Why...?
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STW,
What's your opinion regarding lifestyle control?
Should we be able to control it? And I mean properly like other carriers, I don't mean not working I mean doing the 84/900 they want but doing with some control, each of us being able to swap, drop, pickup, and several other mechanisms to build a roster that allows birthdays, graduations, family events etc and even commuting. I've seen bidlines with other carriers that are fantastic, even the person on the lowest seniority number with no choice can immediately go to open time and construct a roster with better lifestyle control than us.
Are you aware of what other airlines crews can do to control their life? CX seen to think money is the answer, people only want more money so they can leave earlier or waste the money trying to make up for lack of lifestyle, because there is no lifestyle control, perhaps if you're on the 777 and living with W's and overtime life seems great but the thing is, it's still crap compared to first world rostering.
CXs obsession with control is what the problem is.
Have these negotiations shown CX to be giving any lifestyle control? Seems they have even more mechanisms to control us.
Taking the deal and accepting a continuation of no lifestyle control isn't acceptable.
What's your opinion regarding lifestyle control?
Should we be able to control it? And I mean properly like other carriers, I don't mean not working I mean doing the 84/900 they want but doing with some control, each of us being able to swap, drop, pickup, and several other mechanisms to build a roster that allows birthdays, graduations, family events etc and even commuting. I've seen bidlines with other carriers that are fantastic, even the person on the lowest seniority number with no choice can immediately go to open time and construct a roster with better lifestyle control than us.
Are you aware of what other airlines crews can do to control their life? CX seen to think money is the answer, people only want more money so they can leave earlier or waste the money trying to make up for lack of lifestyle, because there is no lifestyle control, perhaps if you're on the 777 and living with W's and overtime life seems great but the thing is, it's still crap compared to first world rostering.
CXs obsession with control is what the problem is.
Have these negotiations shown CX to be giving any lifestyle control? Seems they have even more mechanisms to control us.
Taking the deal and accepting a continuation of no lifestyle control isn't acceptable.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: All over
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do you guys constantly try to turn this debate into a question of morality?
This is an industrial conflict. It is business, nothing else.It is simply a conflict of interests, we fight for our cause, they fight for theirs.
Don't be so naive and think you are on the good side and you are fighting the baddies. This is absurd. There is hence no place for words like shame or pride in this discussion.
I don't think we have the unity nor the leverage to win. Regardless of the costs, the company will not give in. This is my opinion and always has been since we rejected the last offer. I base my voting behaviour purely on economic game theory. My objective is to get the most out of my contract, same as you guys. By accepting or "giving up" as you probably would call it, I expect to get more than by the strategy you suggest. Always remember: if you misjudge the unity and the will power of our pilot body to fight this through, you misjudged the situation. You did not win any moral high ground, you are not a hero, you are not a better person, you simply lost.
You don't have to share my point of view, but how can you possibly accuse me or like-minded of being cowardish or frightened ? Don' t you see how misplaced, how childish that is?
This is an industrial conflict. It is business, nothing else.It is simply a conflict of interests, we fight for our cause, they fight for theirs.
Don't be so naive and think you are on the good side and you are fighting the baddies. This is absurd. There is hence no place for words like shame or pride in this discussion.
I don't think we have the unity nor the leverage to win. Regardless of the costs, the company will not give in. This is my opinion and always has been since we rejected the last offer. I base my voting behaviour purely on economic game theory. My objective is to get the most out of my contract, same as you guys. By accepting or "giving up" as you probably would call it, I expect to get more than by the strategy you suggest. Always remember: if you misjudge the unity and the will power of our pilot body to fight this through, you misjudged the situation. You did not win any moral high ground, you are not a hero, you are not a better person, you simply lost.
You don't have to share my point of view, but how can you possibly accuse me or like-minded of being cowardish or frightened ? Don' t you see how misplaced, how childish that is?
This ALSO results in a toxic workplace--things aren't fun anymore.
Part of the due diligence of a GC is to recognize this, and not forward such a divisive TA. If they err, then (hopefully) the membership would see it. But it apparently hasn't and may never -- instead individual selfishness drives everything in a downward spiral. Which is where things are now. The union has a chance to either hold or escalate IA in order to stop it. If it doesn't, then this is your life.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: uk
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welcome back Traf. You are, as always, "spot on". The committee should not have made any recommendations and simply stated "this is the best deal we can negotiate at this time" and "we put it to the membership". By recommending it's acceptance they should also "resign if it is defeated".
