Can't believe we could get that wrong!

You know what I mean though. We are all well informed don't worry.

Also lots of us have registered our protest by not joining the AOA (me included)! The effect of that will start to dribble through soon too.

We will prevail!

I like it:ok:

How does "we" vote it down when said "we" isn't even in the union. Complain all you'd like mate, however, please refrain from making suggestions as to which way the union should vote. Remember, you registered your vote by leaving the union, simple as that. Goodbye dear chap, you no longer have any input into this matter.

spongebob
Firstly, how does voting in RP07 reduce our CoS...it actually takes out some gray area issues and firmly puts them INTO our CoS.

And who is this management type you allude to...not the guy posting as "management" I hope...that is very tongue in cheek.

I agree that if we all got together and acted collectively things would improve...that worked in 2001 until july anyway. This is simply a vote on RP07, not on our salary campaign. With the tighter rostering you envisage, they won't be able to work us as hard(without recompense) in RP07 like they can in the aftermath of the fallback. SO if things are going to get busy I hope we are smart enough to vote RP07 to protect ourselves.

uuuuh, wombatatico..... could be wrong but I think that might have been 'tongue in cheek' :hmm:

If Darwin was right surely there wouldn't be that many left!!:rolleyes:

NC:

You and I have been around a long time. You know our COS is not worth the paper it is written on. So to have it in our COS means nothing.

We are supposed to have a D&G procedure in our COS. How many times have it been followed? Does peanut throwing warrant a D&G?

Two pilots just got fired over some housing fiasco. They got one letter stating they were fired. Then underneath the first letter were two more letters. The 2nd letter was his first appeal with the decision still to be terminated. The 3rd letter was his second appeal already written out with the same decision. They got all the letters at one time.

The Conditions of Service at Cathay Pacific is worth Sh!tt

Like I said before, it will get passed because the pilots of CX are scared of the boogyman that lurks in the Fallback. The pilots don’t want to fight for their conditions. We all know RP07 is not the best but are scared of what lurks.

This will pass, not on its merits but on the unknown. Don’t want to hear of ANYONE and I mean ANYONE complain about their roster and how hard they were done by. I want to see a big smile on the 15th of every month even though you are work stacked before your leave, etc etc.

A crap deal in our COS is still a crap deal.

BTW, CX has always worked in a “GREY” area. It is open to THEIR interpretation. You should know this.

Also want to see a big smile on the 26th of each month. Nothing is going to happen in that department either.

Mr Bloggs
Selfishly, I would like RP07 as it suits me having those jokers and some lifestyle rostering. But if it gets voted down I am happy to live with the consequences. I would like to see the majority vote one way or the other, like the DEFO vote.
I am not scared of the consequences if we go to fallback. I survived the rostering of RP94 on the Tristar in mid 90s...terrible rostering.
But, I don't see the point in making rostering a legal battle. If we end up in fallback and go to court and win, we will end up with RPs in our contract...exactly what voting for RP07 will do, but obviously different RPs(RP94).

If I thought that fallback would put them under pressure to improve other conditions, I would vote NO. I have not been given any logical reason for assuming that so I am pragmatically voting YES. This is a vote on rostering, not on fairness of our contract, pay issues etc.

I've worked under three different RP's here and the one I like the best is the current one - at least we get some degree of control over trips and days off. It's not perfect but what is? I think it's better than the fallback and what we had under RP94 so on a simple "vote for what you want" principle it'll get my vote.
KISS!

