Australian Base Closure
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: planet ****witt
Age: 37
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Australian Base Closure
So let’s get this straight the Australians overwhelmingly rejected the companies last offer during negotiations and in return they are treated with a threat of canceling the EBA. All of this during a time when the company is requesting goodwill from all of us.
I guess it is of no surprise that Cathay doesn’t negotiate in good faith. If history has taught us anything you can not trust this or any management group in the company.
So will you give up your goodwill to help out when this is how you are treated in return? It appears the only group the company ever targets is the pilot body. We don’t have to look back to far, just a month ago we didn’t get a full 13th month. This is a prime example where they capped payment at 30K so all office staff could get a full 13th month. However the pilot body is shafted again for a second time in 3 years.
But i don’t think we have to worry about Hong Kong or any base taking up SLS. As CC means no good will towards the company. So I have to say sorry but I will not be able to endorse or support the companies offer.
This is what happens when you treat your employees like **** and manage them with company policies that can and will get amended from time to time to only benefit the company.
I guess it is of no surprise that Cathay doesn’t negotiate in good faith. If history has taught us anything you can not trust this or any management group in the company.
So will you give up your goodwill to help out when this is how you are treated in return? It appears the only group the company ever targets is the pilot body. We don’t have to look back to far, just a month ago we didn’t get a full 13th month. This is a prime example where they capped payment at 30K so all office staff could get a full 13th month. However the pilot body is shafted again for a second time in 3 years.
But i don’t think we have to worry about Hong Kong or any base taking up SLS. As CC means no good will towards the company. So I have to say sorry but I will not be able to endorse or support the companies offer.
This is what happens when you treat your employees like **** and manage them with company policies that can and will get amended from time to time to only benefit the company.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shocking turn of events that nobody saw coming (
)....they turn down the deal because they didn't want to get a sick note when sick longer than three days! And oh, they want to be paid by the hours instead of getting a fixed 90% salary. There's no hope of getting any deal with that kind of judgement. Too many are still under the impression we are still living in the old days of cx. Time to catch up with today's realities. HK is just as bad.
)....they turn down the deal because they didn't want to get a sick note when sick longer than three days! And oh, they want to be paid by the hours instead of getting a fixed 90% salary. There's no hope of getting any deal with that kind of judgement. Too many are still under the impression we are still living in the old days of cx. Time to catch up with today's realities. HK is just as bad.
Shocking turn of events that nobody saw coming ()....they turn down the deal because they didn't want to get a sick note when sick longer than three days! And oh, they want to be paid by the hours instead of getting a fixed 90% salary. There's no hope of getting any deal with that kind of judgement. Too many are still under the impression we are still living in the old days of cx. Time to catch up with today's realities. HK is just as bad.
)....they turn down the deal because they didn't want to get a sick note when sick longer than three days! And oh, they want to be paid by the hours instead of getting a fixed 90% salary. There's no hope of getting any deal with that kind of judgement. Too many are still under the impression we are still living in the old days of cx. Time to catch up with today's realities. HK is just as bad.Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Earth
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sources checked, and it gets worst: they were also arguing that, since cx didn't completely take the 13th away from those based in HK but left them with 30K, they should therefore get a pay raise in Oz. It's hard to explain the logic, but yea, that's what their reps were emailing everyone a few weeks ago.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bottom line... Oz AOA overplayed their hand! They’ve been a thorn in CX’s side from their inception. Their first contract took five years to achieve. They are the loudest and least cooperative of the based unions. They’ve made very questionable decisions wrt type changes and base growth. In context, I think AOAA is a case study on how NOT to run a union.
I’m not defending CX management at all, but AOAA was unwilling to be pragmatic and selectively choose their fights. They simply opposed CX on everything. That said, I wish them the best...
I’m not defending CX management at all, but AOAA was unwilling to be pragmatic and selectively choose their fights. They simply opposed CX on everything. That said, I wish them the best...
Join Date: Jul 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bob, I think you'll find (if you check your sources again) that it was the company that offered a pay rise to all on an Australian base. It's all there, in black and white.
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other than the last post I'm struggling to understand the thrust of this thread.
You all have never trusted anything the company has publicly stated before, why are you buying into their spruke now?