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: one country, one system
Age: 55
Posts: 502
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree with avinthenews, it would be great to have the rostering tool you mention. I also agree with you that the offer is not good. The difference between your and my position is not the target itself, it is the evaluation of our leverage, the assumed willingness of the company to give in and, crucially, the assessment of the risk involved. That's it.
Additionally we differ on the evaluation of the status quo. In my opinion we tend to cherry pick when it comes to conditions at other employers. I don't see Cathay as that bad in an over-all comparison. There might be extreme outlyers in terms of money, there might be better rostering systems, fleet transfer possibilities etc, but if you guys would look downwards as well you would notice a grueling abyss. The reality in most cases today is very low pay, huge taxes, low-cost ops, no housing, slave-like conditions if you are a contractor etc. The truth is that the big bucks are out of reach now in most cases. With a green card and 25 years of seniority maybe, but then I would argue that every captain in Cathay with the same seniority makes at least as much, probably more. Universal tax is a problem for Americans, but this should have been a consideration before becoming an expat, hardly the responsibility of the company. I would argue that in most cases people resign from Cathay because they or their partner doesn't like Hong Kong or because airlines in their home country started to recruit again. Again, hardly the fault of the company. If you are on a base and stuck, I would argue that this was always the deal, everyone who joined this company knew commands are in HK and basings a big maybe. If you lost your base just the same , this was and is a risk every individual has to or should have considered. The new conditions from 2019 onwards, as well as HKPA, are what they are. Nobody was or is forced to accept them.
The industry at a whole is in a constant downward trend and there is no escape.
I disagree with Slasher that those who are willing to accept a deal are selfish, nor would I criticise anyone for acting in self-interest. It's just rational behaviour. We all are acting the way we expect to gain the most, but simply have either a different base line, different expectations or different risk scenarios. Voting no does not make you a better person.
I totally respect your positions, maybe it will work in the end, who knows. I just think it is not worth the risk. All I am asking for is to respect other viewpoints as well and please let's keep the discussion civilized and rational.
Additionally we differ on the evaluation of the status quo. In my opinion we tend to cherry pick when it comes to conditions at other employers. I don't see Cathay as that bad in an over-all comparison. There might be extreme outlyers in terms of money, there might be better rostering systems, fleet transfer possibilities etc, but if you guys would look downwards as well you would notice a grueling abyss. The reality in most cases today is very low pay, huge taxes, low-cost ops, no housing, slave-like conditions if you are a contractor etc. The truth is that the big bucks are out of reach now in most cases. With a green card and 25 years of seniority maybe, but then I would argue that every captain in Cathay with the same seniority makes at least as much, probably more. Universal tax is a problem for Americans, but this should have been a consideration before becoming an expat, hardly the responsibility of the company. I would argue that in most cases people resign from Cathay because they or their partner doesn't like Hong Kong or because airlines in their home country started to recruit again. Again, hardly the fault of the company. If you are on a base and stuck, I would argue that this was always the deal, everyone who joined this company knew commands are in HK and basings a big maybe. If you lost your base just the same , this was and is a risk every individual has to or should have considered. The new conditions from 2019 onwards, as well as HKPA, are what they are. Nobody was or is forced to accept them.
The industry at a whole is in a constant downward trend and there is no escape.
I disagree with Slasher that those who are willing to accept a deal are selfish, nor would I criticise anyone for acting in self-interest. It's just rational behaviour. We all are acting the way we expect to gain the most, but simply have either a different base line, different expectations or different risk scenarios. Voting no does not make you a better person.
I totally respect your positions, maybe it will work in the end, who knows. I just think it is not worth the risk. All I am asking for is to respect other viewpoints as well and please let's keep the discussion civilized and rational.
Last edited by Sam Ting Wong; 4th Jan 2019 at 04:00.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Australia
Posts: 330
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would rather we stayed in CC for life, I fear should this pass and the new CMP patterns causing such disruption, selfish personal deals will be made with crew CONTROL like never before, so expect to have rosters that are completely dysfunctional meaning our so called request system (pot luck more like it) will be even worse than before.
CX loves that crew can screw over other crew without penalty.
CX loves that crew can screw over other crew without penalty.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: All over
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I
The industry at a whole is in a constant downward trend and there is no escape.
I disagree with Slasher that those who are willing to accept a deal are selfish, nor would I criticise anyone for acting in self-interest. It's just rational behaviour. We all are acting the way we expect to gain the most, but simply have either a different base line, different expectations or different risk scenarios. Voting no does not make you a better person.
