Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > PPRuNe Worldwide > Fragrant Harbour
Reload this Page >

CHAIRMAN CUTTING A DEAL

Fragrant Harbour A forum for the large number of pilots (expats and locals) based with the various airlines in Hong Kong. Air Traffic Controllers are also warmly welcomed into the forum.

CHAIRMAN CUTTING A DEAL

Old 12th Dec 2018, 08:02
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Sep 2015
Location: Paris
Posts: 7
CHAIRMAN CUTTING A DEAL

Dear fellow HKAOA Members & Non-Members (as this affects you as well).It would appear a screen shot calling into questions the true motivation of our Chairman has fallen into the public domain. Although the What’s App communication allegedly happened a few months ago, this now has increased importance given that we are soon to be presented a deal for the Membership to vote on under the guise of rule 20.4. This rule is actually being used against the Membership by both the company and those individuals on the GC, who want this deal to be voted in at any cost for their own personal gain. To those on the GC who simply want an extension of ARAPA by another 10 years and the Training Ban lifted so they can become Training Captains, and ultimately get a desk and chair on the third floor – BEWARE.

The Membership is becoming increasingly aware that there are behind the scenes actions being rushed through by certain persuasive members of the Committee, to get a deal done at all costs, irrespective of the communications continually being sent by official HKAOA Communications stating otherwise. Management desperately want the Training Ban gone. We have wasted two years on HPE negotiations to no avail, and now we are negotiating a PEACE CLAUSE whilst two of the original four items – namely HKPA and Pay are being given lip service. Have the FAU been asked to sign a Peace Clause? NO. Why? Because

Management respect them – whilst they laugh at us and our lack of will power to pushback industrially.

Our colleagues at the FAU have negotiated considerable pay rises in under two weeks, whilst we are apparently lowering our negotiating limits or box to help Management avoid any further impasses, as is evident from that screen shot. Fellow HKAOA Members - do not allow certain individuals with their own selfish agenda to destroy your Union and future contracts, by voting in a deal that ties our hand behind our backs for the unforeseeable future. To even be discussing a peace clause is justification alone to say NO to whatever proposal is placed in front of us. This applies regardless of whether it is recommended, not recommended or given an abstain vote by the GC.

Now wonder a previous DFO called us Million Dollar Morons – it’s time to stop being scared of our own shadows and stand up for what is right and just. The world aviation industry is short of good quality trained and experienced air crew, as is evident by our ever increasing resignation rate. This is not 2001 yet they are playing chicken with us, to see if we can blink before the annual profits are announced.

Unfortunately, it now appears there are people within our own Union ranks who are helping Management to try and suck us in again to sign an inferior deal to that which was originally offered in 2016.

Whatever this deal contains – consider what we want as collective group of aviation professionals.

Firstly, do we want viable contracts and a future working environment?

Secondly, do we want a Union that is effective and strong, or an Association that is by name only and is emasculated as an employee representative body.

Consider these two questions in conjunction with this screen shot and draw your own conclusion.
Attached Files
File Type: pdf
PHOTO-2018-11-27-13-46-49.pdf (162.1 KB, 1379 views)
Kendra689 is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 08:24
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 357
It’s pretty simple, for me anyway. Significantly better than TA16 or vote no. Profits up, great external market & a requirement to retain pilots. Should be a great deal!
Loopdeloop is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:11
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 1999
Location: Nirvana
Posts: 475
So what's in it for the Chairman and his cronies, I wonder, or perhaps they are compromised? Agreeing to no floor limit in negotiations - because the real negotiations limits failed in so far as the Company is concerned - when the AOA should have walked away and left a demand list on the GMA's desk. Instead DS instructs the NC to do anything, take anything. He needs to be removed. Disgraceful.

You DS, should be ashamed of yourself if this is true and if for any reason a deal worse than TA16 is offered with a BS Peace clause worse than the past clause 7 and you recommend it to the Membership, then you Sir, in my opinion, will be the most despicable Chairman the union has ever had and you can expect a huge exodus of members shortly after. Goal Achieved?
Bob Hawke is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 10:32
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: somewhere
Posts: 239
If that What’s App screenshot is genuine then not only do I feel like resigning from the HKAOA but I also want a refund of all my subscriptions for the time I thought that they were representing my interests but were in fact pursuing their own agenda. So basically since the current Chairman was elected.