Mr. Bloggs put it very well. The CX pilot group is scared of what lurks behind the corner. They are scared now, and will be scared with every proposal management puts out.....and considering they will all be sh#t, not the position one would hope for. How spineless can we be, the ONLY strength we have is in our NUMBERS. So many speak of wanting an increase in pay......why would CX give ANYTHING to us when they know the pilot group will crumble at the first sign of resistance. They will continue to hand down and destroy what is left of the Cos until this pilot group realizes that this behavior is unacceptable. This company is too profitable for Swire to let it just dissolve, and that's what would happen if ALL of the pilots stood as one and started rejecting offers that were not in our best interests. They cannot fire us as a whole. And if one goes down....then they need to know....that the rest of us will follow. Voting YES for RP07 is a mistake because it lets them once again divide the issues. It is something THEY obviously want, and we need these rostering practices as a bargaining tool for more important pieces of the cake. If by some miracle, management does decide to open talks about pay, what will we have to bargain with??? What incentive would they have to pay us more??? Here's to not being so spineless.

sponge bob
your excellent use of facts and logic has convinced me...I will vote NO.
damn, i broke my new year's resolution of not using sarcasm anymore!!!!!

If you are looking for better rostering and more control over you roster, I don’t think RP07 is it. Over 95% of our operations are scheduled. Why can’t I request/bid a flight/days off with some degree of accuracy? Sorry, I just scared the sh!tt out of everyone with the “Bid” work. Why do I have to request jokers 80 some days in advance.

We know we are on annual productive hours, so why don’t we know how many hours a month we should be bidding/requesting. Is it a big secret that scheduling must hold onto? Why does scheduling have to build our roster? If we are capable of flying a Multi-Million dollars aircraft, I think were are capable of building our own roster to the required 84 hours or the 54 hours with a weeks reserve or whatever the hours that Scheduling require. Give us the numbers and let us do it. Is it that hard? Are they are always undermanned.

Guess that will never happen as we will accept a crappy deal because not many pilots actually know what is out there or don’t think it can ever happen. Well one thing for sure “If you don’t try, it will not happen”. Where would we be at now if the Wright Brothers took that attitude?

Vote it down and let’s get on with some serious negotiations with regard to rostering. We will all have an incentive to get a proper deal when we have the fallback in force. We could be only into the fallback for a couple of months with a deal that works for both parties. Don’t think it is a moon shot with rostering.

If I were the DFO, I would give you absolutely “NOTHING”. Why? The pilots will sign a deal that works for the company and very little for the pilots. So why give them something when you don’t have to. Negotiations 101.

Like I said, when it is all over and done with, No complaining on the 15th and no complaining on the 26th because nothing is going to improve.
Why have we given so much and got absolutely nothing in return. No wonder we get nothing with this pilot force and their mentality.

It's not a "crappy deal" by any stretch of the imagination. It's better than any deals I've worked under before here - I now actually get to arrange days off for weddings/birthdays etc and know that I'll get them off.
Why would we only be working under the fallback for a couple of months? The company are quite happy to roster to the fallback - they gain flexibility by not having to deal with any requests but lose flexibility by re-introducing 5-4-3 for those that select it. Do nothing for 4 years then it's AFTLs.
Of course there's that court case as well. They may win and get AFTLs sooner, or we may win and get......RP94 (possibly, or whatever the judge thinks is appropriate)
Is RP94 much better than RP07?
No

I have to agree with you there. The rostering could certainly be worse and compared to my friends at places like EK, GF, CI, etc. it could be A LOT WORSE. Unfortunately I think we as pilots will always complain. We tend to focus on the negative aspects of our jobs instead of the positives. It's what we do best. The question is, how are we going to find the time for the extra complaining that will result from working on the fallback agreement. :ugh:

I am not a scheduler but if 95% of our operations are scheduled, why 80 days to put in day off requests? I realize is it hard work for the schedules to put our requests into the computer, sorry we do that for them if it is a seamless system, OR better yet, why don’t we do it for them? We have our own IT department and we have some smart computer blokes paying union dues. What could happen if we got together?

Like I said before, not many know what is out there if you are comparing to EK, CI and GF.

I guess we will never know what could be achieved. We gave away 5 4 3 and reserve for the ability to request days off, 80 days in advance, 3- 4 times a year. I think we won that one. If you look hard at it, did you need to give that away to really request days off? No but the company wanted it gone.