I totally respect your positions, maybe it will work in the end, who knows. I just think it is not worth the risk. All I am asking for is to respect other viewpoints as well and please let's keep the discussion civilized and rational.
The industry at a whole is in a constant downward trend and there is no escape.
I disagree with Slasher that those who are willing to accept a deal are selfish, nor would I criticise anyone for acting in self-interest. It's just rational behaviour. We all are acting the way we expect to gain the most, but simply have either a different base line, different expectations or different risk scenarios. Voting no does not make you a better person.
I totally respect your positions, maybe it will work in the end, who knows. I just think it is not worth the risk. All I am asking for is to respect other viewpoints as well and please let's keep the discussion civilized and rational.
I do not share your hobbesian view of the industry at present; perhaps that's because I (and several colleagues) are bombarded with entities looking for pilots. The raw numbers might not be as high (at least for the first couple of years compared with a gheezer on one of our older contracts), but the COL is way lower and the conditions better (and even dare I say it -- fun ?). If you set the standard at the bottom and "at least I'm not getting shot at as much here on the street" then, yes -- perhaps there are some who would prefer living in a cracker box taking on huge debt and barely scraping by with family life falling apart to getting knifed on the street. Maybe THAT'LL sell POS18 -- "Hey--we're better than the slums of Venezuela." But I don't think even this is working out so well for them (hence the decision to upgrade SOs and dangle the false carrot of basings for those dumb or desperate enough to actually want to believe in it). It IS disheartening that rather than striving for greatness we are comparing things to the absolute bottom of the barrel. I don't think this has ever worked out very well.
I can think of no more toxic environment than when peers are divided amongst each other.
In any case good luck. Old Ben had it right when he said hang together or hang separately. What does baffle me is how a union would allow something to be advanced which DOES divide the membership; cutting its throat as well as its members. I would hope those advancing the agenda do realize they have a responsibility toward the membership and toward stopping the decline (which is opposite most of the developed world) -- and not just toward different factions within the membership. None of us here are smart enough to play the manipulation game (nor is this a good game to play).
Last edited by Slasher1; 4th Jan 2019 at 13:10.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 53
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ultimate prize is TB gone.
The condition disguised as a carrot in terms of hkpa is 3 years of crumbs before the bonus at year 4. This buys time.
For the ARA guys it's 5 more years of housing before you default to 24k. ( Yeah, I know maybe 5 people can get the full 10years). This buys time.
But my point is this :
What will happen in this 3-4 year period.... ALOT OF TRAINING. Who will get trained..... POS18 guys. Once the trainers are in, there will never be a chance to leverage a TB again. Afterall, who of the trainers quit training during the TB to force the issues?
These POS 18 guys are the future! These guys will be your replacements and you will never get another deal again... EVER!
Every time a b scale or c scale leaves it's a cost saving. That's the prize. TB gone and train the guys that will give the productivity gains and low pay.
That my friends is the long game. Where else will $1 billion in savings come from the pilots.... Afterall that's the Target.
Your pay and conditions will be frozen and you will just wither on the vine.... That is what will happen if you buy into this deal.
ARA is the new A scale.
Hkpa is the new b scale
Pos 18 is the new c scale and not represented by the union....
Where will the hkaoa be in 3-4 years time? A memory of something that seemed like a good idea at the time.
Think!
The condition disguised as a carrot in terms of hkpa is 3 years of crumbs before the bonus at year 4. This buys time.
For the ARA guys it's 5 more years of housing before you default to 24k. ( Yeah, I know maybe 5 people can get the full 10years). This buys time.
But my point is this :
What will happen in this 3-4 year period.... ALOT OF TRAINING. Who will get trained..... POS18 guys. Once the trainers are in, there will never be a chance to leverage a TB again. Afterall, who of the trainers quit training during the TB to force the issues?
These POS 18 guys are the future! These guys will be your replacements and you will never get another deal again... EVER!
Every time a b scale or c scale leaves it's a cost saving. That's the prize. TB gone and train the guys that will give the productivity gains and low pay.
That my friends is the long game. Where else will $1 billion in savings come from the pilots.... Afterall that's the Target.
Your pay and conditions will be frozen and you will just wither on the vine.... That is what will happen if you buy into this deal.
ARA is the new A scale.
Hkpa is the new b scale
Pos 18 is the new c scale and not represented by the union....
Where will the hkaoa be in 3-4 years time? A memory of something that seemed like a good idea at the time.
