No. Do not think it is a good deal.

First of all, 4.5% is what we should have got anyway. Like every other staff member in HK.

Second of all, with RP protections thrown out, it will effectively be a massive gain in productivity for the company, with a massive decrease in our salary to work ratio. We will be even more exhausted working harder for less. With no protections.

We will be contributing so much more to the overall profit margin through our extra work, yet, when profit sharing comes around - we will again be given the least. Again, management will grant themselves record bonuses for their fabulous work!

Thirdly, What happens next year when the company announces all "eligible HK staff" get (-.-)% (I can guarantee it will be higher than 3.5%)?
- We will be locked in at 3.5% and can do nothing until 2017 in regard to CC and pay.

Vote no, for the sake of your dignity at least!!!!!
Surely you are worth more than that??!!!!!

No more multi-year deals!
 

I said it last year and I'll say it again, in these uncertain times we cannot afford to enter multi-year pay deals, we'll lose every time!:ugh:

Most have forgotten or simply don't realise that years ago the Company persuaded us to forego annual pay negotiations in return for profit sharing... we all know where that has led us!

We have to return to annual bargaining for inflation related salary adjustments, just like everyone else! Time and resource consuming it may be but the Company has saved itself a small fortune since it last paid the relevant profit share to its aircrew; or maybe most of you believe HK$2000 adequately compensates you for the annual loss of spending power and static input to your pitiful retirement packages.

RP15, two man OZ, 3 man Europe/Vancouver all for 4.5%/3.5%, great deal for the company!

The Lord giveth & the Lord taketh away !
 

You can have your 4% 4.5% 5.0% or 10% but I guarantee you will just loose it somewhere else & end up with the 3.0% they planned on giving from the start. They will get it back on RP's, OT, rostering, O days rostered after reserve, 2 man crew, 3 man crew, housing allowance, shorter aircraft ratings, shorter or no base training, shorter or no handling sims, more expensive staff travel, reduced "quality" health care approved treatments & coverage, travel insurance, hotel allowances, hotels etc...every one of those things is being hit hard or will be hit hard in the next 12 months. The only thing on the rise is the share price (from $14 to $20 in 6 months), dividends & management bonuses. We are working for a company that couldn't care less about moral (check their response & action to the survey response = Nil) or where this will lead in 5 years. It's a sad state or affairs, I'm not saying I have the answers but I am saying I care less & less about CX every day & that ain't what you want from a guy flying a heavy jet all night to the other side of the world. Chances are guys like me won't even be here in 5 years & that's a shame!

Sydneyman
 

What???... Nowhere have I stated anything like 9%. I would just like to see a fair cost of living increase.

Do you think we deserve LESS than every other HK employee?

First of all, to clarify: I believe negotiations are pointless when in fact the outcome is that we are given LESS than every other "eligible HK employee" as a cost of living increase. No productivity gains, no reductions required from them. Just for turning up.

And then we are given a lock-in figure, which is going to be lower than next year's cost of living increase for everyone else, I would bet on it.

Anything less than what the rest of our "people, they make an airline" staff get, is just a slap in the face. Why not just settle on the annual "cost of living increase". We will get it anyway, when no agreement is forthcoming. We are giving up our big gun Contract Compliance for nothing. How stupid are we if we say yes?!!!!

Secondly, the fact that the company has decided to delete RP's agreement, without compensation for the extra workload we will have to cover, for NADA, NOTHING! NIL! ZILCH???!!!!!... Come on, we should be in CONTRACT COMPLIANCE ON THIS ISSUE ALONE!!!!!!

Remember when AKL and ANC went 3 crew?... That was negotiated for a 14% credit factor. I do hope that they will pay the 14% credit factor for 3 man Europe. What is the credit factor increase for 2 man Oz??.... Do we have any higher than 14%.... because I know from experience 2 crew through the night is worth more like a 50% credit factor. Let alone 14%.

So many reasons to say, "no thanks".

I understand that the initial reaction will be to vote 'yes', as a sense of fatigue and relief combine to push us in that direction. As other posters have mentioned before me, the company is once again selling us a trojan horse. Inside the horse is a complete dissembling of our work rules through the suspension of RP's. The changes in RP's effectively nullify the value of this pay raise. I say again: the pay raise is a mirage under the new RP environment. Even prior to the suspension of RP's, they have already drastically lowered the quality of life for those on bases with the single act of cancelling A days. Imagine how bad it will get for all of us when they start tinkering with every single facet of our operation and lives.

I say that the ONLY way this is voted through is with an amendment to the suspension of RP's. The oompany agrees to keep the current RP's in effect until proper negotiations have been completed. This with the knowledge that CC will be implemented immediately if any degradation to our work rules and quality of life ensues from the resulting RP package.

