HPE - ARAPA

[Brokeidiot]

Originally Posted by controlledrest

Company has given fair-share rostering as a bribe to the spiky hair crowd. No cost to the Company, removes transparency from the roster and makes the spikys happy. The only fair rostering is strict seniority.

Next they will offer an increase in the living allowance.

At the other end they will look after the Trainers.

In the middle they will screw over the ARAPA guys.

AOA needs to add a rule - No agreement will be entered into if it comes at the cost of concessions from any pilot group.

This company has never been a strict seniority rostered airline so why should it be now. Ah probably because you are more then halfway through your career here so you only stand to benefit.

[ANTIPHOLUS]

Quick command .....most of the guys here who are 55 or thereabouts took 10 yrs + to command,unless they were trampling over seniority like those f@cktards of the NTSB or ASL.
And it's been anything but fair share..ask a fairly senior guy on the freighter fleet how fairshare is working out . Even in the dying days of the jumbo pax operation, the last 3 or 4 years of decent trips were monopolized by the same 10 or 15 individual captains on super compact rosters..fairshare my arse...

[ANTIPHOLUS]

Again more . Probably the top 150 (out of what, 3200+ ) got their commands in the salad days. Hardly representative of the demographic now. Hardly “ most of the individuals”. Representative of senior trainers and indeed managers ( not all by any means ) however that is what you would expect in any airline, that the senior people gravitate there. And they’ll wither on the vine soon enough. The creation of ASL over more than a few careers, not only on the freighter; your original point was about fairshare, was it not ? There has never been fair share here, more luck of the draw as to what fleet you ended up on.
I take it from your level of bias your ex ASL ? Either that or you don’t know your head from your arse.

[Trafalgar]

Curtain. I admire, respect and appreciate nearly all your posts. However, in this case I think you are a bit off-base. Antipholus nails it in his concise explanation. Let's not bicker amongst ourselves when the real enemy is a management hell-bent on destroying our financial security, careers and health. All to pad their own bonuses and then move onto the next Swire gravy train.

[Trafalgar]

All fair points, but I believe so were those from Antipholus. Ultimately, none of us can do much about what happened in the past, but we sure must stay focused on the main and imminent threat. Management LOVE to see us bickering. I'm so traumatized by the threat that I don't think I can concentrate fully on the job. Safety first. Shame it has to coincide with the holidays....

[Trafalgar]

Your last point was spot on. Screw the negotiations. The crisis IS self-generated and CX is using it to force cuts. Not a single one of us should be playing that game. I know what my contract says. And so do the lawyers. Hopefully the AOA will realise that none of us are going to accept having our long fought for benefits and conditions 'negotiated' away. That won't pass 'go'.

[controlledrest]

Originally Posted by Brokeidiot

This company has never been a strict seniority rostered airline so why should it be now. Ah probably because you are more then halfway through your career here so you only stand to benefit.

There has never had a request system that works. With strict seniority the system becomes transparent so we can see when the company is screwing with us. And no, it will be a long time before I would benefit from strict seniority.

[morningcoffee]

Mike, I’ll take the laughable hypocrisy of pilots for 5 points

Back in the day, A scalers got offered RA65 and as a result every B scaler got the choice of RA55 with bypass pay to compensate for additional years as an F/O. And here we are, B scalers on RA55 now want RA65 but couldn’t give a rats ass about bypass pay that the C scalers should be entitled to as a result of them also getting additional years as an F/O.

Back in the day the AOA fought tooth and nail to offer commands on the Freighter to anyone who would take it because $24K housing ($38ish in today’s money) was more than enough to live on in Hong Kong. And here we are bleating about how we can’t live on a reduction in the $100K rental. For sh*ts and giggles the company, with the AOA’s blessing, should offer Freighter commands again with “much reduced” housing just to see the hundreds and hundreds that would apply.

I could go on here.

The GC would be a fun job if it wasn’t for the pilots they have to represent.....

[Fly747]

Yes CR, and a whole load more freighter Captains on the lesser deal have turned up in HK over the last month following closure of the MAN base. They are all looking a bit dazed!

