:yuk: Oof it's a little too early for that!

Operating FO on the JFK seems to be re-enstated. Final warning letter iso dismissal.

Operating CA and Augmenting CA, still awaiting outcome of appeal.

How long does the final written warning stay active on your file? Too lazy to search !

Not a firing but...
 

VP CC has jumped ship, apparently with no notice as the email was sent by AAR and not LB herself as usually was the case when she had something to say.

They cited 'personal reasons'.

Hers, or EK's is the question. Their loss, LB seemed like on of the few who actually 'got it' when it came to keeping your staff happy (or at least tried to do something about issues that affected the CC on the line and at home)

Im hearing (unconfirmed) reports that the person in HR in charge of pilot recruiting has been shown the door as well.

More leaks than the Titanic they said.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...bg/mobilebasic

Hopefully this link works

You can pretty much replace the words "cabin crew" for "pilot" and it hits the nail on the head.

OK, so in the name of your secrecy, you are willing to let hundreds die in a disaster instead of saying what happened and learning from it. Extremely unprofessional. And it is the public's business, to have the rest of the pilot's out there learn from this mistake in Cochin.

JammedStab,
Does your Company release ASR info to public audience?
I don't think so...

MS

waltair

Your ignorance of how the legal structure of such a scheme works is clearly evident in your post. We're talking about employees leaving the Company or being fired. We are also talking about three separately accessed funds, all of which are independent of each other. So, I'll say it again, the ONLY fund the Company will have any right to withhold is the A fund. Banks do not control access to the accounts, the trustees do. As for the trumped up criminal charges to access a few hundred thousand dollars? Seriously?

Just because you're paranoid, it doesn't mean everyone is out to get you!

Harry

The A fund is the majority of the provident Fund
 

Harry,

Lets fully develop the A fund situation.

The A fund is one portion of the provident fund and comes from company contributions, the B fund is a mandatory contribution from the pilot and the C fund is an additional ( and optional ) contribution from the pilot.

The A fund will make up the majority of the combined provident fund if just the A and B portions are funded over the years with EK.
The C a/c can be significant depending on how much the pilots elects to contribute however is is generally a much smaller amount then the A a/c.
Both the B and C funds are funded solely by the pilot, the A fund is funded solely by the company.

Should the company elect to withhold the A fund then the pilot will forgo the majority of the combined funds in the provident fund.

true, I have not heard of a situation where the company has withheld the A fund but you just never know what the future holds at the this place.

Your prior posts on the A fund imply that it is just a small portion of the provident fund, your opinion is incorrect.

Harry you are indeed a cod,

Desdi

Just because your or my company doesn't release info doesn't mean that you, yourself could save many lives by anonomously posting safety critical info.

Having said that, would it change your mind? I don't think so either.

By coincidence, subsequent to the 777 crash in Dubai, it came out through the rumour mill that my company had a similar incident. Nearly had a tailstrike but got away with it by inches. My company kept it a secret(involved a higher up) and I only heard about it many months later. Imagine if we on this thread ended this idea of the importance of secrecy over safety(even if the company continues the secrecy) and provided information to each other to prevent disasters. The secrecy method means we only learn from disasters with the published report as opposed to the similar incidents that pre-dated the disaster.

Seems like secrecy rules on this thread among the general population though. Perhaps they feel it is more important.

Desdihold

Yes, I see what you're getting at but I don't think my posts imply anything other than stating what you yourself have agreed with. Regardless of the monetary value of the fund, the A fund is paid at the discretion of the Company. The other two aren't. That is NOT opinion, that is fact.

Whether people choose to contribute a portion, large or small, of their salary into the C fund is irrelevant. They can invest in bitcoin, the next fancy pyramid scheme or Scandinavian pine forests for all I care. My argument is based on what the Company can and can't do with the money, not how much it will personally mean to the individual as an overall percentage of the 3 funds. It goes without saying that the more years you do here, the more you'd have to lose should the Company withhold its contribution.

Harry

[QUOTE=harry the cod;10024390]

“ So, I'll say it again, the ONLY fund the Company will have any right to withhold is the A fund.”

It’s funny how you swing it Harry.
You still try your hardest ( “ONLY”) to make it sound like everything is just fine.
Well let me break it to you.
75% of something is to many of us a substantial number.

But hey, for us that’s been here longer then a week know what you are all about.

yes but JS, in most countries you won't land up in jail for sharing confidential safety info publicly if it is indeed in the public interest.

not so if the poster is from or in the UAE.

Do you have an example of that happening Wings? Or is this more galley talk?

Don, I'm referring to the UAE cyber crimes law, if you are found in breach of it then yes you can go to jail. (Spreading rumor, false information, or any kind of posting that can cause damage to reputation, commercial interest yada yada)

Don't forget that we all agreed to abide by the ERM which includes keeping confidential company info just that. Half the posts on pprune are technically in breach of it, just lucky for us they seem to not have the time to follow up on most of it (although they have been known to pull people into the office to give them a rap across the knuckles for posting in here, and that is just for chitchat)

if someone were to post up confidential safety info here, whether true or not, and they can identify that person, I personally wouldn't be worrying about whether jail time is a rumor or not. I'd be worrying about how to get myself out of dodge.

There is no 'whistleblower' legislation in the UAE. That's not galley talk, that is fact.

Re-posted with important added words which have been highlighted.

Just because your or my company doesn't release info doesn't mean that you, yourself could save many lives by anonomously posting safety critical info.

Having said that, would it change your mind? I don't think so either.

By coincidence, subsequent to the 777 crash in Dubai, it came out through the rumour mill that my company had had a similar incident prior to the Dubai crash. Nearly had a tailstrike but got away with it by inches, then the thrust was manually added. My company kept it a secret(as it involved a higher up) and I only heard about it many months later. Imagine if we on this thread ended this idea of the importance of secrecy over safety(even if the company continues the secrecy) and provided information to each other to prevent disasters. The secrecy method means we only learn from disasters with the published report as opposed to the similar incidents that pre-dated the disaster. It might have prevented the disaster at your company. I hope you can help prevent one at my company.

Seems like secrecy rules on this thread among the general population though. Perhaps they feel it is more important.

Sounds like she’s a keeper ;)

Mach .888

Swing? Well, let me break it to you too. The employee's fund is 5%, EK's contribution is 12% becoming 15% after 10 years. Like for like investment, the A fund will NEVER equate to 75% of the total. And if you'd bothered to read the last post, you'd see that I do indeed acknowledge that over time, the amount itself could be substantial. That, however, was not part of the original debate. We were debating whether the Company can access funds OTHER than the A.

I don't make the policy, nor do I necessarily support it but it's important people have the facts before going off on one!

Harry