End of year Restructure
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3Greens, that's not what BALPA is saying, it would be very surprising if all the junior crew were Skippers and F/Os on the 744, since that's where cuts are coming from.
Still amazes me at CX that the guys who are on RA 55 are so desperate to go to 65 that they can interpret from the massive oversupply of pilots we currently have and suggest the company might not want those on COS99 to retire at 55 but stay on longer instead.
Still amazes me at CX that the guys who are on RA 55 are so desperate to go to 65 that they can interpret from the massive oversupply of pilots we currently have and suggest the company might not want those on COS99 to retire at 55 but stay on longer instead.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3Greens, that's not what BALPA is saying, it would be very surprising if all the junior crew were Skippers and F/Os on the 744, since that's where cuts are coming from.
Still amazes me at CX that the guys who are on RA 55 are so desperate to go to 65 that they can interpret from the massive oversupply of pilots we currently have and suggest the company might not want those on COS99 to retire at 55 but stay on longer instead.
Still amazes me at CX that the guys who are on RA 55 are so desperate to go to 65 that they can interpret from the massive oversupply of pilots we currently have and suggest the company might not want those on COS99 to retire at 55 but stay on longer instead.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Asia
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the RA55 vs RA65 gamble from 2009 is looking rather dicey at the moment. However, that is changing the subject. Redundancies are done from the bottom, period. That is irrespective of CoS99, 08, or based CA, CBA, or EA. This pipe dream that it will look like QR or EK is just that. I’m not sure what is going on at BA or VS, except that it seems completely irrelevant to CX.
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: York International
Posts: 677
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the RA55 vs RA65 gamble from 2009 is looking rather dicey at the moment. However, that is changing the subject. Redundancies are done from the bottom, period. That is irrespective of CoS99, 08, or based CA, CBA, or EA. This pipe dream that it will look like QR or EK is just that. I’m not sure what is going on at BA or VS, except that it seems completely irrelevant to CX.
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Smoky City
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I’m on the 747 but I’m not so arrogant to think that our current Teflon status will last.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, the RA55 vs RA65 gamble from 2009 is looking rather dicey at the moment. However, that is changing the subject. Redundancies are done from the bottom, period. That is irrespective of CoS99, 08, or based CA, CBA, or EA. This pipe dream that it will look like QR or EK is just that. I’m not sure what is going on at BA or VS, except that it seems completely irrelevant to CX.
Obviously an unfair dismissal claim is the recourse for anyone who believes they’ve been unfairly dismissed. What does this mean practically?
In the event of a successful judicial process in accordance with the Employment Ordinance the courts will enforce compensation less than that which the company will probably already have paid. Under the EO there is no requirement for a company to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee.
So yes, our contract will necessitate management being rather “creative” to achieve their objectives and will keep their lawyers in a job for the foreseeable future. But it won’t save anyone here from joining the world wide scrap heap of unemployed pilots.
I firmly believe in our contract and the ability to seek redress in accordance with Hong Kong law. But I also respect that doesn’t amount to much.
Good luck to all. It’s going to get painful for everyone.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: The Back of Beyond
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to mention enshrined as a result of the government bail out. HKG locals, including expat PR holders 'shall' be kept on before non-PR holders, regardless of seniority, is my understanding.
Join Date: Apr 2019
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You’re correct that our contracts are quite clear regarding redundancy and are legally enforceable. So take it to the next step. How will you ensure your contract is enforced or how will you seek redress if the company uses another clause to reduce excessive staff other than the redundancy clause?
Obviously an unfair dismissal claim is the recourse for anyone who believes they’ve been unfairly dismissed. What does this mean practically?
In the event of a successful judicial process in accordance with the Employment Ordinance the courts will enforce compensation less than that which the company will probably already have paid. Under the EO there is no requirement for a company to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee.
So yes, our contract will necessitate management being rather “creative” to achieve their objectives and will keep their lawyers in a job for the foreseeable future. But it won’t save anyone here from joining the world wide scrap heap of unemployed pilots.
I firmly believe in our contract and the ability to seek redress in accordance with Hong Kong law. But I also respect that doesn’t amount to much.
Good luck to all. It’s going to get painful for everyone.
Obviously an unfair dismissal claim is the recourse for anyone who believes they’ve been unfairly dismissed. What does this mean practically?