[Trafalgar]

CR. Your comment regarding the "increased standard of living offered by the higher rental entitlement in accordance with their CoS (which, by the way, was created and defined by the company)". A further note on that point: the rental entitlement (ARAPA) was 'created and designed' by the company to FOLLOW THE MARKET PRICE OF HOUSING IN HK. It was designed by the COMPANY to adhere to the guarantee of 'suitable' housing in HK. If they try to change it, then they are voiding the very 'market pricing' they originally created the scale for, and therefore they are violating my COS. Are you LISTENING AOA?? (...I know i'm shouting, but I am as p*ssed off as I ever have been).

[morningcoffee]

Curtain rod,

Jesus, where to begin. If a b scaler who was supposed to retire at 55 now stays on past 55 he’s going to over the career progression of and delay the upgrade of a C scaler. Why are you struggling with that? If he was going to retire on a Friday when he turned 55 then CX would be needing a new skipper on Monday to replace him/her. No retire, no replace.

The company had a flood of guys trying to pay back BPP and go to RA65, some were successful, some weren’t. The fact that you don’t know any means absolutely nothing.

Not sure wtf your talk about Freighter bpp is about, are you saying it shouldn’t have been paid when pax captains went past 55, Freighter only?

The AOA endorsed the Freighter deal, that’s curiously not the same as doing absolutely nothing. Maybe the AOA could have said it doesn’t approve, everyone that took the deal and got a command in 5 yrs says it’s all ok because the AOA was happy with it. As I said, let’s do it again. Makes a mockery of us trying to keep housing anywhere near present levels.

[AtoBsafely]

Mr Coffee,

Where to begin?

Management introduced working past 55 as a way to crew aircraft whilst growing the airline back in 2006(?). Initially, only commands on the freighter were offered and later it was available on any fleet. The DFO at the time assured junior pilots the time to command would not be affected.

When management introduced COS 08, they took away bypass pay as well as reducing some salary scales. It was a significant cut to B scale, but did allow working until 65.

You seem poorly informed. COS 08 was not endorsed by the AOA, it was brought in by CX Management unilaterally. Just like they will introduce a COS 17/18 with all the stuff they think they can get pilots to accept.

[BlunderBus]

Last 3 flights all RQ fo's going
UPS Qantas and AHK
If contract companies get the commuting sorted out its game over cx

[Dragon Pacific]

History Lesson

Dragonair pilot exodus 'grounding flights' | South China Morning Post

[TheGreenDragon]

10 years ago. The travesty is that gove or take , the same bunch of manager mingers are still incharge. Now hiding in CX , supping their lattes , thinking of their xmas holidays.Total

[Trafalgar]

That's the outrageous tragedy of HK aviation. In a 'first world' business environment, these people would have been out on the street years ago. In HK, after a decade (or even longer...), they are still in place causing untold damage to the company and the lives of people and their families. It is a travesty that corporate governance in HK is so lacking. Ultimately, the only thing that will sort out the problems of the individual pilot is for him/her to leave and establish a career at a company/place that will provide a stable and rewarding work environment. CX/KA will never be that place. Ever.

[Shep69]

Originally Posted by morningcoffee

The company had a flood of guys trying to pay back BPP and go to RA65, some were successful, some weren’t. The fact that you don’t know any means absolutely nothing.

I don't know if this is true or the extent to which it happened.

But you do realize, of course, that IF it happened such an action (i.e. having to pay back BPP or in any way incurring a cut in conditions simply to go to RA65) would be illegal in many of the jurisdictions in which CX operates.

Think the Kiwis just won a case on that very issue.

[Air Profit]

There wasn't a "flood". A handful at most. The majority of RA55 pilots made their decisions and are happy with the same. Ultimately, CX, out of spite more than anything else, is not willing to look at the issue further. The usual "cut off nose to spite face" CX move, as their pilot/experience shortage is growing exponentially. Flew a couple of days ago, both FO's are 'outahere'.

[Loopdeloop]

If a dozen is a flood then yes there was a flood.

For the last 10 years the HKAOA position has been to support a fair deal on RA65. That means RA65 for all pilots, and for those with BPP in their contracts to have it honoured for previous RA55 extendees.

For those in denial, please visit the AOA forums and get educated.

[Trafalgar]

I completely support RA65 for all pilots. Especially as the experience level in this airline is declining precipitously. I don't know how your resolve the obvious complications, but the company should come up with a viable scheme and put this issue (...one of far too many) behind them. The obstinate refusal to address this is obviously more out of spite than a recognition of the airlines best interests.