victims were reinstated, with back pay. Two out of three happened – the retaliation didn’t happen. CX essentially called out the AOA, and the AOA blinked, not shutting down the airline.
The committee was then somewhat lost. The coalition for LIA, built on something for everyone, wasn’t enough for anyone to risk losing their job over, especially after the company imposed a pay increase. The issues left were the 49’ers, and a more abstract one of how should the company be run. Again, neither of which would be enough for the majority to stick their neck out over, so a ban on upgrades wouldn’t stick. The only thing left was a ban on recruitment, retreat, and hope that the company would overreach itself, pushing enough pilots to the point of no return when LIA could be effective again.
Jumping at the chance, the company did the opposite. The slowdown in the economy after 911 allowed rosters (the main point of friction for a pilot on a day to day basis) to be relaxed, improving most guys quality of life. Recruitment was stepped up, to catch the AOA in a bear squeeze. New recruits can’t join the AOA, and as senior captains continue to retire, the AOA income base will decline (of course, some senior pilots had already calculated that even if the AOA won, the improved benefits would never offset the 4-5% levy to the AOA given the short time they have left, so aren’t paying anyway) If the AOA returns to LIA before the majority of the crew are willing to lay their jobs on the line, the risk is the ranks of the 49’ers will swell, putting more financial strain.
In summary, at some point the AOA decided to make the dispute about “how, and who runs an airline” rather than just R&RB. CX decided to try and turn the AOA back to a flying club, and training ground for future managers, because to question “how, and who runs an airline” is to question the whole legitimacy of the post ’97 compromise between Swire and CAAC.
So the standoff continues, with a group of 400 or so non AOA pilots, about 500 AOA members who just wish none of this had ever happened, 500 AOA members who are watching their bucket of sh*t fill up, and 300 AOA members who will do what it takes to get revenge.
My prediction? Non AOA numbers will increase, as new recruits come in and AOA fence sitters throw in the towel. The “bucket” guys will slowly leave, or (if the rosters stay loose) will become fence sitters. The 300 will hate the company they work for always and forever.
So, new joiners will face a core of hatred, but most will either just view them with disdain, or be sympathetic.
The new demands were well thought out, something for everyone in the AOA, whatever scale or base, to ensure all onside. The LIA was well planned, well thought out, and well executed. A rational management would work out that the new contract would cost X, the LIA Y, and once Y> X, would cave in. That’s how it works in the States. Captain Demery said himself “it will end when someone high up in the organization will say “This is stupid and inefficient, its costing us money…”
So, a year or so ago the AOA turned down a “best and final offer” from CX management. Not only was it turned down, but full page newspaper adverts were in the papers ridiculing Swire management, questioning the right for a UK based firm to run a HK airline, thus ensuring that any residual goodwill London might feel for “their boys” evaporated. In a face based society, delivering a public insult to the top wasn’t the best idea. Especially when the LIA strategy depended on someone senior in the organisation stepping in…
One problem emerged. CX management wasn’t rational. X and Y would never be calculated. The CX negotiating team had reported back that the AOA wanted everything on the wish list, no compromise likely
AOA newsletters predicted victimisation, promised retaliation and full support, with no resolution to the dispute until all victims were reinstated, with back pay. Two out of three happened – the retaliation didn’t happen. CX essentially called out the AOA, and the AOA blinked, not shutting down the airline.
The committee was then somewhat lost. The coalition for LIA, built on something for everyone, wasn’t enough for anyone to risk losing their job over, especially after the company imposed a pay increase. The issues left were the 49’ers, and a more abstract one of how should the company be run. Again, neither of which would be enough for the majority to stick their neck out over, so a ban on upgrades wouldn’t stick. The only thing left was a ban on recruitment, retreat, and hope that the company would overreach itself, pushing enough pilots to the point of no return when LIA could be effective again.
Jumping at the chance, the company did the opposite. The slowdown in the economy after 911 allowed rosters (the main point of friction for a pilot on a day to day basis) to be relaxed, improving most guys quality of life. Recruitment was stepped up, to catch the AOA in a bear squeeze. New recruits can’t join the AOA, and as senior captains continue to retire, the AOA income base will decline (of course, some senior pilots had already calculated that even if the AOA won, the improved benefits would never offset the 4-5% levy to the AOA given the short time they have left, so aren’t paying anyway) If the AOA returns to LIA before the majority of the crew are willing to lay their jobs on the line, the risk is the ranks of the 49’ers will swell, putting more financial strain.
In summary, at some point the AOA decided to make the dispute about “how, and who runs an airline” rather than just R&RB. CX decided to try and turn the AOA back to a flying club, and training ground for future managers, because to question “how, and who runs an airline” is to question the whole legitimacy of the post ’97 compromise between Swire and CAAC.
So the standoff continues, with a group of 400 or so non AOA pilots, about 500 AOA members who just wish none of this had ever happened, 500 AOA members who are watching their bucket of sh*t fill up, and 300 AOA members who will do what it takes to get revenge.
My prediction? Non AOA numbers will increase, as new recruits come in and AOA fence sitters throw in the towel. The “bucket” guys will slowly leave, or (if the rosters stay loose) will become fence sitters. The 300 will hate the company they work for always and forever.
So, new joiners will face a core of hatred, but most will either just view them with disdain, or be sympathetic.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Surrounded by aluminum, and the great outdoors
Posts: 3,780
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the ban has been and is well publicized
yup it sure is....a well publicized cockup....thanks there Kaptin M for the compliment...I've been criticized by far better blokes than the likes of you....still bitter about "9-to-5in'89 lost our jobs now hear us whine"..
