Demographics of the General Committee
 

After receiving the same email that bushcat posted I decided to have a look for myself at the General Committee makeup.

There are 16 members on the AOA GC according to their website. 8 are A scale CNs and 8 are B scale (6 CNs, 2 FOs).

There are 2 B scale FOs who represent the 1300 plus guys who will be most adversely affected by this deal. There are 14 A and B scale CNs representing the 750 who have the most to gain by this deal. Are any of them due to retire in the next few years? I suspect there is one A scaler on a base and one B scale TC close to retirement. Of the 8 A scale, 7 are based. Do the based guys have anything to lose on this deal? So out of self interest there is likely to be 9 GC members actively pushing this deal and 2 actively opposing it!


Is this GC really in a position to give impartial judgement of this deal?


My advice, get more FOs and SOs into the AOA so that we can reject or accept the deal inspite of the self interested recommendation of the GC.

I honestly couldn't care about a pay increase anymore- its way too late anyway.

What we should be fighting for is an annual scale increment based on inflation!!!!! This will ( stating the obvious ) ensure that our conditions do not deteriorate further and nothing else. :ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:
Every single decent global company on this planet does that.

We would like to see a 24 hours strike, we still have some people to terminate, ones we missed the last time or some newbies beating their chest. Do you think some will put their provident fund in jeopardy?

Is that the same as the GOLF days where only a 100 or so put their head above the parapet? Out of 2000 pilots you would be fortunate to get 100 to stop working for a day. We knew who those pilots were and took appropriate action.

Most know that we will not hesitate to terminate more pilots. It only takes a few and the rest will fall swiftly into line.

You are dreaming.

How many pilots will be able to pay their mortgages in Hong Kong and in those favorite ski resorts around the world? We can drop by the housing department and have a list of the biggest mortgage holders in Hong Kong.

Many Mangers have been to these many ski resorts and from talking to various pilots we know which ones have several mortgages in these areas. We don’t have a problem terminating these pilots’ contract. We could always hire them back onto the freighters in a couple of months or years on lower conditions. Ha Ha.

So beware and you have been warned.

I would like to use this opportunity to thank the many many pilots who still acknowledge their roster changes in crew direct, answer their phone at home and in the hotel, work on G days, flying the freighter, operating into discretion, support the HKAOA and for generally going above and beyond the call of duty for US.

From the bottom of our bonus, we thank you.

We will offer you a generous pay increase but there are certain items we need from the pilots.

The freighter agreement is too constrictive. We need all pilots to fly the freighter therefore we will be offering the ASL pilots an opportunity to join the Cathay Pilots Seniority List. This will be most beneficial.

We need the Retirement Age to increase and the only way to expand and still save my bonus is to do this. Career progression of pilots is not our concern, making money is. We are sure the most junior pilots understand.

Here’s to my Bonus!

The Management.

404

May I respectfully suggest your two mates (well one in particular) needs his head read.

Royal Brunei is an absolute basket case of an airline. I personally know a couple of guys who were there for many years and ultimately left when it became totally intolerable. They push the envelope more than any other airline with the possible exception of some of our Indonesian friends.

Not only that, I assume that he has gone to work for Rishworth. Double jeopardy.

As to Oasis. Big gonads required. Their cashflow situation is frightening and I am not sure how deep the pockets are. Their seat costs must be at least 1.5 times ours and look what they are charging.

ULR said
My advice, get more FOs and SOs into the AOA so that we can reject or accept the deal inspite of the self interested recommendation of the GC.

Agree, and a recent update from the President stated there were still not enough volunteers to require an election so it is up to the members to apply.

I certainly disagree that the members join the GC for self interest, most do it as a sense of duty, it has no financial reward. When you consider the company sacked 3% of the workforce but that included a whopping 25% of the GC we should be very grateful for those that still choose to represent us. Instead there a few posters on this website who throw foul insults and accusations at these hard working representatives and attempt to draw all sorts of conclusions from spread of representives.

