From my perspective:

550h a year (as we were 10% overcrewed) distributed between 46 weeks.
Or 550h distributed between 43 weeks.

Still equals 550h a year

Thus taking SLS is a paycut, given not taking SLS, you would have worked just the same.
You just get your G's in one or two long blocks.

That would be true if roster stacking occurred, however lucky old me has never worked less in his life.

Anyway each to his own, I don't regret it at all and neither have my loved ones.

Flap10
Have I? Quick review of my posts on PPRUNE and I can't seem to see where I bitch about my KA pay packet.. I think it's for the most part an excellent contract. I'm keen to see how it is cut in the coming years... but as of now, it fits the bill nicely. Sure there is room for some very common sense improvements, but that will need to be negotiated. I think any A or B scaler would have a hard time justifying they need more salary. The money is good. The healthcare, MPF, and other indirect items are what needs to be sorted equitably.

So I guess it would surprise you to learn that I took 15 days UPL first..
then when SLS was offered I topped up my quota with another 6 days of SLS..

And it would further surprise you to learn I've taken UPL in 2010 to the tune of 3 weeks to have the time when my wife gives birth this summer.

All very nice for you to throw stones at glass houses, but I'm the guy on the DPA site advocating change. Real change.
I'm also the guy who DOES balance his life and is grateful for what he has..

Trevfly.. you got it.. I gave them from Oct to Feb to sort it, now I have to look out for number 1 & the wife & the unborn child.

If you'd do any different, then you sir are a moron. DPA had their chance..

Flap10

I guess you mean like a school teacher who always gets allocated leave when the kids are on holiday?

Sorry, I don't see your point.

I agree with the question but I don't see that SLS and pay cuts are connected in the context of the point.

In my time I've only seen SLS used twice, both times in challenging situations. They paid back the cash after SARS and, if this rumour is to be believed, they'll pay it back this time as well - we'll obviously have to wait and see.

STP

You call 80-90% load factors a challenging situation???? So I guess the propaganda and scare tactics do work on some people. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Keep the employees in fear of their job, they will obey to any demand!!!

Flap10

I can only assume you weren't around during SARS as the load factors were virtually non-existent for a while. This time's not been as bad, I'll grant you that, but there was no way of knowing how things were going to pan out. Not only that, load factor doesn't always equate to profit but I hope, like everyone else, it does so that those who took SLS might get something back.

Now (and I hate to pin you down) back to the rostering question. What exactly did you mean when you said:

I'm not trying to be obtuse but I simply don't understand the point you're making.

STP

STP

The above was made in reference to the reasons why SLS was partly justified by you and AAIGUY on this thread. There is no denying that rostering has become sh!t over the years, but by giving away part of your salary to have a one off quality time with your family is not the answer, and certainly undermines the fight for better rosters.

Actually been around for a while now, maybe too long....Yes we all saw the impact SARS had on loads and things did look pretty bleak for a while, but this time was completely different.

Actually management knew exactly how things were going to pan out, hence the initial deadline to sign for SLS was a mere two weeks after it was announced. They certainly didn't want you to know how it was panning out, instead they preferred to ride on the wave of bad economical info that was streaming out from the media to keep the employees scared. Fuel prices too high....Fuel prices too low....low yields...blah blah blah. You didn't have to be a genius to see that things were okay. Yes load factors don't equate to huge profits, but at the same time it doesn't mean that we are about to go out of business.

Guess what..it is okay for one year not to surpass last year's results....so we broke even this year, or perhaps made a slight loss for once in 60 years, big deal!

Asking employees to take pay cuts should be the last resort, not a resort to try and embellish the 'year end result' on our backs so that management can get bigger bonuses.

Flap 10. Could not have put it better... I particularly agree with your comments in the last sentence. The company has an obligation to it's employees to not use them for 'window dressing'. Now that the numbers are on their way back up to a respectable level, the company is obligated to return the SLS. If not, then it will not take a rocket scientist to predict the acceptance rate if such a move is ever contemplated in the future.

But that's because they were giving the tickets away for free...

And don't forget the 'never-to-be-realized' fuel hedging loss they threw at our faces, or the layoff threats.

:hmm:

Aiguy, how do you know the delay was caused by the DPA and not the companies lack of communication? The reality was that the delay was caused in part by all the 'white ants' that were talking with the company behind the unions back. Potentially you have identified yourself as one of them?