RP's was never supposed to be part of these talks, wasn't this a stipulation?
This was only about pay, the next talks will cover RP's, don't muddy the waters, keep it simple.

Oasis, you are technically correct, however in the interim, the company has been arbitrarily amending established work rules (A days), attacking our staff travel, suspending RP's (instead of stating they will remain in place until a new negotiated package is agreed). Why should be suspend something that is obviously working, and putting intolerable pressure on the company. Suspend them for pay, and then immediately reimpose them for all the other travesties that they are committing. The only group 'muddying the waters' is the company. Always has been.

Oasis,
That's not muddy waters you're looking at.
That's your bowels after cx shoved the RP's up there with a cricket bat. It wasn't the AoA who decided to lump them together.

Anyone thinking that things can't get worse with rostering need to ring a mate at Emirates or SQ.
With rostering incorporated into OMPA it can be amended on a whim.
Eg, res call outs within 75min (as per the girls)
Call 8929 at 6am on every O day to be prepared to start work 10 hours later.
All G's to disappear to be replaced by O days.
Call the JRC and complain? The JRC will be gone.
A former GMA has already made noises about ditching proffering.
Rostering requests? For trainers only. Ditto mutual exchange.

Contract compliance in 2017 will be a strike. Nothing else will affect them.
Roll over on this issue and we're done.

I disagree. Silberfuchs said it right:

Single digit pay raise? You've been conditioned to the crumbs that the corporation has been tossing at you. :ugh:

pay offer
 

I agree with DB. Take the money and keep CC until we get our RPs back. CC is a big stick they obviously have a problem with.Stay on the road and stick together.

I reckon it would cause more havoc if we went out of CC for a few months and then use it again if the new RP's are not acceptable.
It also shows them how much our goodwill would benefit them.

Imagine; everything would run on time again, no cancelled flights, you can hear a pin drop in crew control...
If you are in constant CC, you are losing the benefit of the bad, if you don't show the good every once in a while.

Should we be concerned about this? Our valued cx passengers :sad:

CC
 

We should keep our foot on the their throats, don't stop CC. They "ripped up" our lifestyle, after the fact. It is NOT attached to pay anymore. Play hard ball with these people, it's what they play with us so we must reciprocate.

Absolutely, let's keep the CC going until ALL the issues are sorted.

The big issues are yet to be addressed.

Pay negotiations with our 'caring' employer are like bartering with a whore - you might make or save a few dollars here and there, but at the end of the day you're going to get fukked anyway.

:E

I'm with oasis on this one.
It may be hard for CX to actually realise how much CC is affecting them, when it's in place constantly.
If for example the percentage pay changes (it's not a payrise) are accepted, we as an Association could say we will cancel CC straight away, eg 1st June, the AOAGC give their members the directive/suggestion, that in order to show them how much good will is actually worth, that the members should help out above and beyond if the individual sees fit, but.... with the effin' big caveat, that if RP's are not sorted to the NC's/GC's/members satisfaction by 1 July, we give them just ONE month only, then we go back into a full, unified CC squared.
Let them see what a huge and sudden effect, a large contrast in a lack of enthusiasm to only do whats professionally required, will have.

Turning the heat on and off may be one of the more effective ways of getting the message across that they need to be professional too.
Historically, their workplace relationship efforts have been amateurish at best.
So sad when this could still have been a great company where employees are happy to and enjoy helping out, because they are respected and appreciated.
Clearly not the case at present.

Heat off, heat ON+

Voting this payrise in because of the upcoming RP negotiations is a HUGE mistake
Our snakehead masters are well ahead of us on this one
Do not be sucked into voting for this lets face it another sh#t payrise to concentrate on something were all going to get fukked on anyway
This BS from RF about concentrating on the RPs and HKPA is utter nonsense
Wise up boys and girls
Cx are two steps ahead of us already , vote this in and you will pay

Coming out of CC--if we believe it is working and are using it to accomplish goals--is a REALLY REALLY bad idea. If the company is good at anything, it's good at bean counting and crunching numbers. It keenly knows what CC is doing and what it's costing already. We have been seeing real results of its effectiveness, which didn't happen right away. Moreover, we have the advantage of having a (n experienced) pilot shortage on our hands and training pilots has a healthy lag time. AND are finally somewhat organized in the effort. Even if we were to 'come out' with negotiations still in play we'd have varying degrees of individual participation and philosophy. Better to stay the course.