Based on those assumptions cast by some it could be argued that as there are no females on the GC that all the females in the company are going to be screwed by this new deal.........and thats why we should not vote for it!!!

The opportunity to consider the deal will come shortly as advised by the President. The members will vote on it accordingly after considering all the facts and it will either pass or fail....simple.

or fail, then get voted on again:hmm:

Yes all female pilots will be screwed because none of them are A scale CNs close to retirement. Thanks for helping to make my point Cyril.

I have had friends on the GC. I know they have given up time for the greater good. But in the past all votes have affected the entire membership reasonably equally (arguable on housing vote and 49ers). Point is there was no conflict of interest.

But now we have a deal coming that is to the great advantage of all CNs, particularly A scale, and no benefit to FOs or SOs - and if wombatico/bushcat are to be believed, no bypass pay for based FOs.

The last time I remember a conflict of interest vote was back in 93 or 94 when Tucknott pushed some basing deal...he then rushed off and took the basing, got paid $100K for his troubles.

So I will say again, how can we expect an impartial recommendation from a GC that has 14 people with so much to gain representing 750 people whilst the 1350 with so much to lose have 2 people representing them?

Will the GC A scale CN close to 55 or the GC B scale TC close to 55 reject the deal for the greater good????

a-ha
 

just tired of hearing freighter guys whingeing about delayed commands..transfer to the pax fleet...can't live where they want...didn't get the basing they wanted...etc etc...pretty much everything they did to the original cx f/o's when they turned up and took a job when cx was all out screwing the pax boys.

whoa...
 

instead of trying to drag the original guys conditions (a-scale) down ...why not suggest moving B-scale upwards???

bushcat400
 

are you suggesting that the freighter crews 'saved cx ass' during sars?....
pleeeeeez

to suggest moving B scale upwards would require common sense and solidarity. Why blame the company when you can point the finger at other people........."those freighter guys took my command" etc etc. At the end of the day if you are here at CX no matter what terms and conditions you work on , we need to get together to fight , not each other but the company.
We have no right to complain about people taking a job on any terms or conditions as they are probably better than the ones they had before.....................................AT the end of the day if we don't have the balls to withdraw our labour or co-operation in support of our justifiable cause, are we really stupid enough to expect people to refuse a job to support us...........???? ..............................

VR-HFX
 

totally agree....if you'd already flown 8 years as an f/o in cx why not do a freighter command and then go to brunei?....duh
take gun....shoot foot!

Quote:"as to Oasis. Big gonads required. Their cashflow situation is frightening and I am not sure how deep the pockets are. Their seat costs must be at least 1.5 times ours"

Hi VR-HFX,

You must be a top insider.
Could you share all your financial secrets with us, I'm quite interested.

Cheers,
Xavier

Funny thing is, I heard that went cashflow POSITIVE as early as March this year...from a really reliable, well-placed source, FWIW.

404 does not know them too well!

One guy has recently come out of the closet and wants to move with his partner to a country that does not frown on their lifestyle choice, the other has amassed a small fortune from an internet porn site, and does not need to work. I would post the web address but the bastard has made enough!

hey if all he can afford is a closet due to the low housing allowance, so what, why knock the guy??

CX has had bases for many years now, and age discrimination has never been a problem. But it`s funny that since the company wants to increase the retirement age it has now become an issue. Or is it really?

I'm not sure that Cyril would agree that he's helping ULR make his point.

ULR continues to bash the committee whilst Cyril correctly points out that those few who dare to serve on OUR UNION's representative body get no thanks for it whatsoever. ULR still manages to allege self-interest.

Ah, Tucknott. So presidents going back that far were also into self interest? Tucknott did not go onto a base until some years after the original basings deal was signed and he didn't get the $100,000 that the early based guys did. That was stopped in 1993. But what has fact got to do with committee bashing?

The point ULR is if you are unhappy at who's on the committee do something about it. You have had friends who have done so, why don't you have a go? The life of a left hand seat armchair critic is much easier and carries no responsibility - we know.

Back to Harry Potter.