Sisyphos,

Dealing with your 3 points;

1. We all knew it was RA55 when we joined; that was the deal. If one of your buckets isn't full enough at age 55.... tough...should I alter my life plans to accomodate you? As an aside, you seem to have the view that people get the salary they need or deserve. It is my experience that they get what is in their Contract.

2. "They think RA 65 will slow down their career."
It is and will. However, a fair and transparent BPP will compensate those who have suffered loss. That was what all agreed and expected when we signed the Contract.... did you cross out that bit in the Contract when you signed?... thought not.

3. Quite probably.. but that comment can be equally directed at ATY and Cyril and co.

Sisyphos, have you read NC's post earlier this year which dealt with the financial loss to Junior Crew of RA 65? I seem to recall that of the extra 10 years you may (hows your medical?) work, 3 will be making up for delayed CN's salary. I believe NC's calculations assumed we didn't get any pay cuts in the future...

Cyril,

"I have always acknowledged that at some point in time someone will be affected by RA 65 just like it was in QF BA and many other airlines. That might be now or 10 years time and we would all be better served by a negotiated settlement"

Yes you have, however you haven't really quantified it. The extentions offered already have already affected Command Times, so the time is probably now. I'll quantify it for you.... one year delay for every year increase in RA. What say you?

As for a negotiated settlement. Absolutely: you and I can agree whatever we want; however it's all hot air unless the company agrees. I suggest they will only agree one of the 3 option in my post yesterday... what say you?

Sysiphos,

wonderful to see we can all debate this reasonably, and apology unconditionally accepted - no offence taken on my side! I know it's a gross understatement, but this is understandably a divisive issue, and I want to re-inforce the fact that I wholeheartedly agree that the majority do want (or more accurately, will need) RA65.

However, the problem is that contractual RA55 came FIRST. This means that, no matter what how small the minority who signed up for this and actually intend to leave at 55, there is the none-too-small matter that they should be afforded the contractual option of being able to utilise RA55 without being unduly financially disadvantaged. By way of an (obtuse) analogy, as a B-scaler, I'm incredibly envious of the A-scale T&Cs, but my outlook is "good on 'em, they got in at the right time!". I find the notion of their unilaterally imposed pay cut obscene, even more so than the difference between the two pay scales.

The point is this, there is always a "moral zeitgeist" that changes with the times, but majority rules is not an equitable cover-all in this case. If there is just ONE who seeks to utilise RA55 to transition to a non-CX/retirement phase of life, then that is their prerogative. To say "stuff you mate, more of us need the money so you can forego your 55 plans and look at 57/60/65...". That sir, is simply unfair. This of course assumes that RA65 will disadvantage the intended RA55 guy/gal. On this, I think there is no doubt, although depending on whose "financial model" you belive there is a wide variance in the financial discrimination that RA65 will impose.

Something that is rarely mentioned, due to it's eminently personal nature, is the amount some people regard as suitable for retirement. Whilst RA65 may be the "middle class Western norm", there are some that will forego the NY condo with porsche and thrice yearly Caribbean cruise and instead live in a 3-bedroom shack in Humpty-Doo for daily Barra fishing on the East Alligator River.

Of course, as always, the company and it's divisive ways is the root cause of all of this dissension in the ranks. For an excellent summary of the issues and the options, I urge all AOA members to review PW's excellent presentation on the AOA website. Finally, may I ask that ALL CX flyers who peruse this forum and who are not members of the AOA, please, think seriously about joining. Whatever your views of the AOA (and if ever there was a time that a strong membership was important) now's the time to join.

An army of one is great, but an army of 2400+ is frickin' awesome.

Booyakasha b!tches!!:}

Liam

You go on about how to compensate the junior crew affected by age 65.

How do we the ones affected by ASL etc get compensated as we approach 55? A case of we don't care as long as we are not affected?

Iceman
 

You get compensated by what's in your contract.....

Are you saying you were disadvantaged by ASL and it peeves you that you have never been compensated...?

Liam

I am saying that what happened to me and many others is all that would happen to the junior crew now. But you and others do not see it that way!

Iceman
 

Not sure I get your point.

Are you saying... you were an abused child, so that gives you the right to abuse others.. or

Are you saying... things change at CX, and you should fight hard to keep what you have got?

Now here is a suggestion :

everybody puts their money where their mouth is. Those who want can switch to COS 08 / RA 65/ no BPP . Those who don't simply stay on their original contract, with BPP but no chance ever to go to RA65. I bet a vast majority would switch, hence the company would save a significant amount of BPP and cater for a possible future recruitment problem .