But the main thing is that CC takes a fair bit of time to fully ripple through and is more of a war of attrition tactic--especially for those who aren't participating and have to be 'timed out'. Like a temporary cease fire, removing it only gives the opposition time to regroup and rearm--and develop countertactics for when it kicks in again. And this whole thing has been timed such that the TA will (likely) be ratified right as we approach the busy summer travel season. If we knock it off now, the major effects of CC won't be back in place until the lull in October. We've made this mistake before.

We can all be friends again after common goals are achieved. Don't forget that we tried for years to avoid this confrontation to no avail. Common goals could be achieved in a week if the company were genuinely interested in win-win solutions and real negotiation. When folks are happy they are VERY productive.

So until their is a motion passed for CC to continue under the premise of ' until Rp's and HKPA are sorted to our collective agreement'

IT WILL BE A HUGE MISTAKE TO VOTE THIS PAY DEAL IN

Goathead

Yes go ahead don't accept the offer and wait another year and get a similar offer or worse because the economy has worsened. You will never recoup the money lost!

The vote for CC was only for PAY, was it not, so future votes will be required for CC in relation to RP's etc etc.:ugh:

Iceman

If we goof around with the ball the chances are we are going to have a dropped catch.

All I'm saying is that without a new CC motion passed before this pay deal gets voted through we are going to have more than a dropped catch, folks need to realise that. So I'll wait and see and vote accordingly.We are playing with proven world champions here , not a bunch of amateurs, this lot have every inconceivable trick up there sleeve and if you think otherwise you are completely naive .

If you have faith with the NC then good on , but history says otherwise.

All you people planning to vote down the pay deal again: how effective do you think contract compliance is going to be once RPs have been cancelled, three man long haul is imposed and the company is essentially free to do as they like to introduce measures to make cc ineffective? Shooting ourselves in the foot, once again - as it is all cc has achieved is a negligible salary increase, while giving the company a perfect excuse to ram through huge productivity concessions uncontested - I say take the money and continue to withhold goodwill anyway.

Simple solution: Vote for tha pay deal and take the money. "suspend" CC....and continue to do EXACTLY what we've been doing now for months. Best of both worlds. CC forever OR until the company comes to their senses and fixes all these profoundly unsatisfactory issues.

I did not vote for cc for anything beyond pay. To keep it going after a pay deal is reached is abuse of the membership vote.
That's not going to happen.
The AOA can feel free to give us a vote to continue cc. I'm fine with that, that's democracy.

If we stay in cc, AT can hide behind the notion that we are just impossible to work with and that we don't keep our word. Which would be true.

If we get out of cc, the burden would be on AT to make this work, and it would reflect badly on her if we went back into cc due to negotiations with her.
More pressure on AT to give us what we want in the next round.

The difference between strategic and tactical. Let's fight to win.

Well put Oasis; we can only demonstrate the effectiveness of CC by coming out of it. Eventually some degree of "battle " fatigue (for want of a better phrase) will set in with the troops anyway. And as you say it gives AT a chance to demonstrate she can work worth us, or not. Just remaining in cc ad infinitum for every conceivable gripe weakens it's effectiveness, and as has been stated a return to it for the next phase is easily tabled and voted on. And gives us the moral high ground to boot.

Rhein, Oasis, again I disagree. Giving up CC will relax pressure, will give time to negate the effects (CC takes time to work and is a cumulative deal) as we move into the summer travel season, and indicate modifying and ignoring (and in fact complete abandonment) of the RPs is acceptable. The company knows full well the effects of CC; no need to come out of it to tell them something they already know.

An acceptance of the TA and a vote to remain in CC until RPs are satisfactorily addressed will send the message that yes we are willing to work with you, but what you have done with rostering since January (and even before) is unacceptable and needs to be fixed. While maintaining pressure to actually do something.

The only "moral high ground" coming out of CC allows for is effectively stating "it's OK with us if you screw us on rostering." This isn't exactly a moral high ground; it's accepting the unacceptable. Like a wife telling her husband "it's OK--you really didn't beat me that hard and I deserved it because I burned the toast."

Don't forget, little was accomplished in the year prior to going into CC, and we were forced into it by a bad deal. We needed it to get this far, and we need it to force any form of real negotiation.

Shep69

It would HAVE to be another vote for further CC, not a problem with that, assuming that the GFBA has been complied with.

However, the impasse in RP's seems to be that the AOA went in asking for something that the membership were not asking for, an american style of rostering and hourly duty pay. They did not have a mandate for that apart from a very poorly worded survey to possibly give the result wanted. We need LESS of our salary attached to HDP NOT more. The company cancelling the RP's were within its rights the same as the AOA could have cancelled them.

