Cathay pilots have got no balls!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: up here, everyone looks like ants!
Posts: 966
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Getting Old" for you perhaps, but as a "boy pilot", your perception of the big picture is somewhat doubtful. "Fired Second Officers"? Where did that come from? Your obvious guilty feelings about something or other is skewing your judgement, sonny. Straighten up or you may find yourself back in that Caravan/Metro/Seneca doing your Phinda-St Lucia shuttle again.
Remember that only the tall poppies lose their heads, boet.
Remember that only the tall poppies lose their heads, boet.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a Friendly Reminder about 'Replacement Workers' etc. (NOT $(@)$!!!).
Reproduced here is a post that was, for a long time, a 'sticky'.
It still applies, so please be guided accordingly, Thanks, BE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those 'Lists' Again!!!!
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Just a reminder that, since its inception, seven years ago, PPRuNe has not allowed, "Reference to, details of or links to" such lists, the primary reason is that since the people on these lists are hardly likely to have agreed to their names being put into the public domain they may have recourse to the law and even if Danny were to only finish up with a bill for his defence it would probably cause the BB to close. If other sites wish to display them then be it on their own head.
Please would you be kind enough to cease putting any details of, references to, or links to any such lists on PPRuNe.
Failure to comply will result in the offending posters having their posting ability stopped.
Your cooperation will be much appreciated.
BlueEagle - Moderator.
It still applies, so please be guided accordingly, Thanks, BE
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Those 'Lists' Again!!!!
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Just a reminder that, since its inception, seven years ago, PPRuNe has not allowed, "Reference to, details of or links to" such lists, the primary reason is that since the people on these lists are hardly likely to have agreed to their names being put into the public domain they may have recourse to the law and even if Danny were to only finish up with a bill for his defence it would probably cause the BB to close. If other sites wish to display them then be it on their own head.
Please would you be kind enough to cease putting any details of, references to, or links to any such lists on PPRuNe.
Failure to comply will result in the offending posters having their posting ability stopped.
Your cooperation will be much appreciated.
BlueEagle - Moderator.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: honkers
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dexter, it is of little consequence to us what we are called. sc#bs,replacement workers, custodians etc,. are all suitable and, depending on which side of the fence you are on, appropriate. i shall endeavour to get this thread back on track. it was never a case of whether Cathay pilots had balls or not, rather who was going to be dictated to by an out of date union and affiliated unions.
as with the dispute in '89 in Oz, the union had embarked on a campaign to "annoy the living daylights" out of the Companies in an attempt to gain more money, in an industry that was paying very well at the time. The AFAPs tactics were a "nine to five" campaign, totally unworkable in the aviation industry and the union new it. the AOAs tactics were mass "sick ins" again totally unworkable. now when you get someone annoyed for long enough, they are going to hit back at you and hit back hard. and so was the case with the Airlines in Oz - mass personal writs on pilots for damages. with Cathay it was indiscriminate sackings.
i concede neither retaliations were fair but they happened. the unions should have realised that they were in a no win situation and should have changed strategies but NO. AFAP stick together and it will turn out OK. AOA get IFALPA to sanction a recruitment ban and it will work out OK.
both unions were guilty of headstrong and egotistical leadership. at no time was any consideration given to the more junior pilot groups in the airlines. there were pilots in Oz that never flew again. i was still learning to fly and paying off my flying lessons - no rich Uncle paying for me! i swore, after witnessing that event in 1989 that no union or association was ever going to prevent me pursuing what i perceived to be a fair and reasonable aviation job.
hope this clarifies a few things for you young Dexter.
gee i enjoyed that week off!
as with the dispute in '89 in Oz, the union had embarked on a campaign to "annoy the living daylights" out of the Companies in an attempt to gain more money, in an industry that was paying very well at the time. The AFAPs tactics were a "nine to five" campaign, totally unworkable in the aviation industry and the union new it. the AOAs tactics were mass "sick ins" again totally unworkable. now when you get someone annoyed for long enough, they are going to hit back at you and hit back hard. and so was the case with the Airlines in Oz - mass personal writs on pilots for damages. with Cathay it was indiscriminate sackings.
i concede neither retaliations were fair but they happened. the unions should have realised that they were in a no win situation and should have changed strategies but NO. AFAP stick together and it will turn out OK. AOA get IFALPA to sanction a recruitment ban and it will work out OK.
both unions were guilty of headstrong and egotistical leadership. at no time was any consideration given to the more junior pilot groups in the airlines. there were pilots in Oz that never flew again. i was still learning to fly and paying off my flying lessons - no rich Uncle paying for me! i swore, after witnessing that event in 1989 that no union or association was ever going to prevent me pursuing what i perceived to be a fair and reasonable aviation job.
hope this clarifies a few things for you young Dexter.
gee i enjoyed that week off!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Wybacrik
Posts: 1,190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We can presume, of course, TSI, that you have made your views well known to all the Captains and F/Os that you fly with?...
as well as to the leadership of the AOA?...
just so they know exactly where you're coming from?...
so that they know not to rely on you if push ever comes to shove?