“The company is quite happy to roster into the fallback”. Who made that statement, The Company? If you were negotiating, would you not say that even if you could not or chose not or simply don’t want to. One must learn to read between the lines when negotiating.

Does not help pilots doing W patterns or being called out off a 12 hours reserve to do a 12 hour duty with possibly two pilots, but, I can request those days off for the wedding, if you live that long. The days off are more important that safety I suppose.

This company is all about taking and the pilots are all about giving. If you keep giving the company with keep taking. When they want something, scare the pilots into giving. Don’t expect your roster to get better because CX will exploit all the deficiencies of any agreement, including this one.

Don’t think you realize all the new routes and increased services CX will be starting in the coming years. When they are undermanned your lifestyles request will be the last thing on their agenda and that will be for a long time. Revenue comes first at the expense of others including Safety.

Remember, money comes first and foremost for this lot. If you don’t have any protections like 543 or FDP starts on reserve, you will be rostered for some interesting patterns to say the least. You will get more fatigued and eventually call in sick and that will only perpetuate the problem. Any the famous words of all crew controller “It is legal” or “Are you refusing a duty”.

It’s not about now, look ahead. How many aircraft are we going to have in 3-5 years, what kind of new routes, how can this agreement be exploited?

It’s all about fatigue protection. How many ASR’s can be contributed to tiredness or fatigue?

Then again, it could be me not seeing the forest for the trees.:ugh:

It's a difficult read but I agree...I'll just contribute it to tiredness or fatigue.:} :) ;)

Mr Bloggs
Who said "the company is quite happy to roster in the fallback"? The aoa rostering team, thats who. I know some of those guys and I trust their integrity and their intelligence to make that statement. I thought CX would have trouble rostering us 6hr reserves in the fallback. I have been assured by the aoa guys that it will not be a problem for CX. These guys look at the rosters every month...they have the JRC feedback as well. If you know something they don't please email the GC!

I don't know why people are getting emotive about this. Its really simple...do you want RP07 or do you want to take your chances on the fallback. What this has to do with collective bargaining, US bid style rostering and how much spine each pilot has is beyond me.

I wish you No voters would give me something to work with here...all I have been reading from you so far is emotive threats and doom and gloom. Please quantify it for me so my simple logical brain can decide to change my vote your way!

Bloggs,
Thanks for mentioning the two pilots fired recently, its a shame we can forget it so quickly. You are right their D&G, appeal, Final appeal was an absolute joke but you heard it first here there is about to be some major headlines on this one!, Standby

Just to show you how the company is sticking to your COS Mr Rhodes proudly anounced at a C & T meeting ( I was there) two weeks before JR's final appeal that he was fired. Natural Justice I dont think so!!

Number cruncher,

Sorry about your new years resolution. I'm not sure what type of facts or reasoning your looking for, nor for what purpose you have in hearing them. It's not important to publish a report to show what the CX pilot group has GIVEN up over the past decade, because one word encompasses it all......EVERYTHING. This group has not maintained one thing that has been put before them. Maybe you're too close to tell the difference, but this group has no idea of what negotiating is all about. In the CX pilot handbook the only definition I find is....to accept what management proposes. So given your sarcastic remark....you are planning on voting YES to RP07.....and the what have you achieved??? A better roster for the time being? And when do you think management will come to the table to talk about long overdue, inflation adjusted pay raises? And what would be their objective of doing such a thing? To take away from the bottom line because you deserve it??? Maybe you shouldn't throw away your cards before the hand is dealt. Maybe it would be a sound idea to negotiate rosters and raises at the same time. Maybe we should educate our new pilots on the important issues that concern their futures. Maybe the union should come and introduce itself to new pilots to increase numbers and its stance against the company and their demands. I would imagine with a little marketing and some union leaders taking some time, numbers in the union would increase dramatically with new pilots. Maybe you should gain more knowledge of union matters from outside the AOA, to improve the AOA, because this union is pathetically ineffective. My whole point has been to work together as ONE, and as we ALL want an increase in PAY, why should we conclude an important piece of negotiations prior to even speaking about PAY. According to our chairman Chris Pratt, we are acquiring 43 aircraft over the next 3 years, and without any disposals, that will require a huge increase in pilots, and obviously their productivity given the downfalls in our CT systems with upgrades and movement. WHY should we make it easier for the company to roster us after spending (correct me if I'm completely off) nearly 10 years without an increase in pay. You're looking for hard facts and detailed research, but the disadvantages are painfully clear when you're not blinded by the bull!!!!!.