In the event of a successful judicial process in accordance with the Employment Ordinance the courts will enforce compensation less than that which the company will probably already have paid. Under the EO there is no requirement for a company to reinstate an unfairly dismissed employee.
So yes, our contract will necessitate management being rather “creative” to achieve their objectives and will keep their lawyers in a job for the foreseeable future. But it won’t save anyone here from joining the world wide scrap heap of unemployed pilots.
I firmly believe in our contract and the ability to seek redress in accordance with Hong Kong law. But I also respect that doesn’t amount to much.
Good luck to all. It’s going to get painful for everyone.
The only valid grounds for a “complaint” are those arising from unlawful dismissal. I think that’s what you meant.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think the correct EO term is “wrongful termination of contract”. Unfortunately the penalties for the company are minuscule compared to the savings that could be made.
Knowing your contract without knowing the legislation that make the contract worth anything is only seeing half the picture.
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Polar Route
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If CX starts busting contracts, legal or illegal, enforceable or not, the moral at CX will sink to depths previously unknown. The disdain between pilots and management will be so toxic that the airline may never recover.
Through pure misfortune, CX is enjoying most pilots being onside at the moment as we all seek to survive this virus. It’s one thing to ask for SLS and get union approved pay concessions for idled, based pax pilots. It is something very different to furlough out of seniority against every contract in CX/KA, except the “amendable” POS18.
This airline will quite literally crash and burn if it tries to fly the operation solely with pilots on local contracts. They aren’t there YET, and they know it. Letting go of guys at 55 on CoS99 is fair enough, but out of seniority redundancies are a radical path that not even CX is brave enough to try on.
CX has an opportunity. They are at a fork in the road and can go several different directions. At the moment, it appears there is no leadership making any decisions. Perhaps that is wrong, and they just haven’t moved yet. I would like to think that the plan for expensive expats is to move them onto bases and keep mostly local contracts in Hong Kong, but since when has CX ever done anything that actually makes sense?
Through pure misfortune, CX is enjoying most pilots being onside at the moment as we all seek to survive this virus. It’s one thing to ask for SLS and get union approved pay concessions for idled, based pax pilots. It is something very different to furlough out of seniority against every contract in CX/KA, except the “amendable” POS18.
This airline will quite literally crash and burn if it tries to fly the operation solely with pilots on local contracts. They aren’t there YET, and they know it. Letting go of guys at 55 on CoS99 is fair enough, but out of seniority redundancies are a radical path that not even CX is brave enough to try on.
CX has an opportunity. They are at a fork in the road and can go several different directions. At the moment, it appears there is no leadership making any decisions. Perhaps that is wrong, and they just haven’t moved yet. I would like to think that the plan for expensive expats is to move them onto bases and keep mostly local contracts in Hong Kong, but since when has CX ever done anything that actually makes sense?
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: HK-CRoC
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cargo
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: HK-CRoC
Posts: 749
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Important ??
With China's new security law being rammed down HK's throat and the Corporate exodus beginning, I would think that "the rule of Law" , criminal, Corporate or EMPLOYMENT would be paramount to HK !!
But don't use the USA as an example, lawlessness reigns supreme...
But don't use the USA as an example, lawlessness reigns supreme...
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: HKG
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My guess the company will:
Quicken the already announced plans to ditch 330s and older 777s
Offer an early retirement package. Will be a cheap package but they will pitch it just high enough to shed some of the more senior guys. Who wants to live in just another Commie China city anyway?
Offer long term leave without pay. Redundancies would cost too much and would have to be in reverse seniority (we have enough pilots based with legal protections for it to be any other way), so a work around is furlough. A variation to the contract but can be implemented with agreement.
If the company was smart they would offer bases to get 50% of pilot body based - immediately removes expensive housing and education and aligns with recommendations from Jepp as how to maximise productively from air crew.
Offer an early retirement package. Will be a cheap package but they will pitch it just high enough to shed some of the more senior guys. Who wants to live in just another Commie China city anyway?
Offer long term leave without pay. Redundancies would cost too much and would have to be in reverse seniority (we have enough pilots based with legal protections for it to be any other way), so a work around is furlough. A variation to the contract but can be implemented with agreement.
If the company was smart they would offer bases to get 50% of pilot body based - immediately removes expensive housing and education and aligns with recommendations from Jepp as how to maximise productively from air crew.