Think!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: England
Posts: 601
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The HKAOA has been a busted flush since the failure to mandate immediate strike action for the unconscionable sacking of 49 pilots for ‘no particular reason’. Some of the keyboard warriors and ‘I’m secretly going sick’ snowflakes currently posting were part of that decision to not back their colleagues in their hour of need.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Greener Pastures
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The HKAOA has been a busted flush since the failure to mandate immediate strike action for the unconscionable sacking of 49 pilots for ‘no particular reason’. Some of the keyboard warriors and ‘I’m secretly going sick’ snowflakes currently posting were part of that decision to not back their colleagues in their hour of need.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Somewhere Smelly
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Exactly
The HKAOA has been a busted flush since the failure to mandate immediate strike action for the unconscionable sacking of 49 pilots for ‘no particular reason’. Some of the keyboard warriors and ‘I’m secretly going sick’ snowflakes currently posting were part of that decision to not back their colleagues in their hour of need.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
As ye sow, so shall ye reap... suck it up.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Somewhere Smelly
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Ultimate prize is TB gone.
The condition disguised as a carrot in terms of hkpa is 3 years of crumbs before the bonus at year 4. This buys time.
For the ARA guys it's 5 more years of housing before you default to 24k. ( Yeah, I know maybe 5 people can get the full 10years). This buys time.
But my point is this :
What will happen in this 3-4 year period.... ALOT OF TRAINING. Who will get trained..... POS18 guys. Once the trainers are in, there will never be a chance to leverage a TB again. Afterall, who of the trainers quit training during the TB to force the issues?
These POS 18 guys are the future! These guys will be your replacements and you will never get another deal again... EVER!
Every time a b scale or c scale leaves it's a cost saving. That's the prize. TB gone and train the guys that will give the productivity gains and low pay.
That my friends is the long game. Where else will $1 billion in savings come from the pilots.... Afterall that's the Target.
Your pay and conditions will be frozen and you will just wither on the vine.... That is what will happen if you buy into this deal.
ARA is the new A scale.
Hkpa is the new b scale
Pos 18 is the new c scale and not represented by the union....
Where will the hkaoa be in 3-4 years time? A memory of something that seemed like a good idea at the time.
Think!
The condition disguised as a carrot in terms of hkpa is 3 years of crumbs before the bonus at year 4. This buys time.
For the ARA guys it's 5 more years of housing before you default to 24k. ( Yeah, I know maybe 5 people can get the full 10years). This buys time.
But my point is this :
What will happen in this 3-4 year period.... ALOT OF TRAINING. Who will get trained..... POS18 guys. Once the trainers are in, there will never be a chance to leverage a TB again. Afterall, who of the trainers quit training during the TB to force the issues?
These POS 18 guys are the future! These guys will be your replacements and you will never get another deal again... EVER!
Every time a b scale or c scale leaves it's a cost saving. That's the prize. TB gone and train the guys that will give the productivity gains and low pay.
That my friends is the long game. Where else will $1 billion in savings come from the pilots.... Afterall that's the Target.
Your pay and conditions will be frozen and you will just wither on the vine.... That is what will happen if you buy into this deal.
ARA is the new A scale.
Hkpa is the new b scale
Pos 18 is the new c scale and not represented by the union....
Where will the hkaoa be in 3-4 years time? A memory of something that seemed like a good idea at the time.
Think!
By allowing new, poorer contracts and passively acknowledging that the pilots won't strike across the group for ANY reason has resulted in today's mess.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: No where
Posts: 898
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've been reading some of the responses from the GC members on the forums today. In a word...disgraceful. Condescending, defensive, evasive, deluded and smelling to high heaven of being bought out by the company. It is NOT your job to be defending the company's position. What on earth do you people think you are doing. Face the facts: you have miserably failed in your duty towards your members. You have sold out your fellow pilots, and you have bought into an indefensible position that might as well have been written by the company propaganda department. The replies today to the honest and valid comments from members is beyond a disgrace. Every one of you should resign. All you are doing is making certain that not only have we lost all trust in you, but in fact you are providing all the evidence needed to conclude that the ONLY vote possible is a strong NO vote. You need to resign, today. Utter disgrace.
Im honestly starting to believe that the company has offered the members of the GC a special deal if it gets voted in. It is jut so dodgy what has been happening the last week
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Greener Pastures
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are a few GC members on the HKAOA forum who are sounding EXACTLY like CX management.
You can't blame people for thinking something untoward is happening. I certainly do.