cheers

Spongebob,

Yes, you're right, there are too many inaccuracies for me to bother with.

"Maybe the union should come and introduce itself to new pilots to increase numbers and its stance against the company and their demands. I would imagine with a little marketing and some union leaders taking some time, numbers in the union would increase dramatically with new pilots. Maybe you should gain more knowledge of union matters from outside the AOA, to improve the AOA, because this union is pathetically ineffective."

You'll have to keep imagining as you're obviously not prepared to be a member and put your money where your mouth is. IF you join you'll find out about many of the items you're wrong about.:ok:

spongebob,
I like your sense of humour at least;-)
I just don't see the point in past anger affecting future decisions. You bring up lots of disparate but relevant issues. Union membership is down...but I see no excuse for not being a member today. So if people want to save 1.25% thats fine, but don't complain about me making decisions for them with my vote! I have been here for a while so have endured lots of changes and degradations of my CoS. But I just don't see how voting for RP07 is bad for me. Spongebob, what am I missing here? I will be putting 'policy' items into my CoS...how is that bad? If I vote no and go to court, at BEST I will end up with RP94 as my rostering practice, at worst AFTLS. So how is that a win?
I know there is this underlying belief that anything they offer must be bad for us, good for them. Did it ever occur to you that it might be good for both?
The facts I want are not about past injustices...I was on the GC a few years back and saw the injustices at close quarters..I want facts on what is bad about RP07. Not paranoia, not revenge or retribution....just the plain facts as to what is so wrong with Rp07 VS the fallback!

The premise for your no vote seems to be that RP07 is worth something to CX and by holding it back we can use it in negotiations about salary? Is that about right? I don't see that it does lead to productivity/cost savings for CX so I am voting yes from that viewpoint. If voting down RP07 would put them under pressure, I would vote No. I just don't see that it does!???

Another Hard Read
 

Is it the GMA or the head of Cx scheduling that told the AOA rostering blokes that it is not a problem. Yes the AOA looks at the roster every month, but do they know all the details of the task at hand. You have a bunch of dedicated AOA blokes on a base with families. Do they know the roster as good as Cx.

I am sure Cx can and will roster 6 hr reserves, they will have no other choice. Will they like it, certainly not. It cuts down on flexibility and Cx needs and like flexibility. I don’t believe in having 30 days free reserve but what we really need is at some point in a 12 hour reserve, our FDP needs to start. In the name of safety, we cannot do a 12 hour reserve and then a 12 hour duty. You could be up for over 20 hours when you F it up and kill over 300 people, then the rules will change. Is it then we come to an agreement.

I simply cannot believe the HKCAD will allow this.

5-4-3

Oh yes, I just filled out my Cx survey last week telling them I wanted 5-4-3. I can only assume you filled yours not wanting 5-4-3. Now the company can roster accordingly. You see everyone is happy.

Just trying to point out the facts. Do you know what our route structure will be in 1-5 years with all the new aircraft coming. It certainly will not be as it is now. Do we have the protection in RP 07 or will you be just more Knackered (Yes dude, you are correct)?

Ask yourself why Cx is willing to put RP into our contracts? They know it is contractual if the court case continues. If our contracts are worth anything.

