JFK 777 Base on new FTLS
 

I was told that the GMA said JFK would be opened as a 777 base if the AOA agrees to an appropriate new FTLS.

I heard the Perth Base is safe so long as they agree to one pilot.

London remains as long as we wear our hats.
Frankfurt avoids the axe if we don't get sick.
Manchester stays open if we never apply for maternity leave.

Toronto remains if we all PX on the Dakota.
Vancouver won't close if AOAC agrees to CXexpress LCC flying YVR-HKG with contract crews.

Los Angeles has a bright future if we all sign CoS12
San Francisco remains open if we accept DEC without bypass pay.
Miami will open if we raise the EFP threshold to 96hours
Atlanta won't close if we raise retirement to 85.
Chicago has a bright future if we waive our cosmic radiation limits.

Sydney has a fighting chance if we allow floating bases.
Melbourne's future is safe if we don't mind loading ELIs and Linseed Oil on the same pallet.
Brisbane stays intact if we forgive the Star Chamber



Beijing, Shenzhen and Shanghai won't open if we give up housing, schooling, and the AOA.

That is so funny...thanks for the laugh.:D

Thank you Whackthemole.

Can't wait 'til it is filled with Canadians who have the 'right' to work in the US.

No need for the "right" to work. CX is a foreign airline with foreign registered aircraft aircraft with pilots with foreign licenses overseen by a foreign regulator. If you look carefully on the CX tail, you won't see any stars and stripes.

For simplicity, the pilots will based in HKG. They will do some regional flying but will also have a "preferred rostering destination." Days off will be given down route. i.e. in JFK. Local national pilots will go home and foreign pilots will travel to their home country on their days off thereby keeping immigration happy since they won't be overstaying their crew visas (183 days).

...but the PABA will still say that officers taking a based position must have the legal right to work in the country they are bidding for and also pay tax in that country - just like the PABA always has. Hmmm.... wonder why the company is having issues around the world? Some are brought on by FOP Admin by not verifying people's legitimate 'right' to live and work in a country they are based. How hard can that be??

Actually dogleg, they do need the right to work from a US base. Why is it, do you think, that the company went through all the trouble of getting visas for the Canadians working from US bases? It wasn't just an paper exercise for practice. It is required by US law and, subsequently, company policy. So if we are going to have newly based pilots being company sponsored for US visas, they better plan on finding ways for this to happen in all the other basing areas as well. That Ozzie base sure looks good from where I'm sitting...

PS - I'm not antipodian.

CX helped the Canadians get visas so CX would not have any possibility of having to help those Canadians with a future version of the present "double taxation" issue.

CX can say, "You have the right to live and work in the USA, so, go there and you won't be liable for Canadian tax, nor will we."

It's like chess. We pilots look at the present move.

CX looks (suprisingly enough) at least one or two moves ahead.

No, I'm not referring to the basing office. I'm referring to those who have run this colonial enterprise since the 1700's.

Why on earth would the AoA even put this forward to vote on? Sorry I forgot they are the other face of management.

JFK 777 Base on new FTLS???
 

Where did that go?

How is it that we start American Bashing? If Cathay offers work visas to anyone who wants them, are you going to say NO to an LAX base living in San Diego?

So, JFK 777 base?

Refoucus.

The new FTLs have nothing to do with what the company proposes for a potential 777 JFK base. CX wants EFP calculated and averaged over a 2 months period, eg 1 month 96 hours, the next month 72 hours equals a monthly average of 84 hours over a 2 month period and no EFP paid.

Averaging of hours over a two month period. That will be a NO on the ballot!!

ps. Go Israel.

New FTL's
 

What are the new FTL's? Is it 92 hours before overtime or overtime over a 2 month period?

Three trips a month will make out to be about 96 hours.

I am sure those desperate for a base will sign just about anything to get out.

Let's make some sense of this.:ok:

Mr. Bloggs

There are no new FTL's at the moment plus FTL's have nothing to do with EFP. FTL's are based on CAD371. The hours are just an example to explain how 2 months averaging would work. Cx would only consider a JFK base if they can roster 5 trips over a 2 month period without accruing EFP. That's one of the idea's presently floating around on the 3rd floor. As I said before this has nothing to do with FTL's.

Understood.:ok:

Just seeing what was floating around.:ok:

Seems like they are trying to renegotiate the rostering practices then?

Yes, Mr. Bloggs, those desperate for a base will sign anything to get out.

Unfortunately, those who are content with the polluted cesspool which is Hong Kong and for whom selling their childrens' health to the devil for a few bucks of housing allowance will certainly vote No to any modification of our contract which will benefit those who are on or who wish to take a base.

If they want efficiency and safety then all they have to do is roster JFK based crews to do a SIN or CGK through the night flight on their layover in HKG. Efficient and right on everyone's body clock. You'd be approaching 80 hours every month by doing two trips a month from JFK.

The company has already stated they are increasing frequencies, including a 2nd through the night flight out of SIN and a SGN redeye.

JFK 777 Base on new FTLS
 

I find your lack of faith disturbing... :P

Joejet said, Joe, CATHAY can not offer visas to anyone! Only the country of employment (in this case, the USA) can offer visas. I don't think the USA will make the same mistake again.

Your correct in that Cathay does not actually offer the visa. They can sponsor someone to the INS for a work visa. The job description can be written so that only a current Cathay pilot meets their criteria. This happens all the time in every type of industry.

We will all find out next Friday!

Whatever is learned next Friday, I'm sure it will create more questions than offer answers. No doubt, there will be bad news for some and good news for few or perhaps none.

heard a rumour this week that all US based, Canadian FO US visa applications got rejected only Captains got approved.

Heard 15+ resignations from PAR base closure? Anyone know anyone who did this, or is it total BS?

What is the motivation for CX to "open" a JFK base?

Uhhhh, 4 pax flights (3 direct) and one freighter daily to JFK.

IS - It's not rocket science, must be a bit embarrassing.

Gotta run, I have to study up on my theory of scientific theory...

Two too many theories in there for me, but I'm thinking of entrusting my soul to it. Seems pretty rational and logical to me. Don't you guys think?

If some sort of an announcement is coming out on a Friday, it is probably bad news.

A common industrial and legal tactic; for example, if you are going to be fired or sued, Friday afternoon is often the time.

Or Friday evening after Handbrake House is closed for the weekend if you're really going to shaft a bunch of pilots...

I challenge you, or anybody else, to present just one piece of good news that has been presented since 1993.

Seriously.

Fun while it lasted...
 

Skillet et al, it's back to contentious topics using the thread drift method it would appear. The change of name in the now deleted thread that you suggested should not have been to change "dogma" to "dogmatism" but "shortest" to "shortest-lived"!

Happy drifting.

STP

Does Cathay also help other nationals get US visas, or just Canadians. If not, why?

No, CX does not "help" any nationals "get" US Visas.

CX is in the airline business, not in the immigration business.

The Canadian/US visa issue was an expeditious means of continuing to do business without a major upset. There were a load of Canadians living in the US under the terms of a previous basings agreement (not well thought through) and all that CX has done is to facilitate US work visas for them whilst in the employ of CX or a subsidiary.

Just seems a little strange that only Canadians would be afforded the privilege of working in the US. Why not Mexicans? Or Germans?

The Canadians that do not have work visa but have a base in the US cannot be in country for more than 180 days per year...so they can not practically live in the US. if you have a work visa, then you can take up full time residency. There should not be any restriction for other nationals working for CX. As for the Mexicans, they don't need visa, they just cross the border. Germans...well, I don't want to start a thread drift.

OK, here's the truth:

Canadians are just BETTER. Better at everything. That's why.

Capt. U.

You are correct sir, every time I fly with a Canadian they tell me they are the best so it must be true!!!!!:ok:

Must be tough on the ego to be overshadowed all the time by Big Brother next door...

I agree that the biggest pain in the arses at CX are Canadian and that some tend to overestimate their flying abilities by a good margin. Not that any of this is unique to Canucks, it has just been my experience here.

Where's WCC? I'm sure he has an opinion on this.

Just heard an interesting rumor that some US guys are quite pissed off about the visas, and that they have made FOIA request to be able to review the apps. Supposedly there were some shady reasons given in the apps to justify those type of visas.
Can you guys imagine what would happend to the affected guys if they have not been 100% truthful in their applications:=:=:=

No visas required for jail.
 

If anyone did lie on their visa application, which I doubt, they would end up in Federal Prison followed by immediate deportation. No visa required to be an inmate in the US Federal Prison system.

Why would anyone try to have a fellow employee sent to prison over that?

once they're in a US prison they wont be employees for long ... that precedent has been set, hasn't it?