|
The strongest I have seen the union, in my time here anyway, was 2001. We had around 94-95% membership. We had a 92% YES vote for limited industrial action(LIA) - it was for the Maximum Safety Strategy(MSS). MSS was basically a go slow campaign.
I can tell you as I analysed the results in real time back in 2001 that the response was very underwhelming. As in, the increase in 15+min delays was barely into double digits. So whilst many talk the talk, few walk the walk. I was an FO at the time and I did my part - but the CNs I flew with mostly didn't. Now given that incredible strength and unity, we waited another 7 years for a payrise(for B scales - none for A obviously) and even that was imposed(2008). Now why was that? Well - three main factors. 1) the 49ers definitely took the wind out of the sails of many - especially most of the captains i flew with 2) we gradually lost membeship from mid 90s to 50% a few years later due to high subs(to support the 49ers) and the recruitment ban(obvsiously they couldn't join) 3) and by far the most important, bad timing - 9-11 happened two months after. So why am I bringing this up - because right now we have a **** situation. Whether the yes or no vote prevails there are many suggesting they are leaving the AOA. So that gives us point 2 Point 1 - I would suggest from survey results I have seen and talking to many, the membership is NOT as militant or cohesive as we were in 2001. So if it is NO, what is the plan? Point 3 - what is the wild card? A downturn due to the US/China trade dispute? HNA going bankrupt with lots of pilots looking for jobs on COS18? Who knows - hopefully nothing - but seems like there is always something around the corner. So if the plan is to vote NO fine - it is a democracy - but then have a plan for after. Or is everyone going to blame the GC and DSS? If you wanted a militant leader to take us where you wanted to go why didn't one run? If you think the majority want to be more militant, start a motion - there are plenty of whatsapp groups doing a great job of whinging, blaming the HKAOA for no results. So do something about it - or just keep blaming everyone but yourselves for the inaction you partake in. I have heard it all before many times - everyone is a keyboard or bar warrior. But how many stand up when needed? From my own experience, especially in 2001, you would be unpleasantly surprised. What I would urge everyone though - DON'T leave the HKAOA. Membership dropped to 50% after 2001 and we got ZERO payrises for 7 years despite record profits. So you will save 1% or so but cost yourself in career earnings. OK - off my soapbox;-) |
In 2001 not just the tragedy of 9-11 happened, but a week later Ansett collapsed and the pilot shortage disappeared overnight. No reasonable argument encourages a fear of the unknown future. But no reasonable argument encourages ignorance of differing scenarios. Rarely does does anything in life play out how we think it will. Particularly given how Swire react to anything. Take a data privacy breach for example. Who would have predicted they put their collective heads up their butts for 7 months. Yet somehow they’ll act rationally with industrial relations. Hopefully they do. But it’d be completely out of character. |
Numero Crunchero- if there is a mass exodus from the HKAOA it will be the GC’s fault. By recommending a “Yes” vote they brought into stark reality for many the futility of being in a Union that simply acts as a conduit for the unrestricted imposition of Management policy. Quite simply there is no reason to be part of the Union which does not protect it’s Members. |
No one disputes we are poorly lead. But I largely think the GC is an accurate cross section of the membership, which after all is who the union is. Next time you’re at dispatch, look at the tables, the crews and their sign on time. Look at the commuters and their W patterns. Listen to the trainers/777 crew talk about their EFP. Then ask yourself, should the phone ever ring putting you on a “golf day”, do you trust the above colleagues to comply? I wouldn’t trust them not to put any details of a “golf” day on Facebook. kenfoggo, you’re right to question the purpose of being an AOA member, but it’s not solely due to a weak GC that has run out of ideas. It’s also due to a membership that values self before group. In 99/00/01 this union was strong and united. Then a combination of company action and external factors conspired to weaken us to the point it took nearly a decade to recover. As you rightly point out, we are a weak union now. So I’m not sure how you expected the NC to pull a rabbit out of a rather battered hat. I’m sure we’ll vote this underwhelming offer down, then proudly declare that we’ve sent the company a clear message. Then the trainers will keep training. The commuters will keep commuting. The 777 crew will continue to collect their EFP. Crew will be at dispatch early with their iPads ready to go. OCN’s will continue to be acknowledged. And the wheels will keep on turning. But hey, the members have shown backbone. They sent a resounding NO. |
Originally Posted by kenfoggo
(Post 10363615)