Coming out of CC or not immediately going back in to CC with maximum a months break would be akin to sending the goalkeeper off and playing 10 man
There is a risk they will score a goal or two or three and we will only have ourselves to blame ..... We are negotiating with a dogged party called SWIRE
Who are hellbent on winning at all costs and some of you need to wise up pronto
Or learn the hardway AGAIN

Okay for all those who haven't been here that long , some history , we voted down a pay rise a number of years ago because it wasn't enough
Guess what we never did get it .
A pay rise is on the table , it's nowhere close to being enough but it looks like it's the best we are going to get for now

SO TAKE IT and BANK THE MONEY .

They don't play fair with us so we are under no obligation to be honorable either remember that this pay rise was arbitrarily given to everyone else in the company we had to fight for it WHY ?

So take the offer we can always do exactly what the company does ,change the conditions when it suits them

Blowback
Your missing the point here
Short sightedness and short term greed has cost this pilot group dearly over the years
What is the rush to negotiate a fair pay deal same as everyone else ?? What about our payrise 2013 ? What is your rush
What's more important , a good set of Rp's or a sh#t unfair payrise?

Curtain rod and goathead I agree with your sentiments , and accept your argument and point of view .But ,unless you are prepared to crack a few heads of those that refuse to comply with CC ,the full effect will never be felt as it should .
So whilst you say I'm not going to agree to the pay rise .
Let's play Devils advocate here . 4.5% is up for grabs . You all say NO WAY . So the company simply shrugs their shoulders and says well We offered !
the crew didn't want the increase so we won't force them to take it .
What then? you turned down an increase in the hope of securing a better deal

There are just too many self centered individuals in this company who would crawl over broken glass if they thought that it would give them an advantage to make CC truly effective .

So whilst I'm not happy with the offer . Personally I think it's derisory, are you prepared to turn it down in the hope of getting more ? If the pilot body was truly United and we could really make CC exceedingly painful , then yes reject it . But as I said, there are far too many self centered individuals who are undermining CC on a daily basis

Hence my suggestion grab what you can now , who says we have to come out of CC . The vote was CC until we get a decent pay rise . We got a pay rise ,it isn't decent . So take the offer and continue with CC . There is no requirement to take a moral high ground here ,the company has never negotiated in good faith so why do we have to ?

Blowback
Your focusing on the donut not the hole
Any chance when you were at school you unknowingly got held back a year?

Just pulled out the old 1999 pay scales.

Assuming this TA is ratified, pay increases over the past 16 years will have amounted to an annual increase of 1.54% for a 10-year senior first officer. The gross pay has increased 25.7% since 1999.

What has inflation averaged annually over the past 16 years? 2.35%

Gross pay SHOULD have increased by 41.7% since 1999.

There's a shortage of qualified pilots, too, right?

Just sayin'...

Goathead,
I don't recollect being rude to you, or disrespecting your point of view. So why not try becoming an adult and respect others with differing ideas

Not hiding and silberfuchs have pretty much hit the nail on the head
If the membership wishes to vote this through then so be it
If the membership has had enough of CC and cant handle continuing with it because its too tough is and too much of a marathon as RF has said then thats it ,we might as well lay down and be trampled over like the wallies we deserve to be treated like

How can CC be 'too hard to handle'? It's what you are paid for. That is all you are required to do for Cathay Pacific Airways. The rest of the time is your own to enjoy as you wish. That, surely, is the whole point.........

I've said it once, and I'll say it again. You are NOT working for your old military squadron, a charity, or a small family business.

You are S/O/F/O/CAPT Bloggs contracted to a ruthless group of bonus-driven businessmen on a three month rolling renewable basis. You are not part of a 'team'. You are a carbon-based revenue-producing unit. So you fly your contract, no more, no less.

What is so hard about CC?

We have to carefully and methodically 'educate' some of those amongst us who just either don't 'get it', or are so self centered that the long term interests of the whole are something they simply don't care about. Either way, once they are on that 'list', they will always be treated with 'special' care when I fly with them :E

Trafalgar ,

You are absolutely correct ,if everyone would apply CC correctly and with greater enthusiasm the effect would be far more pronounced
It only takes one to wilt, work on a G day and get a flight from A to B which would otherwise have to be cancelled due to a lack of crew.
Had this been the case we may well be looking at a higher figure than the offer currently on the table .

So the dilemma is take the offer on the table or throw it back and be like Oliver Twist "Please sir I want more " But then you need everyone and I do mean everyone to partake to make it sufficiently painful to force the company back into further talks

Also a shortsighted and typical hkg based response. CoL in hkg is, obviously and rightly,
only applicable to hkg based crew. Which is why US and EU pilots need their own AOA thus being able to vote for pay free from disgruntled, sometimes rightly so, other CX jurisdictions.

Cheers,
Soda