Last edited by kenfoggo; 12th Dec 2018 at 11:01.
kenfoggo is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 14:10
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 629
Posting messages mid conversation can be dangerously misleading as it gets taken out of context. This screenshot is in the middle of a conversation. At 938 the question was asked "no floor?". And the response was "no floor best effort". This was clarified in the following messages. At 1002 DSS even says "The box hasn't changed....." So it was clear within 24minutes that nothing had changed. The following messages discuss how to proceed - ie given that HKPA didn't meet the floor, as the rest of the offers would go to a vote the aim was to get the best HKPA offer possible -hence the "No Floor - Best effort" comment. This needed to be clarified due to contradictions between the GFBFA and 20.4. But I will leave that conversation for AOA forums - we really do need to sort them out IMHO.

So I can assure you the 'floor' (ie the minimum acceptable position to even consider taking the offer to the membership for a vote) was in place at all times during negotiations this year. The floor is an absolute minimum - it was reached in three categories but not in one. And in that one that failed to reach the floor - we got our "best effort" offer.

Rule 20.4 was introduced before the GFBFA - they don't work well together which is why the GC tried to get rid of it in 2017. But there was insufficient interest in voting it out - so it remains. And as such the current HKAOA GC is bound to abide by it.

Just so we are 100% clear - the offer on the table reaches the minimum set by the original floor for three out of the four items. And yes I mean "floor" - the minimum. That was all that was achievable given the industrial pressure placed thus far.

As to whether it is a good offer or not - well I will be surprised if anyone gets excited by it. Pretty much like setting a low reserve when selling your house and having the highest bid at your floor. You have a deal - but you are none too excited about it.


Like it or not - 20.4 constrains the GC in its' actions(see below). Then democracy kicks in - is that such a bad thing?


20.4 excerpt.
When, in the opinion of the Association’s negotiators, a conclusion has been reached, whether successful or not, then the results of the negotiation will be referred to the General Committee. The General Committee will, in turn, refer the results to the Membership with a recommendation.
Numero Crunchero is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 14:52
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: land of muppetts
Posts: 1
Yes numero cruncho is correct that it took 24 minutes to do a complete 180 on his comments. It took that long for the GC to contact the chairman and question his statement. What is also not shared is the reaction from the chairman throwing his toys out of the pram and making false accusations of rule violations regarding code of conduct on communication internally within the NC and GC.

So yes it is unfair to share only a snippet in time. However that still doesn't explain why those comments were ever made in the first place.

A seperate thread could be started on the interpretation between the GFBFA and rule 20.4.

Industrial peace should only come if all the outstanding bargaining items are resolved. That's in the members best interests. However we seem to be placating to the company and not the membership.

The bar for an acceptable deal was set when TA16 was rejected and the members completed the most comprehensive survey ever done by the AOA which 75% of the members completed.

Time will tell if the 3 out of the 4 agreed items meet that minimum level the members expect.

supercadet is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 15:40
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: www
Posts: 487
"Time will tell if the 3 out of the 4 agreed items meet that minimum level the members expect."

.....and if they don't, the ONLY answer is an emphatic NO. We will NOT be bought off cheaply. I would rather CC and TB until my dying breath if this company does not show me some respect and value.
Apple Tree Yard is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 17:04
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Krug departure, Merlot transition
Posts: 530
Numero, how is 1% on pay, inferior Arapa to what we had and pretty poor RPs (a step backwards even, from a B747 point of view) achieving 3 out of 4 items?
main_dog is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 22:37
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 465
If those numbers are correct then it is no from me.
fire wall is offline  
Old 12th Dec 2018, 23:56
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CLK
Posts: 295
NC, your auction analogy of buyer/vendor meeting at the reserve price might have been fine years ago at the beginning of negotiations where the outlook was negative and it was perceived as a “falling market”
The fuel debacle is about to be concluded and I would suggest we will be approaching a “rising market” soon, where the vendor is very much not happy to just make the reserve!
A premium is warranted to release the TB/CC and enter into a handcuffed agreement.
BTW do you have an update on the fuel hedging situation remaining?
Farman Biplane is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2018, 01:22
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 53
It is rather worrying when the GMA sings the praises of the NC... that kind of leads one to wonder which side they were actually fighting for.
Brokeidiot is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2018, 03:09
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 629
Originally Posted by Brokeidiot View Post
It is rather worrying when the GMA sings the praises of the NC... that kind of leads one to wonder which side they were actually fighting for.
Ha ha - exactly.

If it makes you feel any better I am reliably informed the lead negotiator is disliked by the previous GMA, COSDO for sure - and a few others whose noses were put out of joint due to his lack of filter when negotiating.