Numero Crunchero- if there is a mass exodus from the HKAOA it will be the GC’s fault. By recommending a “Yes” vote they brought into stark reality for many the futility of being in a Union that simply acts as a conduit for the unrestricted imposition of Management policy. Quite simply there is no reason to be part of the Union which does not protect it’s Members. in 2001 I was on the GC that recommended NO to the vote - that was pre rule 20.4 so the membership never got to vote on it. Over the next few years membership fell to 50% So explain to me how the GC recommending Yes or No helps the situation? Personally I think it is better for the membership to decide - that way no one can blame the GC for a Yes or No vote. Well, actually, many pilots don't like to take personal responsibility so I am sure they will sit back and blame everyone but themselves - and by everyone, clearly the NC, GC and DSS. Obviously CX has no part to play in this - if only we had a leader that said 'strike'- 100% of the members would literally walk off the job. Survey results suggest an ability to act far from this. If people can't be brave answering a survey what are they going to be like in real life? So what do you want? Escalate? And what does that look like? We did escalate in 2001. So yeah - rant and rave but please, do nothing, and then hold everyone else accountable for our misfortunes. |
Numero - I don’t think that any of my postings can be considered a rant nor even a rave . Like you I have been here since before the last dose of unpleasantness which resulted in the 49ers and so I am deeply pragmatic about what the HKAOA can achieve , or more pertinently CANNOT achieve. But I do think that the Union should provide some kind of buffer between an aggressive, confrontational Management and the Members. To recommend a “Yes” vote seemed to fail us all. Perhaps there is some substance in remaining in the HKAOA just to vote “NO” but ultimately what will happen? Nothing. Therefore I see no reason to remain engaged with a Union which does not act as a Union. No rant. I just do not see the point. |
When there is nothing to gain from voting yes or no, people will vote no out of principle at what is being offered. I think it's reached the stage where most pilots realise after this the AOA is finished, a done deal; little more than a social club with insurance benefits. Nobody's going to go on strike but that NO vote will feel good regardless!! |
Allowing the juniors to vote over terms and conditions of the seniors, and vice versa is pathetic and illogical. The only answer here is: No. |
Fuanna, 100% Agree with your post. So spot on, and I am amazed we even allow this sort of crap to keep being enforced.
|
Originally Posted by RAT Management
(Post 10363943)
Fuanna, 100% Agree with your post. So spot on, and I am amazed we even allow this sort of crap to keep being enforced.
But why on earth is the AOA playing this game too? |
Originally Posted by kenfoggo
(Post 10363748)
Numero - I don’t think that any of my postings can be considered a rant nor even a rave . Like you I have been here since before the last dose of unpleasantness which resulted in the 49ers and so I am deeply pragmatic about what the HKAOA can achieve , or more pertinently CANNOT achieve. But I do think that the Union should provide some kind of buffer between an aggressive, confrontational Management and the Members. To recommend a “Yes” vote seemed to fail us all. Perhaps there is some substance in remaining in the HKAOA just to vote “NO” but ultimately what will happen? Nothing. Therefore I see no reason to remain engaged with a Union which does not act as a Union. No rant. I just do not see the point. apologies! |
Oh, the training ban is not hurting them, so let's vote yes and bend over for our pineapple insertion. What a load of crap! If the ban wasn't hurting them, they would just ignore us, and not be so damned adamant on having clauses from preventing us from ever using it again. Would you yes-vote idiots please grow a pair and open your eyes!
|
Originally Posted by betpump5
(Post 10364689)
The thread title interests me. As time goes on and as more and more GC tools crawl out from under the stones from where they have been hiding , there certainly seems to be some conspiracy going on. Just looking at the posts from that Spin Doctor RL says it all.
I'm voting NO based on the Sh1te presented . I urge the pussycat "on the fence" voters to vote NO based on the very strange behaviour being exhibited by certain GC and NC members. Rumour has it directors to vote themselves an 8% bonus based on the pilots voting yes and the end of fuel hedging. |
Originally Posted by unitedabx
(Post 10365330)
Totally agree. Vote "no" and push back some of the ****. And can anyone explain why the vote is taking place in such short order ? Could it be because the company wants it pushed thru before the annual results are out ? Why not delay until say 1st April and then decide. With record profits about to be announced some of the yes inclined voters might think again when they see the shreholders and directors award themselves huge bonuses and dividends at the expense of the pilots. There is no rush to vote. Wait and see if the sob story from management is true or not.
