How to Negotiate
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
wow how naive are you? CX is no longer a long term solution!!! We all know this. Clearly you don’t !!! Weldone ;-)
sign the TA
get a upgrade
get hours
get out !!!!!
Thats the way it will work.
Trust me it will happen and go through . The AOA has caused this also. Not just the company. Both to blame.
Goodbye - once I have hours to leave ;-)
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't let him get you so worked up Cxorcist. This is the typical management tactic, divide and conquer. In this case, it is far too late for the management to win this fight. Let's say there is a contract that 'only' benefits a minority of pilots (say, SO's), but even then, only benefits them for a short period (as moron boy suggested). The result of that would be an even greater exodus of FO's, early Capt retirements, and most certainly a further hollowing out of the training department. Result: a crippled, infighting airline, with ever increasing resignation rates and a paralyzed training system. Ironically, the idea suggested by moron boy would actually result in a longer time to his upgrade, as the entire training system would be non-functioning. There may be a few SO's who would vote for the (perceived) short term benefit, but the majority realize that their entire career value and potential is hanging on achieving an industry contract that incorporates all the things taken for granted a their home airlines. If anything, the younger members seem even more militant in achieving the needed improvement. Moron boy and his attitude are few and far between, and in his case are nothing more than a management plant to rile people up and create division. Recognize it for what it is. This management is in full flight panic mode and this this the only pathetic strategy they have. The pilots are united, and we won't throw away our advantage for a short term gain.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: All Over
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's see how this works.
We have 4 groups--CN, FO, JFO, and SO. For the sake of argument we'll say there are equal amounts of people in each group (there doesn't have to be to make the scheme work; it's just a matter of picking off people within a divided work force and what's important is the concept). We'll start all even.
Ya need to remember also the lack of a pay rise is essentially (in HKG) maybe a 4-5% loss due inflation (we'll assume this is zero for the example just to make the numbers easier but the real number of any pay 'gain' would be the differential between it and inflation). Also that folks in each group can be 'enticed' with worthless promises which don't materialize.
JFO's and SO's are offered a 10% pay rise; the CN's have a 5% pay cut (but retain housing) and the FO's have a 5% cut in the upper pay brackets with a 5% gain in the lower brackets. JFO's and SO's vote for, CNs vote against. Some of the FO's are picked off due to short term gain (maybe even a CN or two due to housing stability) and TA passes with 55%. Company makes money and conditions get worse.
Most CN's and some FO's are pissed off at what happens--probably not remembering the exact numbers but only that they are pissed off at the company and JFO's/SO's for selling them out.
NEXT cycle, CNs get a 4% gain (net loss is still 1%) with the promise of hosing stability, FOs get 4% rise in upper brackets (net loss 1%) and 1% gain in lower brackets. JFO's and SO's get 10% pay cut. Split vote of 50-50. Slight gain in ARAPA for FO lower bracket picks off upgrading JFOs. TA passes 52-48.
Now everyone is pissed off (and the JFO's/SO's are mad at the CNs and FO's for selling them out) and worse off to boot.
NEXT cycle, SO's are offered 9% pay rise (net loss but new joiners don't know this), JFO's gain 9% (both groups 1% net loss over time but it looks like a decent gain in the short term), FO's stay flat, and CNs stay flat but lose housing. 50-50 split. Company then offers senior training CNs stability in housing and picks a few off. TA passes 51-49.
Rinse and repeat.
This is how we've gotten to where we are. Everyone works more for less and things decline over time by picking off groups and pitting them against each other and by exploiting the lack of understanding of new joiners (this is the anthesis of a productive work force FWIW). The important thing is to recognize how this happened in making decisions moving forward.
The KEY element to remember is that the TA's didn't pass with 90%; they passed with a very close margin to parity. So this is the key indicator that if the vote is close we are ALL getting screwed over time. It's just a matter of when our 'turn' comes.
We have 4 groups--CN, FO, JFO, and SO. For the sake of argument we'll say there are equal amounts of people in each group (there doesn't have to be to make the scheme work; it's just a matter of picking off people within a divided work force and what's important is the concept). We'll start all even.
Ya need to remember also the lack of a pay rise is essentially (in HKG) maybe a 4-5% loss due inflation (we'll assume this is zero for the example just to make the numbers easier but the real number of any pay 'gain' would be the differential between it and inflation). Also that folks in each group can be 'enticed' with worthless promises which don't materialize.
JFO's and SO's are offered a 10% pay rise; the CN's have a 5% pay cut (but retain housing) and the FO's have a 5% cut in the upper pay brackets with a 5% gain in the lower brackets. JFO's and SO's vote for, CNs vote against. Some of the FO's are picked off due to short term gain (maybe even a CN or two due to housing stability) and TA passes with 55%. Company makes money and conditions get worse.
Most CN's and some FO's are pissed off at what happens--probably not remembering the exact numbers but only that they are pissed off at the company and JFO's/SO's for selling them out.