CX has done some great work with its IT Department in the past and continues to do so. Why not send me an email stating I have 55 hours and 6 days reserve. Have them publish all the reserve that is needed and I will just pick one. What I want and you want are different.
The task gets done and we have some control. Hell at least produce the lines and then request the lines. There has to be some flexibility on both side but you know CX. They will exploit it all to the nth degree.

Some of the problem is with people on the JRC i.e. Scheduling and the GMA. Their only experience is with CX and the way they do it. If you learn to swallow, you can rise to the top without much experience. That is what we face. They are worried, if we can have any control over our roster, then they will lose control. Control is something Cx holds very dearly.

It is up to us if we want a better agreement or not. We all have to live with the outcome.

IMHO, if RP 07 is available now, it will be available in the future.

If only I had a crystal ball or balls.

These 3 day all nighters to OZ, Karachi’s , Beijing and ULH are just killing me. As time goes on, it will be all back to back.

And Again
 

NC, its about flight safety and fatigue issues. Maybe in my difficult read you could not see it.

As with most pilots at CX, it’s all about ME. I’m all right Jack.

If the pilots can work themselves silly and then get time off to commute to OZ, Europe or NA then I guess safety has nothing to do with it.

Those guys work themselves silly now to get time off but in the next year or so that will not be the case. They will still be worked silly by the way. The aircraft have to be crewed and reserve needs to be flexible. These two issues alone are big safety issues. Those are the facts.

Do we have any fatigue protection in RP 07? If your answer is no, then don’t vote for it.

If the company cannot be flexible in rostering and their reserve, it is a huge cost item. Why did Cx want it out? They don’t what 5-4-3 or the FDP to start on any reserve. It will cost them. So Yes there is a big cost and productivity for the company in RP07. I’m not an accountant but it is not that hard to see.

As long as you are able to bid for those long jokers it must be a good deal. For next couple of months anyway. I'm alright.:ugh:

Bloggs, what you're missing here is that if does get rejected, then it's back to litigation. Litigation is time-consuming and expensive, and whilst on-going (failing an injunction - which is not likely in Hong Kongs' post-handover anti-labour environment) CX can do what ever they wish.
Now this may not seem to be such a big issue with you, but like NC, I do remember the "old" days of punitive rostering, next-to-F-all overtime and DT'ing till I was blue in the face. Cathays' lawyers have the (proven) ability to delay interminably whilst nit-picking through procedural issues (ask MG), so a two or three year "interim" arrangement is entirely possible.
The second issue is that litigation is expensive. I do not know what the AOA's reserves currently are, but they are bound to be inadequate. More subs rises will mean the inevitable flight of some due to financial pressures, forcing subs increases, causing more to flee...
I have been here for over 17 years now, and the current (RP04) system is the best I have ever experienced in terms of MY control of MY life and leisure time. I can request (and get) super-compacts, "G" days when I need them and more days off. I will concede that 5-4-3 is an issue, but I am getting twice that between (requested) "W" patterns.
Put this to bed and lets on with the bigger issue - our diminishing pay packets and salary differentiation.
I have voted FOR RP07 - and I urge all to do the same.

Cpt. Underpants

I have to agree with you and NC 100%. Personally I feel that the company wants us to vote down RP07 and RP07 mk2 because they want RP’s in company policy and the thing to go to court. Why would that be? Maybe they think they can win it? This isn’t and won’t be the same case that MG fought and from what I can see won’t have the same outcome either. RP’s must be kept in our CoS. In my opinion voting down RP07 and RP07 mk2 won’t achieve this and will probably sr*w us for ever.