I'm suspicious of some of the new names, but cxorcist, your post surprises me....what gives?
You all have never trusted anything the company has publicly stated before, why are you buying into their spruke now?
I'm suspicious of some of the new names, but cxorcist, your post surprises me....what gives?
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other than the last post I'm struggling to understand the thrust of this thread.
You all have never trusted anything the company has publicly stated before, why are you buying into their spruke now?
I'm suspicious of some of the new names, but cxorcist, your post surprises me....what gives?
You all have never trusted anything the company has publicly stated before, why are you buying into their spruke now?
I'm suspicious of some of the new names, but cxorcist, your post surprises me....what gives?
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Australia
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAOA has been a case study in how not to run a union. I’m not going to detail their misdeeds on here. That would be foolish. I suggest you find the most reasonable and honest AAOA pilot you can and ask them in person about their actions. “Overplaying their hand” is putting it mildly.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m not motivated by anything. Just calling it the way I see it. AAOA is the most disruptive and least productive union in the room, every time! They can’t get their agenda straight, and what goals they do have make no sense in the larger context beyond the petty preferences of a few senior members. AAOA is a victim of their own poor leadership and likely some counter productive contributions from the HKAOA.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: the land of chocolate
Posts: 434
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AAOA has been a case study in how not to run a union. I’m not going to detail their misdeeds on here. That would be foolish. I suggest you find the most reasonable and honest AAOA pilot you can and ask them in person about their actions. “Overplaying their hand” is putting it mildly.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: planet ****witt
Age: 37
Posts: 40
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The HKAOA is not a union.
A union wouldn’t sell out its members, a union wouldn’t sue one of their members, a union wouldn’t freely give up goodwill while in CC, a union wouldn’t only look out for the self interests of a few senior members.
the fight should be with the CX. Insteade fight ourselves because we have egotistical morons on the GC who think they are smarter than the membership. They continue to forge their own road ahead ignoring the majority.
Well you reap what you sow. If you haven’t left yet you should. Give yourself a 1.25% pay raise and disband the charade.
A union wouldn’t sell out its members, a union wouldn’t sue one of their members, a union wouldn’t freely give up goodwill while in CC, a union wouldn’t only look out for the self interests of a few senior members.
the fight should be with the CX. Insteade fight ourselves because we have egotistical morons on the GC who think they are smarter than the membership. They continue to forge their own road ahead ignoring the majority.
Well you reap what you sow. If you haven’t left yet you should. Give yourself a 1.25% pay raise and disband the charade.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I’m not at liberty to share details, but many of the AAOA fails are fairly well known. Just ask around. They always have some excuse, but the root cause is usually some version of a few very senior captains on the base not wanting to change with the industry and not caring whether the base grows or not.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 1,117
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I’m not at liberty to share details, but many of the AAOA fails are fairly well known. Just ask around. They always have some excuse, but the root cause is usually some version of a few very senior captains on the base not wanting to change with the industry and not caring whether the base grows or not.
No, I’m not at liberty to share details, but many of the AAOA fails are fairly well known. Just ask around. They always have some excuse, but the root cause is usually some version of a few very senior captains on the base not wanting to change with the industry and not caring whether the base grows or not.
oh what utter bull****........
toss off somewhere else will ya.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, because I believe it is instructive for the other based unions. When minority, extreme, and unrealistic interests hijack a union, that union is bound to fail. AAOA were also unable to understand the true limitations and scope of their leverage.
All unions have these destructive voices within. The question is whether they formulate union objectives or not, whether they sit in leadership positions or not, whether they infect the rest of the membership or not.
A union cannot combat CX’s toxic management tactics with their own toxicity. The double negative doesn’t create a positive unless you have the courts or some other third party to come in and force an agreement. Even then, I believe the reasonable, measured, and balanced unions tend to do better.
All unions have these destructive voices within. The question is whether they formulate union objectives or not, whether they sit in leadership positions or not, whether they infect the rest of the membership or not.
A union cannot combat CX’s toxic management tactics with their own toxicity. The double negative doesn’t create a positive unless you have the courts or some other third party to come in and force an agreement. Even then, I believe the reasonable, measured, and balanced unions tend to do better.