Rumour has it directors to vote themselves an 8% bonus based on the pilots voting yes and the end of fuel hedging. In order to satisfy RF's amendment, both RF and the GC agreed to a compromise (which is the current GC motion). RF then changed his mind and now we have two different motions. As the GC one now contains most of RF's original requirements, the GC is UNABLE to change the dates on the Final Agreements whether the GC or RF motion passes. So the vote had to be reduced to end 1 Feb to comply with the new RF restrictions placed on both motions. If there had been no member amendment then the entire vote process could have been fully completed, iaw HKAOA rules, without any shortening two weeks earlier than they will now. So if the vote passed by now, HKPA members would have their increased rates paid in February. So no skull duggery - all purely driven by the member amendment motion. But if you want conspiracy theory - RF's amendment has saved the company around $6million HKD in February assuming the vote passes. |
That should cover your TC upgrade.
|
Originally Posted by Numero Crunchero
(Post 10366090)
If there had been no member amendment, the original GC motion would have allowed for a full vote to start two weeks earlier.
In order to satisfy RF's amendment, both RF and the GC agreed to a compromise (which is the current GC motion). RF then changed his mind and now we have two different motions. As the GC one now contains most of RF's original requirements, the GC is UNABLE to change the dates on the Final Agreements whether the GC or RF motion passes. So the vote had to be reduced to end 1 Feb to comply with the new RF restrictions placed on both motions. If there had been no member amendment then the entire vote process could have been fully completed, iaw HKAOA rules, without any shortening two weeks earlier than they will now. So if the vote passed by now, HKPA members would have their increased rates paid in February. So no skull duggery - all purely driven by the member amendment motion. But if you want conspiracy theory - RF's amendment has saved the company around $6million HKD in February assuming the vote passes. |
Well if Numero gets his way and the result is a yes vote..... There will be no hope for the future.
Is the fat lady singing? Are pilots that lame? I guess we will find out in 10 more days...... |
Originally Posted by RAT Management
(Post 10366249)
Well if Numero gets his way and the result is a yes vote..... There will be no hope for the future.
Is the fat lady singing? Are pilots that lame? I guess we will find out in 10 more days...... |
This has the stink of 2004 all over again when a corrupt HKAOA pres sold the 49ers out with messages of doom and gloom to its members if the vote doesn't pass. Only took the formation of another union to keep the fight going to its conclusion. Interesting how he quietly rode off into the sunset onto his new USA basing right after that. Make no mistake, the AoA is just a medium to facilitate the imposition of change by the company. Name ONE improvement in the last 20 years that has come as a result of the AoA? Like someone suggested on one of these threads, and what I had been saying for a number of years.... everyone should resign from the AoA, it is far more difficult for the company to negotiate with 3000 individuals rather than one organization that represents 3000 individuals.
Quick question NC, why are you all of sudden so vocal? Your message is that members have indicated through AoA surveys that they don't have the appetite to escalate industrial action, therefore the members should accept whatever is on offer by the company. I am not going to debate this point with you, but I am just curious as to why you never spoke out previously. I mean for years and years while we were in CC, not once in any of the forums, not once in any of the focus night that I attended did you ever voice your opinion, instead you were constantly enlightening us with your number wizardry. You've recently used example from 2001 to support your point of view, so this is obviously not a new revelation to you. Why the change? |
In the meantime CH left CX this week, having resigned from the NC when he realized that "If CX want this crap it will have to be imposed on us".
Imposed or had sprinkles added, who knows, but RL sold the 747 down the steam , thanks bro. |
Oops CM not CH
|
NC has been in/around the negotiating committees for a long time. Is it causation or correlation that we have fallen drastically short of any acceptable gains during his reign? Let alone kept pace with inflation? |
RL has just been explaining things to everyone, if you don’t like the facts just vote no but no need to get personal. Don’t worry all the guys on COS99 that get pushed out at 55 will be joining COS18 and signing up for training and they aren’t the only ones. |
I believe a whole bunch of guys on cos 99 signed up for cos 18 as soon as it was released ... Talk about selling everyone out.
|
Originally Posted by RAT Management
(Post 10366782)
I believe a whole bunch of guys on cos 99 signed up for cos 18 as soon as it was released ... Talk about selling everyone out.
|
Originally Posted by Dragon69
(Post 10366311)
Make no mistake, the AoA is just a medium to facilitate the imposition of change by the company.
|
Not skippers on cos 99 who want to extend beyond 55... That's the deal... Just like the A scale who wanted beyond 55, they signed over to B scale. Whole people are willing to exercise self servitude those in their wake will suffer the turbulence.
|
|
Imagine the lack of self respect required to turn up to do the same job you did yesterday, but for 70% less money today. These clowns are either so lazy, or so insecure that they’d prefer to do that than to cut the Cathay cord and get a job elsewhere paying more and getting treated better. |
Imagine ?
Originally Posted by ron burgandy
(Post 10367566)
Imagine the lack of self respect required to turn up to do the same job you did yesterday, but for 70% less money today. These clowns are either so lazy, or so insecure that they’d prefer to do that than to cut the Cathay cord and get a job elsewhere paying more and getting treated better. |
Is it just me or does everyone smell a stench from this "best we can expect" deal?
Everything from the pit of my stomach instinctually tells me to vote NO! The trust had been erroded by one side only. But that same side requires the umbrella clause that is also one sided.... Why? because they can not trust "US!" And they need a gauranteed future! In return we get a gauranteed 1%. Are you crazy? They made the mistakes. They need to fix them. This is not an acceptable fix.... If you think it is, then vote Yes. But don't vote Yes because you can't see anything better coming around the corner. You need to realize that there are things that will change for the worse if it is a Yes vote ( like change in reserve, W patterns, 3 man long haul) it's just not detailed in plain sight yet, but with hindsight you will be saying"what was I thinking". Sure you will win a few small financial gains. But these do not (even close) address the real issues, or account for the negatives you will be voting yes to. The Sum of the parts are greater than the whole. That's why they want it voted as one big package.... Do you smell a rat in this. Trust your instincts. Look at the big picture and realize that this is a giant turd. Make them and those who support it eat it.... But don't even attempt to take a bite out of this offering.... Not for a second. Think beyond what you stand to gain. Think about the whole group, the future, and what it will mean for the longevity of your career, and others. It's not a great place where we are right now. But it's better to sit here than to agree to a worse place without any recourse except for legal challenge.... It's not about what you are going to gain. It's about what we need to preserve. We cannot afford to give away any degredation to our lifestyle and conditions.... Not for a few measly $$$. If you, like me, see this whole thing as wrong.... Please vote No! |
This deal effectively gives me a tiny bit "more". However, I am voting "NO" because it is the product of a broken system, a broken union and represents the very worst management tendencies and intentions in the airline industry. It will herald the end of the the distinguished and respected airline that was once Cathay Pacific. This offer is an abomination. It will destroy our careers, our pride and our integrity. It is unworthy of a single "yes" vote. Vote "NO" knowing you are standing up for your self-worth, your value as a professional pilot and your legacy. This deserves to be rejected with malice. Only a NO vote will tell this management we've had enough. It won't be an easy road ahead, but it WILL be the right decision. Don't sell yourselves and your colleagues down the river into professional oblivion.
|
Yes / No ???
Originally Posted by mngmt mole
(Post 10369323)
This deal effectively gives me a tiny bit "more". However, I am voting "NO" because it is the product of a broken system, a broken union and represents the very worst management tendencies and intentions in the airline industry. It will herald the end of the the distinguished and respected airline that was once Cathay Pacific. This offer is an abomination. It will destroy our careers, our pride and our integrity. It is unworthy of a single "yes" vote. Vote "NO" knowing you are standing up for your self-worth, your value as a professional pilot and your legacy. This deserves to be rejected with malice. Only a NO vote will tell this management we've had enough. It won't be an easy road ahead, but it WILL be the right decision. Don't sell yourselves and your colleagues down the river into professional oblivion.
As well, re HK Govt employment ordinance, they (I believe) can't arbitrarily change your COS in a detrimental manner THEREFORE, the only way they can accomplish that same task is get you to vote this garbage in.. |
You are correct. We have a sad history of voting in the “agreements” that the company then uses against us to further weaken and devalue our careers. This WILL prove the final nail in the coffin of professional aviation at CX. Vote NO and stand strong for what our profession and careers are worth. |
If by some miracle the union as an organization continues to exist after this vote, the members should consider adding conflict of interest clauses to the bylaws to preclude union reps (from the very top down) from profiting in any way from their position for a specified period of time. I know it is impossible to know every way in which a rep may profit, but at least eliminate the obvious and verifiable ways. IMHO what is happening here is perfect storm of weak or greedy reps and a corrupt company who will go to any lengths to implement their stingy, oppressive and punitive policies.
|
Hongkong is one of the most unethical and corrupted places on this planet. Why should the local airline or pilots association be any different? |
Anyone who is foolish enough to tie the fates of their careers, their families and their health to this corrupted and miserable company will sadly deserve what they get. The feeling of relief when I knew I was leaving was overwhelming.
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 00:00. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.