Pay negotiations concluded
 

If I may take a quote from ole RF's missive.
"While the GC acknowledges that the numbers surrounding a pay deal will be contentious, "
He did note that no productivity increases were asked for by the company. Frankly, flying 900 hrs a year. I don't see how I could possibly be anymore productive. I really hope the U.S. and N.Z. folks were not left to hang in the cold, again.
Adios

I am unaware that the management asked for any productivity - because they already mugged us and TOOK it by cancelling the RPs.
The issue is not the 900hrs - I work my butt off and don't hit the 900hr limit. So, they’ve arranged for me to work harder and I still won't hit the 900hr limit. They get productivity from 2 man AUS and 3 man EUR flights and we will just work harder.

Not impressed.

A days reinstated as well. In original format.

Spot on soda pop and Dan B.

Turn up the heat and watch them squirm even more. Still plenty of douchebags up there that need to be shown the door.

The numbers may well be contentious.

"But there was no demand from management that we give up productivity in return for pay" apart from rip up your Rostering Practice and smoke it, blowing rings into the faces of the NC.

Seriously Rod?? Didn't take u long to start suffering Stockholm sydrome.
Are you following in the footsteps of past AOA presidents and taking a cushy base after this recommendation gets up?

This should not be put up for a vote until the RP's are sorted out.
We're being asked to bet while only being shown half the hand.
And the half a hand we're seeing is "contentious".

5/5/2
 

with the exception of NZ

2/2/1

What a disgrace!

So much for the company wanting to change the goal posts - the usual suspects on here are just as bad. What happened to lets just talk about pay then RPs then etc etc:ugh::ugh:

An acceptable TA on pay:

1. Will be straightforward. While some types of contracts are necessarily complex, pay rise increments are about as simple as it comes. It will not have strings attached or trickery in an attempt to bribe or buy votes.

2. Will be uniform. It will be an across the board increase without trying to play sectors off against each other. If a locality has currency issues this can be adjusted through things like HKPA. Moreover, currencies and CPI-U are manipulated in various countries as to mask real inflation; we should not let this be exploited.

3. Will NOT be divisive; divisive or disparate increases are nothing more than union busting in sheeps clothing. Agreeing to a marginal increase for the many at the expense of some creates resentments and divisions for everyone and is wholly unacceptable.

4. Will not play games. Will not take away 5% somewhere else and give 4% back trying to make this look like a gain or something it's not.

5. Won't need marketing to 'sell' it; the figures will speak for themselves.

CC IS very much working. The company is starting to figure out that continuous reserve is horrendously inefficient and doesn't work and folks are timing out. We have been successful in attaining a productivity level commensurate with not going above and beyond or being helpful above the contract and there's little availabe to counter it. Moreover, in time it could become a way of life (just like at other major airlnes) as folks get used to it. I think the company has a genuine concern that this might happen.

We are heading into the busy travel season and need to make sure this isn't simply a trick to get us out of CC--as CC was initiated over pay. Moreover a REAL inflationary adjustment isn't a gift--it's our right. Inflation favors big business with large capital assets because wages always lag inflation (and in practice few nations ever experience TRUE deflationary periods with fiat currencies). The company gets as much or more for less in any inflationary period. The 'productivity increase' argument is often exploited as a red herring--anytime inflation happens the company GETS a de-facto productivity increase automatically. Given the competitive pilot market and relatively short supply we finally have a real advantage here and shoudn't blow it.

If it winds up being a genuine and honest offer which reflects a reasonable inflationary adjustment then go for it. If it's a meh........, something seems 'not quite right,' or throws breathern under the bus reject it (and one can wait for the inevitable 'imposition' anyway). Hopefully the leadership will carefully review it and won't bring forward anything that is bogus or an offer that once again tries to divide us against ourselves.

And hopefully it IS an honest, reasonable, and forthright offer. That's really all that folks have been asking for from the get-go.

Actually it's only a 2 year deal...

Twenty years of being abused, disrespected and lied to? My CC is permanent to the day of retirement. The ONLY thing a proper contract will buy from me will be my consideration in not taking 'some time off' on an adhoc and gratuitous basis. They lost my loyalty and consideration years ago. That is what bad management accomplishes.

Hey Mole.
I am with you on this. CC until retirement.

Carpe Diem.

Regarding the recent increases to staff travel costs: I have the discretion to save "X" amount on each flight that I operate. I can assure you that from now on I will make SURE that I use that discretion in a way that guarantees that any potential cost saving will be HEAVILY factored towards the "safety" side of the formula. In other words, the THOUSANDS of dollars I could save EACH flight will now be lost to a professional emphasis on safety. The word "loathing" does not even begin to describe how I feel about the management of this airline. Making a profit center of your own employees is disgusting and venal.

Regardless what we get, I hope everyone realises that there can be no good working a G Day. EVER!

Staying in CC for RP's etc etc, if the pay increase is accepted, would that then not put the AOA in breach of the Good Faith Bargaining Agreement and play into the company's hands?

Iceman, you crack me up.

Yes - We should continue with persistent domination of the high moral ground.

So more bones of massive contention are to be served up , is anyone really surprised?

All I can say is turn up to the Focus meeting ( including some local pilots please !) and ask the question to the NC .

There is no genuine effort by management , and there never will be until they learn good and proper, the value of our collective goodwill.

