Not me. I love pandas!

CAD360 Part One Chapter 3 Subsection 4

Office space at each operating base must be sufficient to provide a suitable working environment for the number of operating staff employed. Adequate provision must be made for the traffic staff, for operational planning, for the storage and display of essential records, and for flight planning facilities for flight crews. If suitable flight planning facilities for flight crews are provided by the airport authority, the space provided by the operator can normally be reduced. However, it is essential that reasonable accommodation should be made available for crews to use before and between flights. A secluded area should be available to commanders for briefing and de-briefing of their crew.


CAD360 Part One Chapter 4 Subsection 4.12

Operators should draw to the attention of flight crew that, in accordance with the provisions of the AN(HK)O, it is the responsibility of each flight crew member to notify anyone who employs his services as a flight crew member, of all flying he has undertaken within the previous 28 days, other than flying in an aircraft not exceeding 1600 kg maximum weight and not flying for the purpose of public transport or aerial work.


I sacrificed my movie rest over the pacific to find that information for you! Before you say anything, I've already checked.... CAD360 doesn't state each operator must have their own crew control, Engineering and IOC. Please stop disseminating fake news.

Ask the CX 'Super B' fellows about their Travel Fund, they didn't sign any new CX contracts and still have their travel funds.

Amazing you fellows think this way ! Go as ask the AOA about your travel fund and if you don't remember it you are not in CX long enough to have had one, it was sold down the river when you were in nappies

Super B's only kept their travel fund if they didn't sign on to COS '08. Not many left.

So we have a management stooge in our midst, signing up to a new handle ?

Talk about "fake news", I didnt mention CC, IOC, or engineering, but since you did, each AOC is required to have its own engineering department. The Head of Engineering is one of the positions listed on the KA AOC that needs to be approved by HKCAD before its changed or appointed. The AOC requirements for engineering are list in CAD 360 Part 2, "Arrangements for Maintenance Support". KA has its own Head of Engineering, Kevin Chan. He is the person responsible under the KA AOC for the airworthiness of the KA fleet. How aircraft are physically maintained pushed back etc does not need to be done in house by KA, but the ultimate airworthiness control (including ETOPS) and service agreements rest with KA under their AOC.

IOC and Crew Operations are not required functions to be in house under the AOC, there are other ways that can be achieved. Some of the 11 HKG AOC holders don't have them at all. Crew operations could be a call center in some remote country.

What I did say "Under CAD 360 each AOC holder must have its own briefing room." CAD 360 says this has to be done by each operator. It is an AOC requirement.

"Office space at each operating base must be sufficient to provide a suitable working environment for the number of operating staff employed. Adequate provision must be made for the traffic staff, for operational planning, for the storage and display of essential records, and for flight planning facilities for flight crews. If suitable flight planning facilities for flight crews are provided by the airport authority, the space provided by the operator can normally be reduced. However, it is essential that reasonable accommodation should be made available for crews to use before and between flights. A secluded area should be available to commanders for briefing and de-briefing of their crew."

Operator means AOC holder, i.e. CAD 360 " For the purpose of this publication the term Operator is used to describe both Applicants and Certificate Holders"

"Each AOC holder MUST have their OWN pilots"

"It will be necessary for operators to satisfy the Director that they have a sufficient number of aircraft crews for the operations to be undertaken. The adequacy of the aircraft crews will not be assessed against a set formula, as there will clearly be a wide variation in requirements according to particular circumstances. In certain cases where the volume of work undertaken is small, the normal requirement concerning the number of aircraft crews employed may be relaxed. It is important that aircraft crews should generally be employed full-time under a contract of service. "

"The employment of part-time or "freelance" aircraft crew will only acceptable in exceptional circumstances and in consultation with the assigned Operations Inspector. Irrespective of whether crews are part-time or full-time employees, tests carried out to establish the competence of the operators pilots, must be conducted either by the operator himself or by another operator under arrangements set out in detail in the operators Training Manual. These arrangements must ensure that the pilot is competent to perform all the duties and responsibilities laid upon him by the operator."

Again, the word operator means AOC holder, two AOCs you have to perform two different processes that have to approved by two different CAD inspectors. Per CAD 360 "In this Part, the word ‘must’ is used to indicate where the Director expects the Operator to respond and adhere closely to the defined requirement."

hkfooey,

Each airline must have its own pilots. That's true.

But this conversation is about seniority lists. There is no requirement for an airline in Hong Kong to have a seniority list just as there is no requirement as to how many seniority lists any one airline may have. (Just look at what's going on with base opportunities and who is eligible for them)

Hypothetically, CX and KA will get to choose their pilots from a combined list. It would be a requirement for any pilot to join that company in exactly the same way CX based pilots resign from CPA when they take a base and sign on with the based entity. Yet they remain on the common seniority list. That may mean a new contract, it may not. Those above the Y intersection would have the choice to stay or move, but those below would be moved between companies (resigning and re-joining as required) as per the company requirements.

Which complies with the AOC just as the current basing arrangement does.

Not sure i'm understanding this correctly. Are you suggesting that CX could close a base and some/all of the pilots could be required to return to HK and join KA on a A320...?

You heard it here first Traf.

You lads are a laugh !

Who cares. Load of tosh. As long as transfer my salary, Schooling, Travel Fund, 13th month, Overtime, the occasional G day payment for parking after 11.31pm into a G etc they I will navigate their wagons through the sky.

When it stops I, like others will be gone

...and mangement will be happy to replace you with a cheaper pilot.

Pilots have been signing inferior contracts for some 20 years, with the introduction of the B-scale (and the start of the rot).

Sorry I am not the one who needs to be educated here. KA pilots signed up for what they got, and obviously they are not happy with it. Any sort of joint seniority list does not in any way permit a pilot to fly for both AOCs, CAD will only let pilots work for both airlines at the same time.

Going back to what Krone said in the first post "This scheme, that was first muted a few years ago on the full integration of joint FOP , could now be just around the corner for all concerned."

You and I both know each airline has to have its own pilots, there is no chance of a "full integration of joint FOP". There is no benefit in having KA pilots retrain at CX, it adds nothing but cost. The cost of training them into CX, and the cost of replacing them at KA. They may as well just recruit a cheaper pilot off the street and do one set of training to fill one slot.

You and I know the company is driven by the dollar, the idea has no chance of getting a guernsey. Kones opening post is sophistry.

I hope you are right . The thought of no integration makes my day.

Nobody I know at KA with balanced shoulders has any interest in being a CX pilot.

Even our young 200 hr cadets are wise beyond their years- no interest in CX.

You're full of it Gnads!
There's hundreds of guys at KA, who, if given a sniff at a CX basing, would sell both their grandmothers.
Whether or not CX basings ever open again in meaningful numbers, is a different story - but trust me, both grandmothers would be sold.

I don't think its a mater of if one pilot group would like to fly the other, I personally don't give a rats where or what I fly, its more about the contract. (that I signed a long time ago and would like to keep)

I agree with what hkgfooey said, there is no advantage for cx to merge the lists, just an expensive pointless exercise.

If they wanted to move crews around they can do it on secondment, many other airlines do this, but even so, why rob Peter to pay Paul.
Both airlines are short on crew.

Base Vacancy

In you're own words there are no bases . So I'm still confident in suggesting there's little interest from KA in CX.

Years ago Richard and Jeffrey , CX seconded pilot managers had hurt feelings at the lack of interest in CX by KA pilots when offered transfers.

I think you guys are jealously guarding a turd 💩

Base Vacancy? Why not call yourself Rocking Horse ****. Both monikers share the same prevalence of occurring in the wild: 2/5ths of 80% of fark all.

Sure, there are guys that would take a base at KA. There are also guys that would take half roster for double pay but why deal in fantasy? The splatter marks of spit on L2 are still on the glass from when Dick Hall and DJ Jazzy Geoff were met with the....?dozen? applications to transfer to CX. The offer was made to all KA pilots, some 400+ at the time.

'Jealously guarding a turd' is the most apt description I've heard. I only ever applied to KA because I didn't want what CX offered. Long haul, eternity to command and a frosty cockpit environment aren't for me.

Would I take a little less China and a little more Japan? Sure. But I don't get to cherry pick. I had to pick one or the other and all that comes with them: the good, the bad and the ugly.

If I had a do-over, I'd still choose exactly the same way.

As for HKPhooey, you really have to build a bridge. If you invested the same energy into your current employer as you do your former (plural), you may not have so many of the latter.

wtf....unintelligible.

Perhaps KA are going to finally start that SYD service and put some KA guys on a base down there? Should be some room for based KA pilots now that CX has just reduced the numbers in SYD!

TT...

I have read your post twice and have no clue... no clue...other than KA gave you a job and CX didn't..
JY