You can't blame people for thinking something untoward is happening. I certainly do.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Voting has nothing to do with COS18. It applies, in some form and variations, to all Conditions of Service before COS18. If you read COS18 it clearly states that agreements with the HKAOA will not become part of the contractual terms of your employment unless ..........
Basically it is up to CX to allow the HKAOA to negotiate for officers on COS18. COS18 consists mostly of policies which can be amended at the companies discretion from time to time.
Basically it is up to CX to allow the HKAOA to negotiate for officers on COS18. COS18 consists mostly of policies which can be amended at the companies discretion from time to time.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
STW,
Good luck in raising the level of debate to a discussion that replaces emotion with pragmatism and facts.
Yes, we are poorly lead as a union but apart from the usual suspects on here and on the forums who do back up their rhetoric with action, the members aren’t exactly a united, cohesive body prepared to sacrifice self for the greater good. Even the strongest of leadership is wasted on selfish followers.
Air Profit,
The HKAOA entered CC/TB for the return of RP07. Nothing else. (HKPA was added later)
You ask does this offer meet the requirements of why we entered CC/TB? As RP07 was offered back, the answer is obviously yes (you’d have to ask the GC why they didn’t put this up to the membership to vote on)
CC/TB continued as it could be seen as a lever to address the obvious deficiencies of HKPA. Does this offer address that issue? Not even close.
Here’s the next question. What are the members prepared to do to adjust management’s mindset, and will that adjustment actually lead to more money, or a typical draconian management mitigation? The “what’s next” is a question for the voters and subsequently for the association to address as a whole.
Dilbert,
it annoys me no end when a Swire Manager on his 3 year cycle at CX refers to himself as “the company”. He’s not the company. We and the rest of the employees are. You’re association should never represent the company, but raising debate to see an item from the company’s viewpoint, if for no other reason than playing devils advocate, is not in itself necessarily bad.
Debating from management’s viewpoint is something else again that should never be tolerated. They are blind. They don’t have a logical view of anything.
Good luck in raising the level of debate to a discussion that replaces emotion with pragmatism and facts.
Yes, we are poorly lead as a union but apart from the usual suspects on here and on the forums who do back up their rhetoric with action, the members aren’t exactly a united, cohesive body prepared to sacrifice self for the greater good. Even the strongest of leadership is wasted on selfish followers.
Air Profit,
The HKAOA entered CC/TB for the return of RP07. Nothing else. (HKPA was added later)
You ask does this offer meet the requirements of why we entered CC/TB? As RP07 was offered back, the answer is obviously yes (you’d have to ask the GC why they didn’t put this up to the membership to vote on)
CC/TB continued as it could be seen as a lever to address the obvious deficiencies of HKPA. Does this offer address that issue? Not even close.
Here’s the next question. What are the members prepared to do to adjust management’s mindset, and will that adjustment actually lead to more money, or a typical draconian management mitigation? The “what’s next” is a question for the voters and subsequently for the association to address as a whole.
Dilbert,
it annoys me no end when a Swire Manager on his 3 year cycle at CX refers to himself as “the company”. He’s not the company. We and the rest of the employees are. You’re association should never represent the company, but raising debate to see an item from the company’s viewpoint, if for no other reason than playing devils advocate, is not in itself necessarily bad.
Debating from management’s viewpoint is something else again that should never be tolerated. They are blind. They don’t have a logical view of anything.
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Canada
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Voting has nothing to do with COS18. It applies, in some form and variations, to all Conditions of Service before COS18. If you read COS18 it clearly states that agreements with the HKAOA will not become part of the contractual terms of your employment unless ..........
Basically it is up to CX to allow the HKAOA to negotiate for officers on COS18. COS18 consists mostly of policies which can be amended at the companies discretion from time to time.
Basically it is up to CX to allow the HKAOA to negotiate for officers on COS18. COS18 consists mostly of policies which can be amended at the companies discretion from time to time.
Join Date: Sep 2017
Location: Europe
Posts: 1,674
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am shocked and saddened at what has become of the AOA. It is bad enough that we have had to fight the adversary of our management for the past 25 years (!), but now it seems we have to fight our own union leadership as well.
At all other times the powers in the economies have sought to leverage their position.
It is at times like these where the people begin to realise something is very wrong, that unions appear to reinforce the power asymmetry. The question is whether it was ever any different? Or is it as the economy declines and the spoils lessen the asymmetry is more obvious.
That the Western hemisphere needs a 'new deal' is axiomatic. Whilst in times passed there may have been a broader 'middle' with which to gradually chip away, there now is an extreme and the many failings of the 'system' become evident to all.