Last edited by ironbutt57; 15th Jul 2002 at 20:40.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Sydney
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone refresh my memory because it's getting slightly clogged up with periphery information doo-doo's..... the ban is on new recruits that have had nothing to do with the company or it's recent history, but not on upgrading of existing pilots (ie those who are meant to be 'brothers' to those who lost their jobs)?
Either I'm confused, wrong or something is plain dumb here....
:o
Either I'm confused, wrong or something is plain dumb here....
:o
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are correct Sharfted, it does seem more than a little hypocritical that AOA members filled the vacancies left by the martyrs of union stupidity then they villify newbies filling spaces made by expansion and aircraft return. I can hear the supporters of the ban now, it's working - rubbish, it's a legitimate union industrial action - maybe if the ban was not a claytons one , it has the support of IFALPA - of course it does, doesn't hurt any of them does it, it has the support of the majority of pilots - lmao and given HK's draconian industrial laws what else can we do? Simple answer give up all industrial action, change the Committee - at the least for cosmetic sake and return to negotiation. Wait for things to change politically here and then when you have a hope of success - if you are still bloody minded about the Company - start again. Yes I know about lists and things but at the end of the day hundreds of pilots not in any union local or international is grist for the mills of management everywhere. Smell the coffee guys please. You are unwilling players in a drama which will adversely affect industrial relations all over our industry for a long time. (Exclude the 49ers from my next please) You are not valiant soldiers battling the nemesis of freedom - management at CX- you are pawns in a much bigger game being keenly observed by the biggest and boldest captains of industries everywhere. I firmly believe we are setting the wrong standards here.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hello Kitty City
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Art of War
All warfare is based on deception.
Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity.
When near, make it appear that you are far away; when far away that you are near.
Offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike him!
Sun Tzu, 'The Art of War'
*** I wonder, of the Management or AOA, who is capable and who is posturing/faking it!
yukan fucov
Therefore, when capable, feign incapacity; when active, inactivity.
When near, make it appear that you are far away; when far away that you are near.
Offer the enemy a bait to lure him; feign disorder and strike him!
Sun Tzu, 'The Art of War'
*** I wonder, of the Management or AOA, who is capable and who is posturing/faking it!
yukan fucov
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yukan, first I think your name is not funny but an indication of your muddled mind if you think it is.
'Selection and maintenance of the aim.' The first rule of war. I wonder whose aim is being maintained now? AOA losing members and barring others from joining, conditions of service neatly parcelled into company manuals, none of the 49ers re-instated, aircraft running on time, all courses filled until next year, waiting lists for those same courses, company running well in the black and of course the ban is still in place. 'Once you resort to conflict complications generally multiply...and nobody thinks of everything'. Mark McCormack. He's a business lawyer just to show how widely read I am lol.
'Selection and maintenance of the aim.' The first rule of war. I wonder whose aim is being maintained now? AOA losing members and barring others from joining, conditions of service neatly parcelled into company manuals, none of the 49ers re-instated, aircraft running on time, all courses filled until next year, waiting lists for those same courses, company running well in the black and of course the ban is still in place. 'Once you resort to conflict complications generally multiply...and nobody thinks of everything'. Mark McCormack. He's a business lawyer just to show how widely read I am lol.
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2 letters hustler.....b.s.
and you are full of it so just toddle off back to cprune with your malcontent comrades and post there.
Furthermore, the AOA GC is quoting 455 non members which now brings your union membership at approx 950 ....and falling with further resignations.
Lies are easily exposed.
Bye bye now...off you go.
and you are full of it so just toddle off back to cprune with your malcontent comrades and post there.
Furthermore, the AOA GC is quoting 455 non members which now brings your union membership at approx 950 ....and falling with further resignations.
Lies are easily exposed.
Bye bye now...off you go.
Last edited by fire wall; 24th Jul 2002 at 12:48.
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Hello Kitty City
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shortly, a name is just a name....sticks and stones etc......more importantly, Ive been looking in here for a while and apart from the odd post after a few too many red wines (yes, I am criticising your grammar!) I am 110% with you.....please read my post again from 'our' point of view.
Hustler: Never let the facts get in the way of a good story? CX has never hired anyone with less than 1000 hrs fixed wing! (Some have had 1000'ish..... but all have significant [read several thousand] rotary hours)
As for you inane BE76 comments....what rubbish. After all many ex-military guys arrive at CX with about 5hrs multi from their MEIR. (Of course their 3000 Tornado hours mean ****** all too) And what of our resident F117 driver...... any words of advice for him, oh wise one? (Perhaps youd like him to 'get some multi-piston time up?)
US courses are FULL....I say again...F-U-L-L, with both FOs and SOs joining and that my little pornstar is a F-A-C-T.
Still you write a good fairytale.
yukan fucov
Hustler: Never let the facts get in the way of a good story? CX has never hired anyone with less than 1000 hrs fixed wing! (Some have had 1000'ish..... but all have significant [read several thousand] rotary hours)
As for you inane BE76 comments....what rubbish. After all many ex-military guys arrive at CX with about 5hrs multi from their MEIR. (Of course their 3000 Tornado hours mean ****** all too) And what of our resident F117 driver...... any words of advice for him, oh wise one? (Perhaps youd like him to 'get some multi-piston time up?)
US courses are FULL....I say again...F-U-L-L, with both FOs and SOs joining and that my little pornstar is a F-A-C-T.
Still you write a good fairytale.
yukan fucov
ZbV
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Samsonite
Age: 51
Posts: 799
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Now that was interesting reading.
So how long will this hiring ban be in effect ? Will this be one of these 30 year wars or would there be a dlight possibilitythat it might end before I retire in 2035?
So how long will this hiring ban be in effect ? Will this be one of these 30 year wars or would there be a dlight possibilitythat it might end before I retire in 2035?