Mr Bloggs,
I agree with you on the fatigue issues. The 12hr reserves/18hr FDP are a killer. And it is possible for them to work us much harder without 5-4-3. But my understanding of this is that we would only have 5-4-3 until the end of the interim agreement? As I said many posts ago, I have had my best and WORST rosters under RP04 so I know the weaknesses. I haven't been senior enough to get the great rostering that others have enjoyed. Like any deal, there are good points and bad points. For me the good outweighs the bad...for you the other way around. Thank you for at least arguing with logic...I kinda get sick of the doom and gloom arguments. Fatigue is, and will increasingly become the biggest issue if we become undermanned. Maybe they will do so deliberately to make age 60 look good from a manning point of view...now I am getting paranoid;-)
cheers
PS I think you underestimate the rostering team. They do their own numbers and calculations. I trust the guys doing it...I know by the way my questions were answered that they know this stuff backwards. I can assure you they don't accept at face value what is said to them by management! There was a time when we trusted AOA GC members...

I agree that fatigue could be an issue with RP07 although probably no more than with the fallback and at least this fact has been recognised and a couple of tools have been introduced to alleviate the problems.
At para 16.4
"other than in abnormal circumstances, crew members on reserve duty will normally be notified of a callout as soon as is practicable"
This has 2 expressions that I hate to see in such a document: "other than in abnormal circumstances" and "normally", both possibly subject to abuse. However, my experience so far is that we normally do get good notice of a callout and it's important as we move forward for everyone to flag up to the JRC when they're called out late so that the controllers are kept in check, neatly bringing me to the other tool used to alleviate the possible fatigue issues: The existance of the JRC. A sensible liasion between the pilots and the company regarding rostering has never existed in Cx before. This is a big step forward and something that we need to keep going.

In reality I think that the new reserve scheme is less tiring. If you've a 4 hour evening reserve to cover the long hauls for say 4 days on the trot, are you really going to have a sleep every afternoon just in case, thereby messing up your own body clock, call out or no? Probably not.
I'd rather have the 12 hour reserve with a commitment to let me know early if i'm going to be used, but I do realise this is just my own personal preference!

With that attitude no wonder B Scale was introduced and your conditions have worsened over the last 17 years. But I think that is a different thread.

Capt. Underpants you logic makes perfect sense, what was I thinking. When it all gets too hard or expensive, just give it away. It can’t get much worse.

You have to be right, you have seniority.

At least I can still request my days off. We won again.

Your diminishing pay package is much better than most here, so don’t expect guys to be jumping in to help you better your conditions. Go talk to some of your older 17 plus year Captains extending on lower conditions. But again, that another thread.:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

The colour of my AOA pin is yellow...whats' yours? I put MY job on the line in 1999, were you even here? Do not accuse me of cowardice.
The sky won't fall, jets will continue to take off and land, you'll have your 5-4-3, and the !!!! floor will laugh for weeks.
Go ahead, cut off your nose to spite your face...you're proving nothing except how short-sighted we are. Go ahead, show all TT's mates at the club that we are "million dollar morons".
:ugh:

How short sighted??? That's an interesting comment from someone that voted in B scale and then has seen his Cos reduced incrementally since. How was that move for your future earnings underpants? And loopde must have a lot of FAITH in his superiors to give it up for the team in his comments about the words "normally and abnormal circumstances". To me it sounds like the word....discretion. What does that word mean here at CX? Is it an accurate picture of what the crew really wants to do? or another decision that could be scrutinized by those above....that brings unwanted attention to oneself? maybe similar to not having to contractually fly cargo planes, but for the sake of ones career and upgrade potential, necessary? And your spiff about the color of your pin underpants, yes it may be yellow, but I wouldn't suggest that your part of the same team that have an entire career to deal with here at CX. I suspect your looking for a way to better the last few years of your career here rostering wise, without any interest of the potential downside. Do you care about the people below you and their career? no need to answer, we have already seen proof, and actions tend to speak a little louder. In conclusion....for those simple minded folk out there....if A scale is pro RP07, you have a pretty good idea that it is not the best plan for the rest of us long term. Some other ideas to ponder......most A scaler's truly believe (or want you to believe) that extending the retirement age to 60 will allow the rest of us to upgrade quicker!!! I'm still trying to figure that one out. And how many times have I heard that having DEFO for the pax fleet will not have any negative impact on upgrading our current SO's? As if spending more time on a lower payscale is better for their career earnings. I've said it before and I'll say it again...How many times has CX management actually came before the AOA with a proposal that actually benefits the pilot group? How many times? And how many proposals has this pilot group accepted, and then seen their Cos go down the !!!!!ter? Have we not learned anything?

