COS 99 extensions- seniority is over
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: www
Posts: 518
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sure, i'll run that by the 6 Canadian FO's all joining Air Canada next week (787 in Vancouver or Toronto).....and the many more currently in the pipeline awaiting course dates.
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: HK
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry. Meant to say 5% per annum. A fairly hefty rate for any airline. Would suggest that time to command blow out is due lack of training resources (until now) and the company shrinking the airline to avoid having to actually deal.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With Dragon Air, HK Express and HK Airlines, believe me, CX is never going to grow again. I have it on good authority that indeed that is the plan going forward. Expand the lower cost companies, and basically keep CX static. There is no career left at CX. It's toast.
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: HK-CRoC
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Done Deal !!
All those SO's or DEFO's joined within the last few years your history is already written ! Plus it's not hard to see the progression chart wrote large on the wall 6 > 8 years SO before upgrade then, FO HK Express etc etc....
Surprise,THIS is how CX leadership works !!
Enjoy ;-)
#CXit
CX progression stagnates, company offers a deal to integrate the 4 seniority lists to provide the only avenue for promotion in the junior ranks, conveniently this will be packaged with the RA65 for existing B scalers. A win/win/win perhaps?
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMA has already state company policy regarding RA65, why we all keep bleating on about rumours of something different is beyond me.
Those who thought they’d outsmart the company, take the bpp cash and the extra J class FOC and then slot into COS08 are waking up to the fact it ain’t happening. No. Chance. In. Hell.
Back in 2008 the cry was “we’re Cathay pilots, how dare they let us leave at 55, they’ll be begging us to stay and on our terms”
How things have changed.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the road
Posts: 160
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMA has already state company policy regarding RA65
30 RA65s currently going per year for the next 3 to 4 and an increase after that. RA55 increasing as of now with estimates of 4 to 500 on that list over the next 10 years, peak in 2 years from now with the bulge of captains in their early 50s. No chance in hell? Parked aircraft affect short term bonuses.
Equally if the AOA fails to negotiate the insurance top up with whatever insurer they can find at next years’ renewal ( looking increasingly dodgy it has to be said ) watch membership decline. Rapidly.
What’s discriminatory about it. ? It could be construed as a benefit in kind. In much the same way that current trainers get preferential leave, or the test pilots essentially write their own rosters and equally have more leave and have it when they want it.
Note that I am neither condoning it nor benefiting from it.
Note that I am neither condoning it nor benefiting from it.
Last edited by MENELAUS; 29th Jul 2019 at 08:57.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: HKG
Age: 53
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pretty sure giving RA65 to a very select group of employees would be seen as discriminatory in a Court of Law in this day in age. In CX's own words;
Move Beyond...Age.
Unless I misread it. Perhaps they meant;
Move Beyond...Age...but only for TB Breakers!
Precedent would be the key. Have new Trainers always been given preferential Retirement Age treatment?
I vaguely see your point with the TopCover. Still not right though, just further divide and conquer tactics. Although, in my mind, still straying very close into the discrimination realm.
Move Beyond...Age.
Unless I misread it. Perhaps they meant;
Move Beyond...Age...but only for TB Breakers!
Precedent would be the key. Have new Trainers always been given preferential Retirement Age treatment?
I vaguely see your point with the TopCover. Still not right though, just further divide and conquer tactics. Although, in my mind, still straying very close into the discrimination realm.
The extended retirement age for trainers precedence had been set before. Any challenge won't stand up. It's a seperate contact open to you as well if you want to jump in.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As usual, one pilot group gets f*cked while another beat their chest about how hard they’ve got it. Any surprise those on the 777 were championing the cause.
Bravo.
Join Date: Nov 2018
Location: Australia
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well things can always get worse. Those that have been working for CX for more than a decade probably know what is coming:
1. Hong Kong, China and possibly entire world economy slowing and in recession by Q4 2019 or Q1 2020.
2. CX forward bookings crater and management begins to panic about looming losses.
3. Aircraft deliveries deferred and accelerated return of aircraft as leases expire.
4. This equals too many pilots and staff in general.
5. LWOP 2019/2020.
And how many of those 400/500 COS99 Pilots, many of whom are Captains, are going to "volunteer" for LWOP unless their retirement age is extended to 65 on full benefits? Particularly as they watch the value of their PFunds and property sink with retirement looming in less than 10 years.
1. Hong Kong, China and possibly entire world economy slowing and in recession by Q4 2019 or Q1 2020.
2. CX forward bookings crater and management begins to panic about looming losses.
3. Aircraft deliveries deferred and accelerated return of aircraft as leases expire.
4. This equals too many pilots and staff in general.
5. LWOP 2019/2020.
And how many of those 400/500 COS99 Pilots, many of whom are Captains, are going to "volunteer" for LWOP unless their retirement age is extended to 65 on full benefits? Particularly as they watch the value of their PFunds and property sink with retirement looming in less than 10 years.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well things can always get worse. Those that have been working for CX for more than a decade probably know what is coming:
1. Hong Kong, China and possibly entire world economy slowing and in recession by Q4 2019 or Q1 2020.
2. CX forward bookings crater and management begins to panic about looming losses.
3. Aircraft deliveries deferred and accelerated return of aircraft as leases expire.
4. This equals too many pilots and staff in general.
5. LWOP 2019/2020.
And how many of those 400/500 COS99 Pilots, many of whom are Captains, are going to "volunteer" for LWOP unless their retirement age is extended to 65 on full benefits? Particularly as they watch the value of their PFunds and property sink with retirement looming in less than 10 years.
1. Hong Kong, China and possibly entire world economy slowing and in recession by Q4 2019 or Q1 2020.
2. CX forward bookings crater and management begins to panic about looming losses.
3. Aircraft deliveries deferred and accelerated return of aircraft as leases expire.
4. This equals too many pilots and staff in general.
5. LWOP 2019/2020.
And how many of those 400/500 COS99 Pilots, many of whom are Captains, are going to "volunteer" for LWOP unless their retirement age is extended to 65 on full benefits? Particularly as they watch the value of their PFunds and property sink with retirement looming in less than 10 years.
Pretend that’s not the case if you like.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Asia
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Only in CX would you have a bunch of guys fighting over a vastly inferior contract just to hang around the place. You are all pathetic losers. How do you look yourselves in the mirror you spineless cowards?
Get a life.
Get a life.
Dan,
"Pretty sure giving RA65 to a very select group of employees would be seen as discriminatory in a Court of Law in this day in age."
RA 65 wasn't 'given' to anybody! We were all offered it and some, shortsightedly, chose not to take it. Case closed.
"Pretty sure giving RA65 to a very select group of employees would be seen as discriminatory in a Court of Law in this day in age."
RA 65 wasn't 'given' to anybody! We were all offered it and some, shortsightedly, chose not to take it. Case closed.