NEXT cycle, CNs get a 4% gain (net loss is still 1%) with the promise of hosing stability, FOs get 4% rise in upper brackets (net loss 1%) and 1% gain in lower brackets. JFO's and SO's get 10% pay cut. Split vote of 50-50. Slight gain in ARAPA for FO lower bracket picks off upgrading JFOs. TA passes 52-48.
Now everyone is pissed off (and the JFO's/SO's are mad at the CNs and FO's for selling them out) and worse off to boot.
NEXT cycle, SO's are offered 9% pay rise (net loss but new joiners don't know this), JFO's gain 9% (both groups 1% net loss over time but it looks like a decent gain in the short term), FO's stay flat, and CNs stay flat but lose housing. 50-50 split. Company then offers senior training CNs stability in housing and picks a few off. TA passes 51-49.
Rinse and repeat.
This is how we've gotten to where we are. Everyone works more for less and things decline over time by picking off groups and pitting them against each other and by exploiting the lack of understanding of new joiners (this is the anthesis of a productive work force FWIW). The important thing is to recognize how this happened in making decisions moving forward.
The KEY element to remember is that the TA's didn't pass with 90%; they passed with a very close margin to parity. So this is the key indicator that if the vote is close we are ALL getting screwed over time. It's just a matter of when our 'turn' comes.
Last edited by Shep69; 6th May 2018 at 15:23.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As with most major airlines around the world, their pilots have an understanding that you don't vote for your colleagues to lose. Only gains for ALL groups have a hope of passing. That is how the US majors have their pilots at the top of the earning tree. Their unions don't even consider a proposal unless it benefits everyone. Certainly, attacking the upper end is a losing proposition for those at the lower end, as most intelligent individuals realize that to remove the higher reaches of your own career is slow motion suicide.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mole,
You’re right. The Company is very close or even into the proverbial “death spiral”. The only thing that will save FOP now is a massive bailout. By that, I don’t just mean money, although that will be needed in large quantities as well. We also need a huge infusion of new and capable leadership. I’m more convinced now than ever that cannot and will not come from the Swires, nor any of their underlings currently working in CXC. They are like a cancer and need to be cut out.
You’re right. The Company is very close or even into the proverbial “death spiral”. The only thing that will save FOP now is a massive bailout. By that, I don’t just mean money, although that will be needed in large quantities as well. We also need a huge infusion of new and capable leadership. I’m more convinced now than ever that cannot and will not come from the Swires, nor any of their underlings currently working in CXC. They are like a cancer and need to be cut out.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the training ban to end...No concessions means no concessions. The association will not put forward any TA for a vote that favous one group at the expense of another. Why on earth would they??
The pressure is not on the pilots to end the training ban and bring contract compliance to an end. If, on the other hand, the Company feels that the current situation remains sustainable for an indefinite period, then there is no point in talking.
Let’s just carry on...
The pressure is not on the pilots to end the training ban and bring contract compliance to an end. If, on the other hand, the Company feels that the current situation remains sustainable for an indefinite period, then there is no point in talking.
Let’s just carry on...
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: FL340
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Advise:
The two items that go together are:- Pay and Conditions
Don't accept just one. Both must be good and together.
No good having a good pay with bad conditions and vise versa
Learn from other airlines and Effective Trade Unions.
The two items that go together are:- Pay and Conditions
Don't accept just one. Both must be good and together.
No good having a good pay with bad conditions and vise versa
Learn from other airlines and Effective Trade Unions.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devil's advocate, pay and conditions that satisfy one group currently the 777 for arguments sake can easily get voted in, the other obvious one is with double S/Os on long haul becoming the norm how much weight will they carry in the future.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devil's advocate, pay and conditions that satisfy one group currently the 777 for arguments sake can easily get voted in, the other obvious one is with double S/Os on long haul becoming the norm how much weight will they carry in the future.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
someone is listening..... SO’s will be the majority group in the future !!! So don’t piss them off———to late . All us local guys want the deal to get our career going after being delayed to help the TB/CC.
And for what ?
keep thinking I’m a Mole or management. We will see when the TA is presented. 51% YES
If SOs are to be the majority group, it’s because of company penny pinching and willingness to compromise safety for cost savings (= managers’ bonuses) through double SO crews. But someone still has to eventually train and upgrade you, and line FOs and CNs theoretically have to mentor you.
If you are ‘local’, you have received free training, without doing the hard yards in General Aviation or the military, that foreigners would give their left ball for. In return, you accepted the crap conditions you joined under, so don’t cry me a river. STFU and pray to golden haired baby Jesus or whatever you believe in that market forces and the hard work and sacrifice of your colleagues will improve your lot.
If you are ‘local’, you have received free training, without doing the hard yards in General Aviation or the military, that foreigners would give their left ball for. In return, you accepted the crap conditions you joined under, so don’t cry me a river. STFU and pray to golden haired baby Jesus or whatever you believe in that market forces and the hard work and sacrifice of your colleagues will improve your lot.
Last edited by Captain Dart; 7th May 2018 at 11:25.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Grindstone....yes we will see...