WRONG. B scale was imposed.

WRONG again. I have at least another 9 years to go at Cathay.

Don't presume to know anything about me or my priorities. I answered the call when it was made, and did more than asked in helping a great number of the 49'ers find alternate employment through my (substantial) contacts in other airlines.

The alternative is DE Captains on all fleets. Trust me, this is a great truth. The jets WILL fly, with internally promoted crew or without. Now, what would you prefer to see? O8 is already in CX's sights as an immediate 3+ aircraft and all crews that go with it...

You clearly haven't been here that long or you don't receive any AOA mailings...why aren't you a member? Bitching all you like will not get your vote on the ballot.

It's about time you learned to recognise a better deal when you see one.

That is one scenario but litigation is not necessarily required or warranted.
Yes they can but do you think they will given the recruitement required to fill 43 airplanes? Who will come if it trully gets that bad? Yes the time is on our side.
Good for you but not everyone wants "W" patterns!
I concede that "A" days are good for commuters but realise that the company is getting 2 for 1 reserves with "A" days. Also, most commuters are ULH drivers and the fallback will pay you credit for reserves to go on top of your current 84 hours a month schedule so how many reserves do you think you will get?

that's right! No longer on the fence, it's No/No!:ok:

This is all so funny , I have a needle and thread on standby for when my sides split. Since joining this company I have consistently been required to do MORE for LESS. I fully expect this equation to continue until , just before I retire (or expire through exhaustion), I will be paying the company for the privilege of coming to work.
All this has occured whilst the AOA has been looking after my best interests!
The AOA ,when it did nothing after the 49 ers were sacked, threw the rope over the rafters , put its' head in the noose and kicked away the stool. All this voting for RP07 mark one or mark two or the fallback is just the reflex foot twitching of a corpse that has already had its' neck snapped.
Vote away, will make not a jot of difference. May make you feel as though you have some influence over your future.
No, I do not have a vote. But I do have an opinion.
No thanks, wouldn't want a vote with this association.

...if only you had a vote...dude.

I do and I have already!:)

Now that sounds like a guy who doesn't have the ability to vote!:}

WRONG. B scale was imposed.

and obviously accepted by A scale pilots!!!


Don't presume to know anything about me or my priorities. I answered the call when it was made, and did more than asked in helping a great number of the 49'ers find alternate employment through my (substantial) contacts in other airlines.

yoohoo!!! You deserve that yellow medal you speak so fondly of. You're absolutely right, I don't know why I ever doubted the solidarity and strength of the AOA. The outcome has certainly been desirable for those involved. Usually a UNION is ABLE to get the company to re-employ the unfortunate in getting their original job back, and keep it from happening again. Here at CX, everyone skirts around with their d@ck between their legs scared of what can happen next, and thus always accepting these !!!!! deals.



The alternative is DE Captains on all fleets. Trust me, this is a great truth. The jets WILL fly, with internally promoted crew or without. Now, what would you prefer to see? O8 is already in CX's sights as an immediate 3+ aircraft and all crews that go with it..


And this is a better option than transforming a ridiculous CT department? Its a great idea, hire people with little or no experience in the CX system, and think they somehow are better qualified and more suitable to do the job than someone from within!!! Another brilliant idea that makes so much sense.


You clearly haven't been here that long or you don't receive any AOA mailings...why aren't you a member? Bitching all you like will not get your vote on the ballot.


AOA mailings? are you serious. What proposals are you receiving that appear to be so lucrative and beneficial for the pilot group?