No?...
why am I not surprised!
as well as to the leadership of the AOA?...
just so they know exactly where you're coming from?...
so that they know not to rely on you if push ever comes to shove?
No?...
why am I not surprised!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
who really gives a F*** whether new joiners can join the AOA. i joined in support for the 49'ers only to realise that the AOA is full of fat-cats who were willing to offer 5% of their salary but not stick their neck on the real line. gutless ******s really.....needless to say, i am not in the aoa any more and most probably, under its current stewardship and direction, will never be again.
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
"it is of little consequence to us what we are called. sc#bs,replacement workers, custodians etc,."
Okay TSI we'll call you SCAB!
"The AFAPs tactics were a "nine to five" campaign, totally unworkable in the aviation industry.."
Doh, really!! Thank you, TSI... it was Abeles who told the pilots, "You are no different to other workers"
That was EXACTLY the point being made - to treat pilots the same as other workers was - in YOUR words - "totally unworkable in the aviation industry."
"i was still learning to fly and paying off my flying lessons" - no excuse for scabbing, TSI! We've ALL had to do it the hard way, why do YOU think YOU are the exception to the rule.
We ALL stood in line and waited our turn, as it's ALWAYS been done.
Do YOU think that you are someone special, more deserving than the guy who started 6 months..1 year...3 years..ahead of YOU??
Aviation doesn't need queue-jumpers...scabs...so don't complain about the treatment or the name-calling when it (deservedly) comes your way.
Okay TSI we'll call you SCAB!
"The AFAPs tactics were a "nine to five" campaign, totally unworkable in the aviation industry.."
Doh, really!! Thank you, TSI... it was Abeles who told the pilots, "You are no different to other workers"
That was EXACTLY the point being made - to treat pilots the same as other workers was - in YOUR words - "totally unworkable in the aviation industry."
"i was still learning to fly and paying off my flying lessons" - no excuse for scabbing, TSI! We've ALL had to do it the hard way, why do YOU think YOU are the exception to the rule.
We ALL stood in line and waited our turn, as it's ALWAYS been done.
Do YOU think that you are someone special, more deserving than the guy who started 6 months..1 year...3 years..ahead of YOU??
Aviation doesn't need queue-jumpers...scabs...so don't complain about the treatment or the name-calling when it (deservedly) comes your way.
Yes Kap,
Just like all those other nine-to-five workers. You know, the flight attendents, flight engineers, CSOs, baggage loaders,engineers. IOt was ONLY the pilots who had to work unsociable hours, and at times for no more than 3 or 4 times what these other bludgers were earning.
Guess that's why they lent you so much support...
Just like all those other nine-to-five workers. You know, the flight attendents, flight engineers, CSOs, baggage loaders,engineers. IOt was ONLY the pilots who had to work unsociable hours, and at times for no more than 3 or 4 times what these other bludgers were earning.
Guess that's why they lent you so much support...
Moderate, Modest & Mild.
It was only the pilots who were accused as such.
So why did YOU scab in the Australian Dispute, Wiz?
Unable to "crack it" in normal times - like TSI - you both saw this as your only REAL chance to get into airlines.
No need to ask why NONE of the scab airlines in Australia are now in existence, is there!
Cheap shots from the likes of Wizofoz, thankfully keep the argument of employing scab labour vs suitably qualified, free-thinkers alive.
So why did YOU scab in the Australian Dispute, Wiz?
Unable to "crack it" in normal times - like TSI - you both saw this as your only REAL chance to get into airlines.
No need to ask why NONE of the scab airlines in Australia are now in existence, is there!