When a whole demographic fails to turn up to an event in which they, (to some extent, more than others), have a vested interest, you have to wonder what more important stuff they are doing on their "?" days off?

Bob Hawke,

Iceman is correct.
If we accept the pay offer CC has to be cancelled, and then we must start all over again for rostering practices under the terms of the GFBFA. That's the deal!

Where did the 2/2/1 come from? Except out of sirhcttarp's arse?

Company has already called an impasse on RPs so no need to start again. Also no problem extending cc to the still outstanding issues of RPs, HKPA etc and having RPs not put in policy but returned to cos.
We vote as we see fit over the pay but irrespective of the outcome remain in cc as the other outstanding issues need to be resolved. The company have shown their insincerity in their promises (think SLS agreement/25 year housing).

I agree with you entirely Balus...

However, the vote for CC was with reference to pay only!

The vote for CC was for the previous pay deal which has not been agreed merely imposed:suspect:

Yes, but it was still only about pay!

Unless the pay rise numbers are staggering I'm not coming out of CC . If the numbers are as low as I think that they will be. It's time to ramp up the pressure

EUR based pilots are in CC for A days??????

HKG pilots for pay?????

Thats my way of thinking. Whatever the outcome I kinna enjoy the status quo of being in CC.

Max,
At a time when CX is breaching existing RPs with every roster publication, I think you're concentrating a little too much on the niceties of the CC mandate.
Take or leave the pay deal but please remain in CC until RP negotiations are concluded.
I hardly think that CX would have the nerve to argue the scope of our mandate, with their track history. Even if they do call 'foul play' what can they possibly do about it? Make our rosters worse? That would take some creativity at this point.

'RM

If we agree to the TA then CC stops. That's what we agreed to. You want to do your own private nonAOA CC for whatever reason, go right ahead.

As several people have already mentioned - CC (or as we used to say "Withdrawal of Enthusiasm") is a Lifestyle for ever with this lot. They comply completely with their interpretation of our Contract(s) so we should comply absolutely with it - no more - no less.
It's exactly what they deserve. Don't 'help out' ever.:{

Arfur, the only helping going on when people work G days is helping themselves. People are not going it to help the company, only their own rosters or overtime. I'm not sure it makes it any better though!

Fuel prices down staff travel massive increase. This deal is below the average inflation rate of Hong Kong.

I am staying in CC and voting the deal down.

WTF are they thinking?

Hong Kong Inflation Rate | 1981-2015 | Data | Chart | Calendar | Forecast

:ugh:

How much has staff travel gone up by?

G day compensation payments are encompassed in the RPs. Even if we come out of CC there will still be no RPs and so no G day compensation and so no incentive to work on a G day anyway. Which means the Company want us to stay in CC as they offer no incentive to come out of it and to help them by working a G day.

Rod: simple segway into the issue. Insist that ANY increase in staff travel is tied to the percentage pay increase for a given year. This year, approx 3.5% (average), therefore that is the maximum increase allowed in staff travel costs. No change to CC until then. That and numerous other issues MUST be resolved before I consider any change to CC.

CC was for the previous pay deal. Until that is mutually agreed I would expect CC to remain. This pay deal does not supersede the previous ones.:confused:

I think we all need to wake up and realise that the time is now to put on the maximum pressure possible, and not relent until EVERY issue is SATISFACTORILY resolved. Without a comprehensive agreement, covering ALL areas of major concern, we will just dissipate our advantage to an extent that whatever gains we accomplish in one area, will be given up in other areas. I don't think this pay deal is adequate. And I certainly don't want to be 'bought' off by a barely sufficient amount of money now, only for them to screw it back out of me with RP's and any other number of devious and two-faced tricks that i've seen far too many of over the years. I vote no. I don't need the money that badly. I do need a proper rostering system, staff travel system, trip bid system, medical system...etc, etc. I vote no. CC until the magnetic field flips for all I care.

Simple, if you agree to their pay deal, notify them you will be out of contract compliance immediately. Shake hands leave the room. Then request a meeting to discuss the wholesale dismantling of previously agreed rostering practices without consultation or negotiation, and notify the company that a vote on contract compliance on the issue of rostering practices will be tabled to members. Specify a day that is the minimum under the rules for notification to members for a vote. If contract compliance was specifically aimed at pay, if pay is resolved, remove it, then vote on it again for rostering, and any other issue you wish to be resolved.

A question to the NC
you spent a week discussing this ? Why ?
This is inadequate and you know it , so have you learnt yet ?

My biggest gripe is this will be accepted by the majority , and there we go no more CC and the end of any leverage we have and a continuation into the slow dissemination of our pay and contract etc etc issues.

Now is not the time to accept this as adequate .

I agree with Lowkoon.
Vote on pay and cancel CC if it passes the vote.
Then:
"Be it resolved that the HKAOA members will abide strictly with the terms of their contract until the company commit to abide by RP's as agreed between the company and the HKAOA iaw long standing custom and practice"

Have it in writing that RP's will be adhered to, remove CC, then re-negotiate RP's.

Good deal, not great. Will vote yes.
Stop cc after yes vote, for the simple reason that we have to be able to turn the tap on and off, so the company feels what its like when we're not happy/happy.

+1 on the post by OASIS above. Bang