It's about time you learned to recognise a better deal when you see one

Once again....a better deal for who???


And a little off topic, but how can a union and pilot group ACCEPT pilots that brake union bans....like the 140 or so that currently wear the uniform. Why should these scabs be able to enjoy their jobs, when it's by their actions that makes this union so ineffective. They should be treated like traitors, not colleagues. We need to stop acting like castrated, spineless, cowards and start protecting our careers, profession, and Cos. The only current direction started well before my time, is to try ineffectively to HOLD on to what we have, only to see management chip away, while watching record profits, growth, and awards pass before us on a constant basis. If this isn't a time to start the improvement......WHEN? Ambitious plans and hard work call for proper compensation. Another bit that has yet to be observed, and could be just paranoia on my part (however I seriously doubt it) is how profit sharing is going to pan out this year. My guess is that the old percentage would have been triggered; however, with the new plan where we get something every year is in effect and pay out LESS than what we would have gotten. But I guess we should just be happy that they won't just go and by another DC3 to rig the numbers. It's just a guess, as I do not spend time crunching numbers, but it wouldn't surprise me the least. Another possible example of managements desire to take care of us. Smoke, mirrors and a crustacean like pilot group......utopia for the swire princes.

A quick question in response to your off topic comment, could you tell me where you stand with the 51 guys who took upgrades during that time?

Thanks

I find it unbelievable....and pathetic, and NEVER should have happened. It's just another clear sign of the solidarity of the union and its pilots..... managements wet dream. However, as similar as it may appear, they didn't accept employment when an BAN ON EMPLOYMENT was in place Judging by your remarks, you may be one of those turds that crossed the picket lines? If not, what do your think of them? I can only say Well done! Super job in making it past the interview! Maybe they can sign up to continually cut the legs from the group that they now belong! I can only say, that this UNION needs a serious overhaul. I'm sure the only response that they may have is they were only looking out for THEMSELVES, and was their only opportunity to get out of a turbo prop or a baron or whatever they may have been flying, and they'll look for nods of encouragement because now they have a better life and fly better equipment......but if it wasn't for uneducated, self absorbed, scabs this airline would be better off. Unfortunately people here don't view crossing the lines as serious acts, as elsewhere. Scabs should be ignored and treated accordingly on the flight deck and labeled as black sheep. It should be unbearable coming to work....period. Even though they will maintain their job, they should not be able to enjoy it. That is what I hope for their type.......pure misery for the rest of their career at CX. Whether that can happen or not is a pure mystery, for it takes leadership and principles to foster an effective UNION. These are obvious components missing at the present time. And if you are one of the few and from America, as your name implies, and are looking to get on with Fedex or another ALPA carrier, hopefully they will do their research on when employment was taken and under what conditions. Then, and probably only then, will you continually regret your prior career decisions.

Why does this happen one may ask. Something like solidarity and one for all, should not seem like such a foreign abstract idea for what was once a respected, educated profession. Is it that difficult to comprehend that these are our only strengths as a group? And I emphasize group!! And since the AOA has a terrible track record, maybe its time for some change, because the obvious direction is IMHO not very promising. I don't know, maybe its just their definition of NEGOTIATION vs mine, or their idea of a good deal vs mine. Or maybe, and I doubt that I'm alone, the union is currently a pathetic example of what should be driving our wages, rostering, and lifestyle in a positive direction. Not this sit down, roll over, and play dead nonsense, with a few letters that then try to convince the majority that this is the BEST deal that we could arrive at.

The comments you make have been done to death on previous threads so I will not continue them here.

You must live a very unhappy life in CX, do yourself a favor and either become president of the AOA or leave and work for a company that doesn't screw you like you say CX does.

I will now have to vote yes for RP07 :}

If CX management was happy to return to the Fallback position why did they agree to an extension of RP07 and a revote on the issue.

Why not enforce the original vote result and return to the Fallback if this is what they really want?

I still believe the company wants RP07.