Plus I could laugh my a** off in about 20 years when poor old Liam and Superfrozo beg for a job interview with Air Nigeria.:}

Sisy

Yours is not a new suggestion. The main problem with it is that those who sign the 55 contract would be significantly disadvantaged in several ways:

1. BPP is worth much less than an actual promotion.
2. Basing opportunities diminish.
3. If we came to a situation that would warrant the company stopping all extensions, they now can't (cannot!), so the RA65 signers keep the command slots filled up that would have been vacated.

It's all or nothing for me. We need a negotiated solution or keep the imperfect one we now live with.

Air Nigeria??? Pfffft...!! Cowboys mate, total cowboys.

I'm pinning my hopes on a job with Air Ngukurr!!:8

sisyphos
 

If you want RA65, go upstairs resign and rejoin on COS08.

As Superfrozo says; its not that simple... Besides, I will stay on RA55, take the BPP and then get my nose in the trough. However, when it's my turn to leave at 55, I will scream discrimination, hardship and anything else I recall ATY, Cyril and your goodself have screamed recently.

If it's good enough for you to do it, it's good enough for me.....

Pill by the sea says in post#2
“The only "outragous situation" is that our most senior aircrew actually accept the garbage contract the company offer. The modern corporate ethos is to offer less and less (sound familiar) until noone accepts it, and only then increase it a little.”

CX shareholder applauds this business sense, but wants also management ”bonuses” to be cut to Zero as proper management is part of the job and should not attract additional payments for proper management.

LIAM
 

When your contract is terminated based on age, when your salary is reduced based on age, then that is age discrimination.......pretty simple and basic really.

Hang on a minute ......I forgot.....I signed a contract with a gun to my head.....sign or be fired......silly me I should have gone upstairs and asked for the 55 bit to be removed.......you might just get to experience the old contract in the box soon.......good luck on getting some changes you want included......or you could resign.......no didn't think so Liam

What if I want to stay on and be an FO? On a London base? Free up my Command and just keep working in the RHS?
Only if you're ex-BA/ Oasis. Not if you're CX.
Clever??!!

Liam

Classic management / weasel reply answer a question with a question and a few snide remarks included.

Just so we all know when did you join and when did you join the AOA?

Cyril
 

"good luck on getting some changes you want included......or you could resign.......no didn't think so Liam"

Firstly, I am not the one proposing changes to the Contract: it is you. Considering some of the changes being bounced around, I prefer the existing deal. So what are these changes I am proposing?

Secondly, I understand there have been times in your career when you have been presented with a "gun to the head". However, when you first joined Cathay was it RA55 and was there a gun to your head then?

I sense you are trumpeting a new Contract that may be shortly shoved in our mailboxes. Should that contract include a paycut for 55+; will you endorse it, or is it still discriminatory and therefore unsatisfactory?

ENOUGH!!
This is just a repeat of a previous thread. Everyone has had their say and we just go round in circles from now on.
There will be a new contract which will disadvantage nobody (ie stay on the old one if you like but don't come back bleating when you're 54).
No BPP - so if you want to be paid as a Captain - you have to pass a course just like every other airline!

No worries with a Command course... Bring it on.

Only problem is that the opportunity for Junior crew will be significantly delayed by RA65.

Certain Senior crew seem to be happy with this and believe they should give up nothing for an extra 10yrs on the gravy train.

Jagman
 

"There will be a new contract which will disadvantage nobody (ie stay on the old one if you like but don't come back bleating when you're 54).
No BPP - so if you want to be paid as a Captain "

There may be a new contract, however please don't delude yourself that it will "disadvantage nobody". No compensation for delayed commands.... err.. someone's disadvantaged there. 10 years of no base.. someone's disadvantaged there. Unless, the new contract continues Cyril on A-scales. mit travel Fund, mit P-Fund, mit loss of licence, mit Medical insurance for him and Frau and kinder; surely he is disadvantaged and the discrimination continues.

You are correct, this does go around circles. How about you and Cyril outline in specifics what you want to see happen; given that is the aim of this thread. Drop the BS and spell it out; who is going to get what and who is going to lose what?

Also you say "ie stay on the old one if you like but don't come back bleating when you're 54"

How come it's OK for you to come on here, and I quote "bleat", about being on a Contract (that you knowingly signed) ends at 55, but it's not Ok for me? Surely, discrimination is discrimination and is never acceptable?

Of course it's well worth remembering that the 55 year olds now bleating are the ones who voted almost unanimously to roll over and accept 'B' scales for new crew in return for various relatively small contract enhancements....... (later of course stolen with the new contract in the mailbox scam). :cool:

...certain senior crew...give up nothing...?! Typical comment by a boy wonder who thinks the world owes them a 'young' command and a new set of shiny stripes. Most of the 'senior' pilots in this airline have already had their prov funds weaseled away from them, 25%+ pay cuts in 99....and below industry average compensation since. Don't tell me that we " won't give up anything''... :mad: