Sometimes I wonder if we are not confusing Contract Compliance with Industrial Action.
CC being where we do no more or less than what we are contracted to do. It makes life difficult for the company.

Industrial Action is where we get vindictive and go out of our way to cause sh!t and cost the company money, make life really hard for company and us.

Whilst I tend to agree a lot of the time with Curtain and his merry men some of the quotes above may be straying into the latter….

it was after all CC we all voted for correct??
last I checked, being a trainer was still within the bounds of our contract. No I'm not a trainer, but who nows, if the terms of the contract appeal to me someday, then I might, adhering only to my contract only of course.
If memory serves, a lot of the guys having a go on this forum, still took upgrades and went to work during the last little spat post 2001.:ugh:

If we want to step it up, we need to vote in a motion of Industrial Action, then we can tear each other up….ourselves and the company!

Till ten, you need to keep it straight up and real:ok:

Liam,

If no one answered their phone on G days (or was not contactable when not contracturally required) manning would be at--not below--contractural levels. Answering phones on G days effectively costs potential co-workers their jobs becuase when it's used as a matter of routine operations it is used to cover inadequate manning and inadequate contracts. In fact, answering phones and over-checking rosters/working G days actually contributes to roster instability because there's little penalty for NOT constantly changing rosters and it can always be juggled to be made to work.

An added benefit would be that pay would be set to what it should be given demand and whatever contract we were working under. There would be a reduction in "gray" areas and more objective pay for work--benefit to all.

NO ONE is advocating not pitching in and helping in times of bona fide crisis. And I think everyone here as professionals recognizes when this happens and is more than willing to as a team help out. Bona-fide crises are however rare--this type of operation has morphed from contingency to routine. As such, G day workers are an enabler of bad behaviour in all respects.

Nobody is contracted to upgrade to captain. They are all volunteers for those positions that help the company conduct its business.
Nobody is contracted to upgrade to FO. They are all volunteers for those positions that help the company conduct its business.

So it's OK for you to volunteer for an upgrade, but not a Captain to TC?

You cannot opt out of an FO upgrade, only a command upgrade!

Curtain Rod,

You need to calm down.

I was going to vote for you, but it is now clear that you intend taking the membership down the same road that ND did 2001. You will remember the phrase 'Mutually Assured Destruction'.

So, I'm sorry, you've lost me!

Contract Compliance is exactly as described by asianeagle. Nothing more, nothing less.

If the time comes for IA then so beit, but you will have a much bigger struggle getting our disparate bunch to vote for it and an even bigger headache getting them to actually do it. We all need to understand that in HKG it is not illegal for an employer to terminate the contract of a striking employee. This is not the first world with first world employment laws.

For those asking, the company is scared of official and AOA sanctioned contract compliance, not so much because of unfilled flight deck seats but more because of the negative impact of it reaching the press and the downside to pax bookings and cancellations/swapping to other carriers. Yes, of course guys and girls not working on G days and showing general lack of goodwill will cause a headache, but that is all it is.

Contract compliance has nothing to do with training and Cdrs discretion etc, it is all about fulfilling your contract to the letter!

Max,

There are lots of gray areas surrounding this subject. I would not minimize the potential impact of a well organized and executed "Contract Compliance Campaign." This company is scrambling already to fill seats. The rosters couldn't possibly get worse, so it would not take much to get the wheels coming off completely. The training system is at max capacity, thank you trainers, but relief is nowhere in sight.

Wrt terminating contracts, do you think this airline would run with 50 fewer pilots than it has today. I don't. There is no fat in the system. The offers to defer leave prove that. You wait, leave will soon be taken away non-voluntarily.

Sickness rates are at record highs and going higher! Further efforts to gain producivity without resolution on compensation will send them higher yet. In the insurance world, I think they call where we are right now as "the death spiral." So many are sick and getting sicker that there are not enough healthy folks to pay the bills and keep the lights on.

Curtain Rod,

Sorry for the confusion, but you really do write (and sound) like the geezer who is standing for election. I guess it's the 'Curtain' part of your handle!

cxorcist,

In the first world, with first world employment laws I would agree entirely with you but unfortunately we don't work in the first world. This time terminations will be handled better,; a kangaroo court will be held before summary dismissal but you can bet your bottom dollar that control and subjugation will win the day over fulfilling the AOC requirements for having sufficient crews. Flights are already cancelled due lack of crews, and no eyelids are batted. It's just the way our caring employer works. Don't be in any doubt, the end result will be very similar to last time. Now, do GDLC or Rod play cricket, or any other sport, for the ensuing book?

Sorry Will but you’re using flawed logic to justify your actions.

Upgrade to FO and then final upgrade to Cap is a natural career progression within any airline, it is what is expected of you by everyone. So long as you meet the experience requirements and the standards, you will be upgraded based on seniority. Nobody is disadvantaged (CX politics aside)! The upgrade is not volunteered for, it is your entitlement. Upgrades are rarely turned down, and if they are, it is usually because of extenuating circumstances.

Taking a training position is as much of an upgrade as volunteering to be a CX flash mob dancer. These positions are volunteered for through NTCs and completely out of seniority. You can apply having met all their requirements and they can still reject you if they don’t like you. You’re simply not entitled to a training position, but you will always be entitled to an upgrade.

An upgrade has a huge impact on pay, experience, and future marketability. It’s the goal of every pilot within an airline to try and get to the left seat as quickly as possible. You’re not really helping the company by taking an upgrade, you’re really helping yourself.

Taking a training position has an insignificant impact on your overall career in terms of pay and marketability. So in a way you’re really helping the company significantly more than you are yourself. So why do it at a time when relations between management and pilots are at their lowest? What are you trying to achieve by doing it? What are you missing out on if you stay as a regular line pilot?

So if it's ok to accept a command course but not ok to be a trainer, who is going to sit in the other seat during my upgrade?

That's the whole point! By not volunteering for anything ( working G days, training positions, etc) at a time when we trying to get better pay and rosters you're exerting immense pressure on the company.


Airplanes have to be crewed, upgrades have to continue in line with their expansion plans, but when that becomes increasingly difficult because of lack of volunteers, a clear message gets sent to the management. Delaying tactics will not be an option for them anymore. It will be in their interest to come up with an agreement that is acceptable to both parties as quickly as possible.

Saying no to trainers will end up just like the early freighter commands did……... it will be offered so far down the seniority list that some wannabe's just won't be able to say no.

Net result, inexperienced Captains not suited to training bringing their wannabe attitude and ego's into the training game.

If that's what you boys want…..go for it!

And what to you think the company will do?

Just offer slightly better terms for trainers (joker leave, anyone?)
And soon, people will find it attractive enough.

My bet on the offer from the company's side is a payraise for North American based, a improvement in HKPA, and not much more. Because these are the issues now. (not enough qualified new joiners, and US guys leaving soon)

I hope we'll be strong enough to remain united until we all get a bare inflation correction.
Then it will always be time to remain united for other issues (HKPA, training role compensation, tax issues, etc...)

You knuckle heads need to read about the history of labor airline relationships.
One of the most successful contract awards was the UAL contract 2000. The got in in part by flying the contract, trainers and checkers only did line checks and sim checks. No initial checks and no one accepted upgrades or check airman positions. No one can argue about the success of that contract.
We get crap because we refuse to do what is required to be successful.

Drop knee,

All very good, but did UAL not go into chapter 11 shortly afterwards?

Max,

I tend to think it was more the 9/11 thing than the pilot contract that did UAL in, but I could be wrong. In any event, they were not a well managed airline then.

chard,

That's the whole point, Einstein.

Unfortunately, the label of "laughing stock" may have begun a little earlier than you think - the day the AOA hired an ex-officer of one of the most dysfunctional pilot unions in the world; USAPA - A union designed to avoid a legal seniority agreement. As a result of their decisions, USAPA pilots were some of the most poorly paid major airline pilots in the United States.

I wish you all the best. Sincerely.

I might humbly suggest rather than everyone throwing snarky quips at each other--here and elsewhere--we devote our time and talents toward planning a strategery for the upcoming CC and follow on actions that it appears are almost certain to happen. There's gotta be alot of talent amongst the internet warriors here to figger out stuff that will be effective if we do move into these stages.