Cathay Pacific Absence Management Program
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cathay Pacific Absence Management Program
I urge all pilots and members of the general public to refer to the Fragrant Harbour forum and the latest attack on flight safety by Cathay Pacific management.
An absence management program has been introduced. Pilots who report unfit for duty 6 or more times a year will be denied overseas basings and may have promotions blocked.
This illegal and dangerous tactic is the latest effort by management in an ongoing saga of attacks against employees.
Please express your disapproval to this latest incident.
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 28 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 28 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 30 April 2001).]
An absence management program has been introduced. Pilots who report unfit for duty 6 or more times a year will be denied overseas basings and may have promotions blocked.
This illegal and dangerous tactic is the latest effort by management in an ongoing saga of attacks against employees.
Please express your disapproval to this latest incident.
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 28 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 28 April 2001).]
[This message has been edited by CATHAY PATHETIC (edited 30 April 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Have the management of CX lost their minds? This policy can only result in much reduced levels of safety. This is the gravest threat yet to the travelling public. Many recorded accidents in the annals of aviation have been due in no small part to tired/ill/disabled aircrew. CX management are now pushing their aircrew dangerously close to the edge of the cliff. The travelling public should be aware that the airline has such little regard for their safety that they will willingly compromise it for the sake of crew intimidation. Sick.
Guest
Posts: n/a
The FAA is being made aware that a foreign carrier that operates to the USA has implemented a punative program designed to coerce aircrew to fly when they are 'unfit'. The FAA office in JFK seems to be particularly interested in the details, and a full copy of the 'new policy' is on it's way to them. The fact that they have been made aware of 'other' incidents that have been committed under their noses the past few years seems to have convinced them that Cathay Pacific needs to come under a 'bit more scrutiny'..... Would love to be a fly on the wall of our management offices when the first 'request' for info from the FAA arrives...... 
Guest
Posts: n/a
You never hear about any Emirates driver on this forum.
At least you Cathay Guy's are allowed to get on PPrune.
Similar manegement over there I am sure only no pilot union.
Does anybody have the address of the FAA guy looking into it.
------------------
Smooth Trimmer
At least you Cathay Guy's are allowed to get on PPrune.
Similar manegement over there I am sure only no pilot union.
Does anybody have the address of the FAA guy looking into it.
------------------
Smooth Trimmer
Guest
Posts: n/a
It's a shame when Civil Aviation Authorities have to enforce a minimum acceptable standard for Carriers to adhere to. Even worse when its not your own. Hopefully the FAA will tell CX to wind their heads in. It's happening too often, as the Ansett 767 grounding shows.
PS, I'm an Emirates driver.
PS, I'm an Emirates driver.
Guest
Posts: n/a
CX management have managed to turn this airline, in only a few short years, from the best employer to without a doubt the worst. It isn't an issue of money, it is to do with the complete and utter lack or respect and honesty when dealing with their aircrew. The indignities visited upon the pilots of CX wouldn't past muster in a flying club, moreless a 'respected' international airline. This latest idea of an 'Absence management program' begs the question: 'Why all of a sudden is aircrew sickness a problem'....? The years of abuse and frustration have finally resulted in a completely unmanageable airline. Instead of addressing the reasons for increased sickness, these mindless idiots decide instead to try and combat the sickness itself....!! Good grief, where in hell do they find these people....? This program will be the straw that breaks the camels back, and the very existence of such a program should be considered a direct threat to airline safety. The pilots of CX will make sure that the worlds aviation authorities are made FULLY aware of what is going on at this sad airline, and advise them that an accident is now near inevitable. Only in a third world country, with third world management could things have ever reached this stage.
Guest
Posts: n/a
..copied from the 'Fragrant Harbour Forum':
Gentlemen, just to keep you updated. Very soon you will all be provided with a confidental reporting number for the FAA. If you are on ANY north american operation, you may call this and report any incident of 'crew sickness' that is included in the operating crew due to 'management coercion'. The FAA has a long history of utter confidentiality on these issues, and will not even identify the flight number or date. They will compile a 'dossier' of incidents, and then 'invite' CX management to address their 'concerns'. Needless to say, a strong response by our aircrew will result in more trouble for Barley and Co than they ever thought possible. We MUST use EVERY channel available to defeat and humiliate these cretins. The FAA takes very seriously ANY implication to aviation safety in their airspace, especially by foreign carriers who are violating rules that apply to US carriers. I can assure you that your efforts will not go unrewarded. In addition, steps are being taken to place articles in many of the main business and literary journals, both here in Canada, and the US. I suggest those of us based in other countries take similar steps. This pathetic attempt at company intimidation will result in their very undoing. Slick Nick, The Pygmy and all you other pathetic individuals who call yourselves managers, be warned that the results of this mis-guided and venal policy will be layed in your laps. The first incident that is attributable to a 'medically unfit' aircrew who was operating WILL result in civil and criminal charges.....if not in HK, then you WILL end up answering in another country. You WILL pay a heavy price for this......