Cheap shots from the likes of Wizofoz, thankfully keep the argument of employing scab labour vs suitably qualified, free-thinkers alive.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kaptin M, you really are a nasty person you know. Was the atmosphere becoming a bit too moderate for you? Did you want to wind up the kids who did not want to support the immoral, unworkable and selective recruitment ban by unconcious name calling and selective quotation of facts. I have some bad news for you, the skirmish is over - notwithstanding os actions still in place. And Wiz, other than FEs how about up to ten times what those others earn for unsocial hours. Lets move on.
ARRR!!! NOW I SEE!!!
Only the PILOTS were accused of being the same as all the other workers.
All the OTHER workers weren't accuse of being like all the other workers.
Well! A mortal insult like that certainly deserved the precipitation of the worst industrial dispute in the countries history and the loss of tens of thousands of job.
As to my history, I've told you all about it before, but you continue to believe what ever you wish (you always have!)
One thing you have never cleared up however,
Why DID you apply for your job back?
All the OTHER workers weren't accuse of being like all the other workers.
Well! A mortal insult like that certainly deserved the precipitation of the worst industrial dispute in the countries history and the loss of tens of thousands of job.
As to my history, I've told you all about it before, but you continue to believe what ever you wish (you always have!)
One thing you have never cleared up however,
Why DID you apply for your job back?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a box
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, shortly, once again your slip is showing....which is more immoral? (good word that for a management tissue..) to support the 49ers or to sack people out of hand for spurious reasons to support a floundering management team desperate to keep their own snouts in the trough?..
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Given the unfortunate position the 49ers found themselves in was the direct consequence of AOA turpitude then the AOA had a moral obligation to support them (the 49ers). There was plenty in the coffers to do that - if - that same capital was not to be spent in other ways ie more industrial mischief. Just be thankful you weren't one of them, I hear you say, interesting that as I hold no fears for my job and I hold no fears for my fellow aviators either in that regard, so long as the AOA doesn't do something else that is silly. That ludicrous ban was never justifiable in the form it took. As I have said previously a Claytons ban, you know the ban you have when you don't have a ban. So name calling, cheap pot-shots and selective mis-quotation aren't helping the situation. And snouts in the trough - come on that's the pot calling the kettle black isn't it. Just a comment on your post - sorry in advance - if you use comparisons to justify argument then you must compare like things, the old apples to apples and oranges to oranges. Your comparison is pure emotion and neither chronologically nor logically linked. The Readers Digest Book of Writing Skills is worth perusal, it also has a good chapter on resumes.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: In a box
Posts: 137
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yet again, shortly, your slip is showing dear. Comparing like with like is a good idea....comparing your 'answers' in this thread with those on the current 'truth will set you free' thread and many in the past you see the same tired device to foul the stream of debate.
Each time your posts seem to have substance, but end up being a sidetrack away from the main issue. Some time ago you were accused of being a Freehills shrink. Whether you are being duplicitious is less open to question each time you post.
As JTR says ATFQ.
PS, is the Readers Digest still published?
Each time your posts seem to have substance, but end up being a sidetrack away from the main issue. Some time ago you were accused of being a Freehills shrink. Whether you are being duplicitious is less open to question each time you post.
As JTR says ATFQ.
PS, is the Readers Digest still published?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 436
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are issues about which even you and I can agree SC, there are others about which we never will. C'est la vie, such is life. What I object to is the childlike name calling by those who have acted really the same as the recipients of their bonhomie but will not open their eyes to see it. Actually, they acted worse and pretend they are better. They put in a percentage of their wage to support those whose jobs they took. Hypocrites and liars.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: in the middle
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
KAPTIN M
I cant believe you can sit there and type this cr.....p.
The truth is that you took longer than most to complete your ATPL's. So because you got your student licence first, should you be eligable before others? Seniority does not stick for life.
The thing that gets me is YOU TRIED TO GET YOUR JOB BACK but they didnt want you!! DONT DENY IT because its the truth. Thats why I find it so unbelievable that you could write such rot.
YOU WERE NOT WANTED BECAUSE YOU ARE YOU.
So wake up and smell the roses and look at yourself rather than others trying to make something out of this not so good industry.
I cant believe you can sit there and type this cr.....p.
The truth is that you took longer than most to complete your ATPL's. So because you got your student licence first, should you be eligable before others? Seniority does not stick for life.
The thing that gets me is YOU TRIED TO GET YOUR JOB BACK but they didnt want you!! DONT DENY IT because its the truth. Thats why I find it so unbelievable that you could write such rot.
YOU WERE NOT WANTED BECAUSE YOU ARE YOU.
So wake up and smell the roses and look at yourself rather than others trying to make something out of this not so good industry.