And what is going to happen when the A50-1000 returns to SYD. Will these officers get back to their SYD base?

You are right, the 50-1000 won't see much of SYD. It will be used what it was designed for, ULH. On NA routes the 350 is a better cargo lifter especially to eastern NA. 777 will be used for capacity increase around Asia/pacific

Yeah, because the 777ER was designed for regional Asian flying.......🙄

Older planes get relegated to doing other jobs that they weren't necessarily designed for. You know that.

I think you'll find that commercially, the high yielding Australian traffic, and especially Sydney, will require the A50, precisely because it's not an old plane. They'll have to put the latest and greatest on this route, if they want to be 'customer centric'.

Think again, the Er with the new seating config will be a slot limited airport buster. Jam it full and go with no weight issues. The 350 is great but it is a runway limited airplane in some cases, it chews up the pavement.

I think you missed the sarcasm Natca... the clue was in 'customer centric'.

Ah yes I lack that ability, sorry bout that.

So looks like they've magically found exactly the number of base positions in Brisbane and Melbourne for the 10/11 guys n girls in Sydney that are required to move.

So were Brisbane and Melbourne under manned before or are they now over manned?

What do you reckon mate.....

Looking at the 330 and 350 roster, one can see over the last year or so a very significant percentage of flights, especially to Brisbane, are being crewed by HK based pilots. Couple that with the fact that a number of captains have retired off the base, and a number of FO's have gone back to HK for command, then I would opine that the base was very undermanned.
Many crew are suggesting these slots have just materialized out of thin air, and semantics aside, I would suggest they have increasingly been available, just simply not released by CX for every eligible crew to apply for.

Whilst I have no dog in this race, as I'm not interested in applying for an Australian base, it does seem fair that the Basings agreement, the very mechanism which allows crew to apply for a base, is the very same agreement that offers some protections to crew when there is a reduction in crewing.

As to whether this should be classed as a type change or reduction in crewing, some would say it's a subjective viewpoint depending on your own position. The company have made theirs, be it correct or not, some agree, and not surprisingly, some do not.
As evidenced by one AOA forum member using the phrase "based for life brigade" to describe based pilots, it is unfortunate that this again seems to have driven a wedge between hk crew and based crew, and has us dissecting the words and intent in the Basings agreement. We're all on the same team, we know where our vitriol should be directed.

Well said :ok:

Can you clarify? Does taking a base in Australia as an F/O then wipe out command bypass pay? Can't you have both?

Basings are candy for crews in Hong Kong... almost all ports are drastically undermanned just check the crew lists. There's no way the company will hand out transfers while CC and TB are in force.... regardless of cost savings.

Everybody. Sit on your hands, stop begging the company for basings. Don't do the company's work for them. They WILL get desperate enough to issue more basings. If not, then no probs, stay in HK, manage your roster, take the money and if you are not happy, quit and find a company that treats you properly. Don't sell our last bit of silverware for pennies.

Well said Trafalgar

Why would they 'get desperate enough to issue more basings'? The new joiners Traf is voluntarily training for them are so cheap to keep in Hong Kong there is no incentive for new bases any more.