Where is the HKAOA heading?
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: VHHK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Liam Gallagher
The Company would still be coming after your COS, except the Training Department would be full and we would all still be bound by Clause 7 and the Company's lawyers would be poised to sue anyone that breached.
We are almost half way though the 3 year period now, and we have nothing to show for it. Except more threats of items that would have been protected (by having them included in your COS) are now available for cutting because they are policy.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HKFooey,
Nobody's going to voluntarily agree to concessions, the DFO knows that. The DFO is just preparing the ground to issue a "sign or be fired". If you weren't around in 1999, ask an [email protected] to explain what's about to happen.
Soon, it won't matter what's written in your COS and what's not. Had you accepted last year's TA, it would also be in the DFO's crosshairs. However, clause 7 was not dependent on the rest of TA, it would have survived a "signed or be fired" and limited your ability to defend yourself. This was all explained on the HKAOA forums last year. That's why clause 7 was so dangerous.
Nobody's going to voluntarily agree to concessions, the DFO knows that. The DFO is just preparing the ground to issue a "sign or be fired". If you weren't around in 1999, ask an [email protected] to explain what's about to happen.
Soon, it won't matter what's written in your COS and what's not. Had you accepted last year's TA, it would also be in the DFO's crosshairs. However, clause 7 was not dependent on the rest of TA, it would have survived a "signed or be fired" and limited your ability to defend yourself. This was all explained on the HKAOA forums last year. That's why clause 7 was so dangerous.
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: one country, one system
Age: 54
Posts: 418
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Liam,
last years TA included specifically a 2 year housing deal, plus 5% and no productivity increase.
Of course we should have signed, don't spin it. We were fools.
last years TA included specifically a 2 year housing deal, plus 5% and no productivity increase.
Of course we should have signed, don't spin it. We were fools.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 323
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Sam Ting Wong
Liam,
last years TA included specifically a 2 year housing deal, plus 5% and no productivity increase.
Of course we should have signed, don't spin it. We were fools.
last years TA included specifically a 2 year housing deal, plus 5% and no productivity increase.
Of course we should have signed, don't spin it. We were fools.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: somewhere above the sea
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STW get this through your head. Even if the TA which you so long for was voted in, are you that naive to believe the DFO in her current rantings, wouldn't have made the same statements about pay and increment freezes? So you would have still lost your 2%, and have no industrial recourse.
You could have agreed to everything they wanted, it wouldn't have stopped them losing 2.5B USD and counting on hedging, and subsequently come looking to everyone else to fix their [email protected]&kup.
You could have agreed to everything they wanted, it wouldn't have stopped them losing 2.5B USD and counting on hedging, and subsequently come looking to everyone else to fix their [email protected]&kup.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Koh Samui Thailand
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fear Not !
I cannot recall any AOA president or GC member rising above the rank of STC after betraying their members.
The one thing Swire's value over everything is loyalty and 'selling out' ( even if it is the enemy ) is frowned upon.
Old school.
I cannot recall any AOA president or GC member rising above the rank of STC after betraying their members.
The one thing Swire's value over everything is loyalty and 'selling out' ( even if it is the enemy ) is frowned upon.
Old school.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: hong kong
Posts: 168
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by OK4Wire
Exactly, Ron. It worries me that STW does not understand that at all.
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Curtain rod not sure if that is entirely accurate the company would of come after ARAPA now granted but they would of had to do it through a COS amendment then or forcing everyone to sign something... now they bypassing that by reinterpreting suitable accommodation it seems. We might of been in a stronger position had they of been forced to make us all sign a new contract. Contract law in Hong Kong is our only strength it seems.