The union will not present a TA that favors one group over the other. It’s called a “Union” for that reason. So stop demonstrating your immaturity. Part of being a good pilot is remaining stoic under pressure. You are sounding like a high school brat on the playground. It’s embarrassing, so please grow up.
The first TA failed because the Company pitched it to 51% ...and got 47%. Maybe (hopefully, but one never knows) they’ve learned their lesson and this time will pitch it to 75% in order to ensure it passes. The TB has become a critical obstacle for them, so they can’t afford to let it fail this time.
It’s quite simple really.
The union will not present a TA that favors one group over the other. It’s called a “Union” for that reason. So stop demonstrating your immaturity. Part of being a good pilot is remaining stoic under pressure. You are sounding like a high school brat on the playground. It’s embarrassing, so please grow up.
The first TA failed because the Company pitched it to 51% ...and got 47%. Maybe (hopefully, but one never knows) they’ve learned their lesson and this time will pitch it to 75% in order to ensure it passes. The TB has become a critical obstacle for them, so they can’t afford to let it fail this time.
It’s quite simple really.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 651
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
backtothegrindstone
Firstly - SOs make up about 20% of the Hong Kong based pilots. Hardly enough to force a vote through.
Secondly - despite the attempted bribing of HKPA pilots by the backpay offer of TA16, a large percentage of the SOs voted against it. I'm not sure if it was a majority but the distribution wasn't far from the actual TA outcome.
Whilst some on these forums might feel that we will act selfishly and hence be bought off with a vote buying deal, history suggests that isn't the case.
Some will vote selfishly - but in the past, and I hope in the future, the majority will vote with the entire membership in mind.
Firstly - SOs make up about 20% of the Hong Kong based pilots. Hardly enough to force a vote through.
Secondly - despite the attempted bribing of HKPA pilots by the backpay offer of TA16, a large percentage of the SOs voted against it. I'm not sure if it was a majority but the distribution wasn't far from the actual TA outcome.
Whilst some on these forums might feel that we will act selfishly and hence be bought off with a vote buying deal, history suggests that isn't the case.
Some will vote selfishly - but in the past, and I hope in the future, the majority will vote with the entire membership in mind.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devil's advocate, pay and conditions that satisfy one group currently the 777 for arguments sake can easily get voted in, the other obvious one is with double S/Os on long haul becoming the norm how much weight will they carry in the future.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
These are the loopholes CX always manage to exploit. Union rules should be written to account for it, before we screw ourselves again.
Oh How we wish a nice little chat now would ‘sort’ it all out. The challenges and abuse from management have been relentless for 30 years! That’s right...30 years of long winded forums negotiations trials and lying. The only thing that changes are the faces of the protagonists... it’s more of the same and it never stops. We just end up taking another step backwards on and on. If we for a split second we actually believed what they say then they might have had a chance to avoid all of this nasty drawn out mess.
Theyre training and losing crew at an unprecedented rate.. senior captains and f/o’s Are all not only
offside but downright belligerent.
Its nobody’s fault but their own.. they own it.
They will never again get anywhere near the loyalty they had for free and tossed away on a whim achieving nothing in the process.
They could fix it at minimal cost with a phone call but choose to perpetuate the aggressive arrogant legacy of days past.
They get everything they deserve.. that is to say a workforce that absolutely hates them all.
If s/o’s think for one minute caving now will in ANY way improve their future then they know less about this company’s tactics than they do about flying a lunar module.
Theyre training and losing crew at an unprecedented rate.. senior captains and f/o’s Are all not only
offside but downright belligerent.
Its nobody’s fault but their own.. they own it.
They will never again get anywhere near the loyalty they had for free and tossed away on a whim achieving nothing in the process.
They could fix it at minimal cost with a phone call but choose to perpetuate the aggressive arrogant legacy of days past.
They get everything they deserve.. that is to say a workforce that absolutely hates them all.
If s/o’s think for one minute caving now will in ANY way improve their future then they know less about this company’s tactics than they do about flying a lunar module.
Incidentally the USA contracts expressly include a phrase that states flying with 2 s/o’s is at the captains discretion and although he may be asked .. his decision is final.
hkaoa need to follow suit
hkaoa need to follow suit
weldone
someone is listening..... SO’s will be the majority group in the future !!! So don’t piss them off———to late . All us local guys want the deal to get our career going after being delayed to help the TB/CC.
And for what ?
keep thinking I’m a Mole or management. We will see when the TA is presented. 51% YES
Previously you said you want to leave.
And it's all the fault of the training Training Ban. You want, you want: Very grown up.
If you are referring to operating long flights with one captain, one F/O and two S/Os, that has always been the way its done at QF. I apologise if I misunderstand the issue.
Join Date: Nov 1998
Location: H.K
Posts: 63
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The difference is, that we have 2 S/O's with a total of about 300 hours combined and wouldn't even be able to hold a MPL or Commercial License let alone an ATPL in most countries.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts