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

CX management. Moral Turpidude

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.

CX management. Moral Turpidude

Old 17th Jun 2020, 07:03
  #41 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by mngmt mole View Post
Feel free to troll through all 800. I'll happily stand by everything i've written. Each post reflective of the time and subject in point. CX does have the best "aircrew body" in the industry, but that doesn't mean that all parts of it are well thought through. Overall standards are the highest in the industry. You might want to reflect on the reason for that....it might have something to do with the legacy experience and backgrounds of the remaining senior crew. We can revisit this subject 15 years from now to perhaps reconsider. In the meantime, the company is looking to trash everyone's careers to turn CX into just another asian airline. Don't doubt it. And btw...you have no idea what sort of leadership I have or have not provided. In my now 30 years plus in the company, I've done my share of lifting...and my share of screwing up as well ;-),
How are you qualified to judge industry standards when you've spent 30 years at one airline?

To say that the average CX pilot is superior to the average pilot in BA, Qatar, Iberia, etc etc is extraordinary delusional arrogance.
YellowFever777 is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 07:54
  #42 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CLK
Posts: 308
Meanwhile, anyone care to comment on why management wants us to take SLS etc when there is a clear option of redundancy via reverse seniority in ALL of the pilot COS?
Farman Biplane is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 08:11
  #43 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 66
Turpitude, depraved or wicked behavior. Jeepers, t'management have given themselves substantial pay reductions voluntarily. They are trying like blazes to keep, if you don't mind the expression, the family together. So, I see no turpitude there at all, au cotraire. What do the Trolls like mmole and exorcist expect? Who can predict what will happen in the short, let alone long term. I have been in CX through several bad times and this is the worst by a country mile. I am proud of what is happening here. My mates around the globe are being treated far more shabbily. CX want more from me, I'll give it and hope to help all employees in the company in the process.
shortly2 is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 08:34
  #44 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Here & there
Posts: 762
Originally Posted by Farman Biplane View Post
Meanwhile, anyone care to comment on why management wants us to take SLS etc when there is a clear option of redundancy via reverse seniority in ALL of the pilot COS?
I suspect because they're not yet ready to exercise that option but still need to preserve cash where possible. They might well press the button on redundancies at some point, but the 'investment' by the HK Govt has given them a bit of extra time to gauge any economic recovery over the next six months and to work out a plan that keeps as many staff as possible for future growth. To my way of thinking that's a much better strategy than immediately slashing staff numbers, as some airlines are doing.
BuzzBox is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 09:41
  #45 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DSOTM
Posts: 192
Originally Posted by Farman Biplane View Post
Meanwhile, anyone care to comment on why management wants us to take SLS etc when there is a clear option of redundancy via reverse seniority in ALL of the pilot COS?
Are you keen for a lot of your colleagues to get fired or something? Would that make you happy and feel special? We should be happy that SLS is the only thing asked of us at this stage.

And don’t worry, if redundancies have to be made they will make them, but can you really blame them for trying to hold on to their staff? After a 5 billion USD bailout?

Go ahead, don’t take SLS because you are entitled to get your salary. It’s fine, it’s voluntary after all. It’s a bit embarrassing if people with a 20K salary in this company can take SLS and you can’t, but it’s your decision.
drfaust is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 09:45
  #46 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: FUMOD
Posts: 38
Let’s just ignore the terms in our contracts DrF. LIFO. You’re sounding like a fresh new TC.
Hugo Peroni the V is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 10:25
  #47 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DSOTM
Posts: 192
When did I advocate for anything outside our contracts? It’s a voluntary scheme. If you don’t want to take it, don’t take it. I don’t know if you’ve noticed but no one has been made redundant yet. So why should we encourage them to do so?

In my humble view taking SLS is preferable to redundancies. But that’s me.
drfaust is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 10:38
  #48 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 30
For those advocating redundancies over SLS, I assume you have quit the union? Surely the purpose of a union is to protect the interests of ALL members as much as possible? Or is it sacrifice the junior members to protect the interests of the most senior and well paid at all costs?
YellowFever777 is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 16:05
  #49 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2019
Location: FUMOD
Posts: 38
is that the same Union that one can support 100% only to see fellow members look after their own interests? Let’s get over this idea of unity and looking after one another. 2019 proved we can rely on nobody!

Originally Posted by YellowFever777 View Post
For those advocating redundancies over SLS, I assume you have quit the union? Surely the purpose of a union is to protect the interests of ALL members as much as possible? Or is it sacrifice the junior members to protect the interests of the most senior and well paid at all costs?
Hugo Peroni the V is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 17:27
  #50 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by Hugo Peroni the V View Post
is that the same Union that one can support 100% only to see fellow members look after their own interests? Let’s get over this idea of unity and looking after one another. 2019 proved we can rely on nobody!
Believe me I'm under no illusions about unity in this pilot group. However for some people to be advocating that junior pilots, real people with young families, be made redundant rather than taking a mere 3 weeks SLS over a 6 month period is particularly selfish and borderline sociopathic.

How ironic to be calling for redundancies on a thread accusing the company of moral turpitude.... couldn't make it up.
YellowFever777 is online now  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 18:59
  #51 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 832
I think the main concept in all of this is getting lost. CX likes to parrot the mantra of "family"...but it's just a cover to use any given crisis to lower the AVERAGE pay and benefits across the workforce. They do it incrementally, each time. If they laid off people, they would then be forced by the mechanics of that process to effectively support the real value of our profession. Instead, they use their current method to lower the pay and benefits across the board, inch by inch, dollar by dollar. The junior pilots are happy because they have nothing to lose (at this point in their careers). Eventually, they wake up after 15-20 years, two and a half kids, probably a divorce...school fees, mortgages, elderly and ill parents and wonder why they have not a penny to their names. Well, it's because they started of with the prevailing logic that contracts don't matter.... CX will take SLS2 out of our pockets (well..not all of our pockets I must say) and THEN they will hit us with the REAL cuts. Naivety like i've never seen before....
mngmt mole is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 22:44
  #52 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: CLK
Posts: 308
Spot on, MM.

YF777, we ALL signed a contract with the company agreeing to the LIFO seniority concept. We ALL spent time at the bottom of the list with family/personal commitments etc.
Unfortunately exceptional circumstances, for which that LIFO clause was actually designed, have presented themselves.
What other clauses of the contract do you want the company to ignore?
Farman Biplane is offline  
Old 17th Jun 2020, 23:39
  #53 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Posts: 832
I should add one more salient point to the debate: CX does not need all the pilots it has. It will be several years before the current number will make any sense. Even then, when they establish 2 SO flights throughout, increase the yearly hours requirement and a myriad of other productivity gains they are working on, it will likely be the end of the next decade before the current number makes sense again. And that is ignoring the growing political winds blowing against the future of CX. Hong Kong is probably never going to be the same again, and that will remove one of the key factors that contributed to the past growth of CX. Times have changed dramatically. CX is cynically trying to get everyone to agree to "cuts", only to then probably cut jobs anyway. Regardless, the contract must be adhered to. I realise that doing so would affect the bottom ranks, but ultimately the lifetime value of a career in this airline will only be preserved IF such actions are followed.
mngmt mole is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 00:36
  #54 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: 35,000 feet
Posts: 41
There was a time when everyone was at the bottom. maybe at the bottom when the Asian Financial crisis struck in 1997, or just above the bottom after 9/11, perhaps barely above the Bottom post 49ers when SARS hit in 2003.

I've had opportunity to leave, I had seniority which influenced my decisions. I knew the rules of the game and everyone who plays knows too. It is best to keep the rules of Seniority based redundancy in the contract. Last in first out. Sometimes those rules hinder our opportunities and prevent us from leaving for the companies benefit, and other times it protects those who stayed on. Wanting to change the rules because you don't like them is shortsighted at best.
viking avenger is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 02:42
  #55 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: DSOTM
Posts: 192
I genuinely don’t understand what you guys are talking about. There -are- no redundancies. If they come, they will come and we will deal with it then. I suspect the company will respect contracts, as they have always done, or buy people out.

For now, however, there is only SLS which you can choose to take or choose not to take. It’s a company wide scheme. I know this may be hard to imagine, but this is not only about you or your “family” and their “anxiety”. Tell them to suck it up, they’ll get over it trust me.

Let your good sense guide you on what to do. I know that some of you might prefer to see the company hacked in half knowing you will get to stay. I am happy that most guys however would prefer to see as many jobs saved as possible, and not just in the flight deck.
drfaust is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 05:41
  #56 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 296
Well said drfaust.

Although hypothetical discussions never hurt anyone. So my 2 cents;

Yes, we all signed a contract knowing what it contains. It contains the clause 35.3 as well as 32.3. Management used it in 2001 and have routinely used it ever since. I suspect they’ll use it again over the next few months. The financial payout for dismissal under 32.3 or 35.3 is fairly similar, particularly for expat crew. What 35.3 gives the company is the flexibility to pick and choose fleets and ranks that have excessive numbers without the need for training.

Yes, we could spend years fighting such a decision through the courts, but for what gain?
Senior crew holding their COS up like Trump with his bible outside St John’s Episcopal Church thinking that’ll save them might want to have a read of all of its contents. They might want to do some research into how management have previously used its contents and continue to use it right up to recent events.

So at this stage SLS is a shared burden for those that can afford it and are selfless enough to do so. Or we can all put our names into the 35.3 lottery hat.

Just my 2 cents.
Progress Wanchai is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 06:17
  #57 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by Farman Biplane View Post
Spot on, MM.

YF777, we ALL signed a contract with the company agreeing to the LIFO seniority concept. We ALL spent time at the bottom of the list with family/personal commitments etc.
Unfortunately exceptional circumstances, for which that LIFO clause was actually designed, have presented themselves.
What other clauses of the contract do you want the company to ignore?
Well they havent presented themselves, the company is not (yet) seeking redundancies in case you missed it. For pilots to lead the charge in seeking redundancies is nauseating. And a note of caution, if you think that the company won't seek to implement some force majeure out of seniority redundancies then you're more optimistic than I am, good luck with that.
YellowFever777 is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 07:22
  #58 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 71
Originally Posted by YellowFever777 View Post
Well they havent presented themselves, the company is not (yet) seeking redundancies in case you missed it. For pilots to lead the charge in seeking redundancies is nauseating. And a note of caution, if you think that the company won't seek to implement some force majeure out of seniority redundancies then you're more optimistic than I am, good luck with that.
it is interesting that in general conversation a “dog eat dog “ mentality is developing. This coupled with a sense of entitlement that is at odds with the layoffs worldwide saddens me. I have been in the “industry” longer than most and of course seniority has been a major factor in my personal wellbeing. Now frankly I’m glad to be nearing the end of my flying career as I can see what’s left of it is descending into a potentially unhappy and divided work force. There is no panacea, save jobs alienate the “top” guys, stick to seniority and fire the poor sods at the “bottom”.
It’s not even the dilemma itself that I find worrisome ( that’s aviation for you). It’s the fact that people are voicing such opinions publicly and quite forcefully in front of junior crew members. I might add I have been on the receiving end “you’ve had your time they should get rid of the old/deadwood”.
Have some empathy is all I would ask/suggest.
Please don’t take offense as I’m not directing this at any of the above posts. More of the ramblings of an old buffer on human nature.
AllWobbly is offline  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 08:13
  #59 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: HK
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by AllWobbly View Post
it is interesting that in general conversation a “dog eat dog “ mentality is developing. This coupled with a sense of entitlement that is at odds with the layoffs worldwide saddens me. I have been in the “industry” longer than most and of course seniority has been a major factor in my personal wellbeing. Now frankly I’m glad to be nearing the end of my flying career as I can see what’s left of it is descending into a potentially unhappy and divided work force. There is no panacea, save jobs alienate the “top” guys, stick to seniority and fire the poor sods at the “bottom”.
It’s not even the dilemma itself that I find worrisome ( that’s aviation for you). It’s the fact that people are voicing such opinions publicly and quite forcefully in front of junior crew members. I might add I have been on the receiving end “you’ve had your time they should get rid of the old/deadwood”.
Have some empathy is all I would ask/suggest.
Please don’t take offense as I’m not directing this at any of the above posts. More of the ramblings of an old buffer on human nature.
I agree with you. I'm trying to be pragmatic and empathetic. SLS is the most equitable sacrifice and relatively very mild when you look at the bloodbaths that are unfolding in other airlines. If and when the company comes looking for redundancies it will be a sad day indeed.
YellowFever777 is online now  
Old 18th Jun 2020, 13:34
  #60 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: All over
Posts: 221
Originally Posted by YellowFever777 View Post
I agree with you. I'm trying to be pragmatic and empathetic. SLS is the most equitable sacrifice and relatively very mild when you look at the bloodbaths that are unfolding in other airlines. If and when the company comes looking for redundancies it will be a sad day indeed.
YGBSM.

New joiners are hired for over a decade on a series of declining contracts. These (knowingly) undermine existing contracts yet the new joiners don’t care. The company plays this very well. Fair enough. The common element in the contract is seniority and the rules are clearly delineated. Seniority has great value and effectively anchors people in the job preventing easy transfer and market forces to operate to some extent (being a barrier to entry and exit). Keeping many with higher skills and qualifications from going elsewhere with these because to do so would dump the seniority and have them start all over at the bottom.

"Unprecedented times ?!?" -- yeah-- Bullshite. . While perhaps the Wuhan Flu itself was unpredictable and unexpected, it's completely foreseeable that SOMETHING would happen over the life of the contract (which is why you have a contract with layoff and recall provisions to begin with). Historically airlines have faced numerous boom and bust cycles by SOME kind of event. While the exact type of event might be wholly unknown its obvious to anyone in the industry that it will happen (and might even happen a couple or few times over a career). Which is why a contract and agreement towards what to do when it does happen exists in the first place.

Now a significant event happens and the snowflakes want to change the contract by voiding the clearly defined lay-off and recall procedures contained within it. They don’t want the rules they knowingly agreed to apply to them anymore (and neither does the company in that they are the cheap labor and the first to go under the agreed contract). It’s a form of communism — make up some scam downline to ‘share the pain’ and void the contract endorsing the behavior of those who deliberately undermined it over the years to begin with. In other words enabling bad behavior. What one agreed and committed to doesn’t matter anymore.

How can anyone think this is in any way the right thing to do ?

Now, to be fair contracts are not necessarily static and perhaps given the objectives of company and person at some point downline both parties might find a mutually agreed better way to do things. That's fine too; several US carriers have done so by incentivizing early out (voluntary) packages or (completely) voluntary leave packages. Without propaganda or coercion. Where the value of seniority and the layoff/recall provisions in the original contract are preserved (not deliberately circumvented).

Last edited by Slasher1; 18th Jun 2020 at 14:14.
Slasher1 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information

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