Whether anyone praises or likes anyone is unimportant - the bottom line is you have your say with a vote. And I am ok with that. I have been here far too long to worry about what might happen - I just deal with what does actually happen.

And for the record - I wanted a pony as my bribe - but didn't get one;-(
Numero Crunchero is offline  
Old 13th Dec 2018, 05:31
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: All over
Posts: 152
It's all about getting the new guys trained and on POS 18. That's the holy grail. A rolling purge who doesn't know any of the past.

CMP's role in this is to figure out how to efficiently staff without basings, and (absent rigs) have maximum availability/flexibility without paying for it.
Slasher1 is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2018, 04:52
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Eden Valley
Posts: 1,747
Indeed Slasher. It's that simple. Pilots bang on about supply and demand as if they are Keynesian economists yet don't get the simplicity that it doesn't make sense to train your own low cost replacement. Well, the KA guys will have a bit of a wake up call to this soon.
Gnadenburg is online now  
Old 14th Dec 2018, 17:43
  #15 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 1,877
Originally Posted by Gnadenburg View Post
Indeed Slasher. It's that simple. Pilots bang on about supply and demand as if they are Keynesian economists yet don't get the simplicity that it doesn't make sense to train your own low cost replacement. Well, the KA guys will have a bit of a wake up call to this soon.
I’ve never understood any trainer that trained anyone on a lesser contract. This includes A training B, B training C or F, now C training POS18. It’s unbelievable how stupid pilots are. Million dollar morons are now just poor morons!!! They stripped themselves of the millions.
cxorcist is offline  
Old 14th Dec 2018, 18:21
  #16 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: HK-CRoC
Posts: 567
Devil Cutting a Deal ??

How can you cut a deal without all the pieces of the pie being visible on the table ❓

January should bring the "new" basings "Evaluation & Strategy" from Flt Ops. This fact has been openly promulgated to all crew quite some months ago by ex DFO..

WHAT IS IT ????

Not watching the whole chess board is done at your own peril

Last edited by Flex88; 14th Dec 2018 at 23:23.
Flex88 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2018, 07:59
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 237
Until now I trusted the HKAOA but I now have serious doubt. Trying to spin « what was said » in the whatsapp discussion doesn’t really help. When the explanations for what was said are confusing and murky, it’s usually because it’s a load of bullocks. It’s starting to read like a certain persident’s tweets....contradictions and misdirection. If there’s a vote on an offer which contain reductions of benefits for some, some serious questions will have to be answered by the HKAOA. Failing to represent the best interest of the members should have consequences.
bobrun is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2018, 12:08
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: cloudcuckooland
Posts: 145
RF was the best and most effective Chairman the HKAOA has ever had by a factor of about triple. Union was dead the moment you voted him out. Remember the PV endorsed bogus candidate GF, designed to take votes away from RF? Remember that?
1200firm is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2018, 16:44
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,114
Originally Posted by 1200firm View Post
RF was the best and most effective Chairman the HKAOA has ever had by a factor of about triple. Union was dead the moment you voted him out. Remember the PV endorsed bogus candidate GF, designed to take votes away from RF? Remember that?
bollocks...he was the worst we had!!!

Ask him why he is not answering the question on the HKAOA forum on what happens the the claim we were meant to submit when he was chairman? He ran the most disfunctional GC we have ever had. He lied to the membership during the last TA vote. He did not allow the NC from releasing critical information about the last vote, because he did not agree with a few points! First time that has ever happened in our unions history.

By by the way the reason why we did not submit the claim, is because he was so busy commuting back to NZ that he forgot... but he will never admit the truth behind that!
Frogman1484 is offline  
Old 15th Dec 2018, 21:33
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 465
That is disgraceful.
How dare he visit his family !
Unfortunately the truth is that the filing of the shp claim is not a one man job, but hey don't let that stop you throwing mud


QUOTE=Frogman1484;10336375]


bollocks...he was the worst we had!!!

Ask him why he is not answering the question on the HKAOA forum on what happens the the claim we were meant to submit when he was chairman? He ran the most disfunctional GC we have ever had. He lied to the membership during the last TA vote. He did not allow the NC from releasing critical information about the last vote, because he did not agree with a few points! First time that has ever happened in our unions history.

By by the way the reason why we did not submit the claim, is because he was so busy commuting back to NZ that he forgot... but he will never admit the truth behind that!
[/QUOTE]
fire wall is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.