I would quite readily support a motion to expel those members that took UPL selfishly prior to the union directive for their own selfish gain at the detriment of other members who followed the directive to wait until a clear position was reached. But hey, never let the common good and a united front get in the way of self interest right? :hmm:

Ex com member or not, if your actions disadvantage other members either their lifestyle or their pay packet, then be prepared for the consequences. To those of you who negotiated around the com, and dealt directly with the company behind the unions back severely undermined the coms ability to negotiate, whichever way you look at it. If we can't present a united front on areas that directly affect our cos, then what hope do we have in a genuine dispute scenario?

Another dispute springs to mind where the excuse was... "but my wife and kids..." (obviously the chance to be home for the birth of your child is an obvious exceptional case,wish you all the luck and good fortune for that), but for those individuals who did it just to get time off is just another glaring example of self interest being used as an excuse to fu#k over your mates, but of course those that did it wont choose to see it that way. Level 2 thank you all for doing it to your mates, the DPA should expel you for it. There is no place for those individuals in a team, their actions have proven it.

The selfish actions of a few individuals directly cost us all a chance at sharing in the possibility of the leave being fairly and equitably distributed, whichever way you look at it. Anecdotally, we missed out on 20% pay over the sls period because of these selfish clowns. They cost us a lot of money. Again, never let fairness get in the way of self interest right lads? Enjoy your UPL. :mad:

edited for glammar and sperring.

I do not work for CX or KA, however I am curious about something, (not inferring anything about the issues being debated), if one had bought CX shares (which if my memory serves me correctly is what the company did with your money) with the money you gave back through SLS at the time the scheme was proposed and were to now sell those shares, how much money would you have made?

Thanks in advance to anyone who can work it out.

Flap10

OK, I get your point about poor rostering leading to people deciding to take SLS to get time with their families and it's a fair point. Of course, there's no way of knowing what percentage of those that took SLS did so for that reason.

I wish I had your certainty with respect to how this latest financial crisis is going to turn out but if you prescribe to monster330's point of view we're not out of the woods yet. I concede that load factors have increased and that the future looks reasonably bright at the moment. If you know how things are going to pan out in the next year or so, are you buying shares? (that's a serious question by the way).

Back to the thread. If the company turns a significant profit and those who took SLS get their cash back, great. If they don't (get their cash back) then this would be the last time such a scheme could be used as all staff groups would become increasingly cynical of any "cry wolf" tactics (if they're not already).

STP

Lowkoon,

Have you read the DPA rule book.. You're not required to follow the suggestion of the DPA as a member.. good luck with your vote..

If you honestly think ANYthing is going to be accomplished with the current comm..you're as insane as you'd be if you think your wife be 'ok' with you going to work whislt she is having a baby.

Your motives are selfish and if you really believed the Assoc. was capable of change, you would have already stood up to lead the charge instead of beak off here about how superior you are.

I'll enjoy the UPL.. I'll enjoy the sh*t out of it.

Back to the SLS Repayment Thing
 

So is the rumor about repaying SLS good or what? Or is this whole thread another wind up? Enough of the endless drivel thanks.

And by the way, how can I block out this annoying Booyah ******?

AAIguy, I support the current com, so I am not the one who should be trying to change anything, time to vote, put your hand up. A platform of "ME FIRST, and bugger the rest of you!" should be quite a novel campaign!

Your comments on my insanity reflect more on your comprehension of what I wrote than on my state of mind. I still wish you well for the birth of your child.

If by "beaking off" you mean that I pointed out that selfish pratts undermining the negotiation position of the DPA was irresponsible, self serving and detrimental to the remaining pilot body, then I stand accused.

I did of course mention that those responsible for it wouldn't see it that way.

Why then Trev do you belong to the DPA? Insurance, friend to hold your hand if the sh1t hits the fan? Legal representation?

If that is your attitude why don't you save yourself the money and quit the DPA all together? Not a suggestion, just that I don't understand why you would join the association and then tell them to get fvcked when the committees position doesn't suit you. :confused:

Hoof, I think trev was using his powers for good not evil this time. He was pointing out that selfish others were ignoring DPA advice to suit themselves and circumvent and undermine the negotiation process. Subsequently, they were then being surprised at the DPA's inability to get something done after undermining them, and the position of the majority.

Defending trev. A pprune first!

Rumor has it SLS will be paid vack in the week of April:E:E

Take it as a card in your hand.

Next time they ask for a favor you have a perfectly valid reason to tell them to get stuffed.