Reasons for NOT doing SLS - please add yours
 

A few reasons I can think of for not taking SLS:No meaningful profit share since 2010

No apology or accountability for fuel gambling hedge losses

No 13th month for aircrew, multiple times

Base closures due to CX law breaking (Paris)

No real basing options (only enough to try to stop crew leaving)

Direct entry FOs over those SOs with adequate experience

Many SOs with no meaningful experience

Shorter Layovers in cheaper hotels

Inadequate housing allowance

Renege on 25 year housing

Cuts to medical benefits

Salary lagging inflation

No seniority type transfers

No seniority roster system (fair share is meaningless)

No subsidised Junk for hire

Cuts to base training so new FOs can barely fly the aircraft, line crew have to finish off their training

Cuts to SO training so many can’t even make a radio position report, let alone be left unsupervised for a toilet break over high terrain, line crew have to finish off their training

Sounds like:
5 demands not one less.
revolution of our times.
This came from a United silent majority lead by a vocal minority, yet still no progress has been made, only chaos and destruction.

Unfortunately we have no unity, and the message will not get thru.

Good luck. Add oil!

I cannot do SLS because there is “No money in the Pot”

Hahaha, same!

I like to dwell in the positive and not the negative world but occasionally miss the mark.

What I’d really like to hear is one positive reason FOR taking SLS. Or a coherent rationale why it would benefit the pilot body OR the long term health of the place.

The money won’t matter; compared with the huge capital costs involved this is a token gesture of goodwill (which has been exploited in the past) which is more of a face saving type of thing. A literal fart in a hurricane when it comes to cash. Providing an illusion of ‘doing the right thing’ while acting in the opposite direction to address the high ticket operational costs (and past ‘blunders’ for that matter—assuming they were actually ‘blunders’ and weren’t a form of money laundering).

If retrenchment is necessary, it delays this from occurring (and also delays the subsequent recall provisions) — preventing a ‘right sizing’ of the airline (and for people to get on with their lives).

It undermines pretty much ALL existing pilot COSs/EAs/CA/CBAs by subverting the legitimate (negotiated) contractural provisions designed for contingencies like this.

It directly subverts the concept of seniority which is the basis for pretty much every airline contract everywhere. In fact, it PENALIZES seniority.

It enables the practice of hiring on ever decreasing contractural conditions which undermine those in existence; in the long run this benefits no one. It rewards bad behavior morally, economically, and contractually.

I’d really (seriously) appreciate a coherent argument given the nature of the pilot contracts how somehow this might benefit the pilot body OR others and a good argument FOR SLS.

Don't expect anything from the meeting with the AOA's to change your mind. It will be along the lines of "we're not offering you anything, you just have to help out and take SLS". I'd sit on your hands for the outcome of that meeting before I signed up if you haven't already.

You are a number. You are not a Swire Prince. Look after number one.

Exactly, just like the Swire princes do...

IF......

Perhaps if our company “leadership” had put all of the affordable ex-gratia payment money into a pot and divided it evenly into a numbers of days pay for every employee (similar time how Profit Share was once payed a long time ago...) then every employee would have got X days of pay as an ex-gratia payment.

But NO, they decided to cap the payment at HK$30000, thereby disproportionately affecting all pilots and senior cabin crew. So a Captain gave away 3 weeks of pay and that equally important office worker who is apparently a more important piece of the machine got the full 13th month.

Step forward to now, and the office worker sees the SLS as simply giving back ¾ of the 13th month and getting a few weeks off work. The Captains perspective is that they have already donated 3 weeks of pay via the 13th month cap and now the company wants another 3 weeks pay.

What IF our “leaders” hadn’t been so vindictive with the ex-gratia methodology /13th month cap? Perhaps there would have been a bigger take up in the SLS already? Lessons to be learned for this “stronger company “ that will emerge from this event?

Meanwhile, CARGOLUX has increased its tariffs into China by 400% and is making a killing on the freight business from Europe into and out of China. Crews never leave the flight deck. It's like the Berlin Airlift all over again. So why hasn't CX cashed in on this little earner ?
Answer : too busy screwing it's staff.

Correct! Too many other Swire interests in Mainland China.

100% accurate.

They lost me when they paid a 35k bonus to everyone except me. What genius thought that was a good plan? Screw all the Captains, they get paid too much already.

This company is a case study on how NOT to manage people.

Isn’t it a violation of employment ordinance to not provide the working roster for the next month on the 15th of the current month?

Now for those that sign the “blank check” form, fair enough, you’ve given them full consent to have their way with you. But for those of us that haven’t, could we not legally tack on those missing notification days in front of the March roster? Another lawsuit to add to the pile? :rolleyes:

Word on the street is that those consenting have signed off critical redundancy protections in their contract, making them less complicated to put on furlough than someone who hasn’t.

Not according to the Hong Kong Employment Ordinance CAP57
18. Appointment of rest days
(1) Rest days shall be appointed by an employer and he may appoint different rest days for different employees.
(Amended 71 of 1976 s. 4)
(2) Subject to subsection (4), every employer shall, before the commencement of every month, inform each employee orally or in writing of his rest days in that month.
(3) The provisions of subsection (2) shall be deemed to be complied with if an employer exhibits in a conspicuous place in the place of employment and for so long as it applies a roster showing the days appointed to be rest days for each employee during the month.
(4) Subsection (2) shall not apply where rest days are appointed on fixed days in each period of 7 days on a regular basis.
(Amended 71 of 1976 s. 4)
(5) An employer may, with the consent of his employee, substitute for any rest day appointed under this section some other rest day—
(a) within the same month and before the rest day so appointed; or
(b) within the period of 30 days next following the rest day so appointed.

“Word on the street is that those consenting have signed off critical redundancy protections in their contract, making them less complicated to put on furlough than someone who hasn’t.”

Is this related to the “temporary variation” of the contract, which has not been specifically published and disseminated? Do tell!

Word on the street is that those consenting have signed off critical redundancy protections in their contract, making them less complicated to put on furlough than someone who hasn’t.

IF the Company have altered the redundancy clause for those who sign for SLS, it makes more sense they will protect those who support and EXEMPT them from any redundancy or furlough that may result from the current downturn.

I cannot think of a single upside to taking SLS EXCEPT for the brown nose points. So you will be viewed as a “team player” when you put in for training or a management position 🤮

No thanks!

3 weeks on the Gold Coast?

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....f20afd0afe.jpg
There has been no one on the third floor I would take my problem to for over a year now. That failure of leadership demands greater attention than Swire's panic over their cash cow's demise due to their own misguided greed and incompetence.