Gentlemen, just to keep you updated. Very soon you will all be provided with a confidental reporting number for the FAA. If you are on ANY north american operation, you may call this and report any incident of 'crew sickness' that is included in the operating crew due to 'management coercion'. The FAA has a long history of utter confidentiality on these issues, and will not even identify the flight number or date. They will compile a 'dossier' of incidents, and then 'invite' CX management to address their 'concerns'. Needless to say, a strong response by our aircrew will result in more trouble for Barley and Co than they ever thought possible. We MUST use EVERY channel available to defeat and humiliate these cretins. The FAA takes very seriously ANY implication to aviation safety in their airspace, especially by foreign carriers who are violating rules that apply to US carriers. I can assure you that your efforts will not go unrewarded. In addition, steps are being taken to place articles in many of the main business and literary journals, both here in Canada, and the US. I suggest those of us based in other countries take similar steps. This pathetic attempt at company intimidation will result in their very undoing. Slick Nick, The Pygmy and all you other pathetic individuals who call yourselves managers, be warned that the results of this mis-guided and venal policy will be layed in your laps. The first incident that is attributable to a 'medically unfit' aircrew who was operating WILL result in civil and criminal charges.....if not in HK, then you WILL end up answering in another country. You WILL pay a heavy price for this......
Guest
Posts: n/a
This has the be the most mis-managed airline in the world. Lorenzo thought he could slash and burn his way to profits too. It was only when the airline in question finally got a management that valued it's employees that the reputation, and financial results of the carrier dramatically improved. This collection of idiots seem to think they can achieve the same with completely opposing tactics. I wouldn't book a ticket on CX in the next 90 days if I were you.....
Guest
Posts: n/a
I don't know who are the bigger idiots, the managers, or the crew for putting up with it, God helps those who help themselves, so why don't you go elsewhere, CX's crews are sufficiently respected to get a job in most airlines, why continue to allow yourselves to be humiliated by these guys??? I'm an observer, for a long time, but all I ever see here is words, I never read of affirmative actions. They're going to keep going if you guys don't stand up and be counted for once.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Righ-On Kanger.
Quite a few FO`s have LEFT CX in the last couple of years. Consider that pre 93 this was THE airline for pilots to COME to. Simple statement but fact, and not discounting the Ozzie and Can. SO`s,who are blinded by the $$ signs and cant resist going to HK. I admit that working in Oz or Northern Canada rather than going to HK may look good in the short term. Remember guys and gals, once an expat always an expat! Particularly when it comes time to apply to that homey airline when you`ve got that type rating! BUT THEN WHAT WILL YOUR COS BE AT THAT TIME AT CX ?
Persevere To Succeed
Quite a few FO`s have LEFT CX in the last couple of years. Consider that pre 93 this was THE airline for pilots to COME to. Simple statement but fact, and not discounting the Ozzie and Can. SO`s,who are blinded by the $$ signs and cant resist going to HK. I admit that working in Oz or Northern Canada rather than going to HK may look good in the short term. Remember guys and gals, once an expat always an expat! Particularly when it comes time to apply to that homey airline when you`ve got that type rating! BUT THEN WHAT WILL YOUR COS BE AT THAT TIME AT CX ?
Persevere To Succeed
Guest
Posts: n/a
Can someone explain to me (after reading the rest of this post) why monitoring the sickness of crew should compromise flight safety?
There seems to be a lot of assumptions here.
You all claim to be professional pilots. You all seem to admit that you do not work (or at least DID NOT work)for a mickey mouse airline. (Sentiment noted!)
On the subject of professional pilots:- Surely none of you would put yourselves at risk (forget the 100s behind you) by flying if you were unfit to do so. Naturally you wouldn't, irrespective of the consequences. So if that is the case (and someone can correct me if I am wrong) why do you feel the need to voice an opinion on the matter?
Mr Water Check's comment implying that an airline should treat its pilots with respect and honesty is laughable. Can someone tell me what makes a pilot more honest than the next man? As for respect:- You are payed to do a job that most of you love doing and as Mr Kangar says, if you don't like it ..... leave.
Of course none of you commenting or moaning about this policy are intending to leave.
'Empty vessels.....'
'Those that can do. Those that can't teach.'
The truth of the matter is pilots are no different to any other people although I appreciate that many of you think you are. They are prone to take the odd 'sicky' like everyone else.
Now you may think that CX is being a bit silly with this policy. I would have have a tendency to sympathise with you if this was unique. However no matter what line of work you are in, people are always watching you. I think the only mistake CX management made was making it public.
Mr Kangar, to a certain extent, has missed what this excersise is about. Why pay a pilot n thousand a month when you can get someone to do the job for n/2 thousand per month. If this policy results in you leaving then so what. The airline will replace you. Sure there may be a few spates of industrial action along the way but the long term picture has to be looked at beyond the flared nostrils of one or two self opinionated pilots.
If you think monitoring staff sickness compromises safety, it is clear that you feel you could be pressurised into flying when you are sick. If that is the case you should give up flying.
If a pilot is always sick then maybe he shouldn't be flying at all.
No doubt I will be posting later.
There seems to be a lot of assumptions here.
You all claim to be professional pilots. You all seem to admit that you do not work (or at least DID NOT work)for a mickey mouse airline. (Sentiment noted!)
On the subject of professional pilots:- Surely none of you would put yourselves at risk (forget the 100s behind you) by flying if you were unfit to do so. Naturally you wouldn't, irrespective of the consequences. So if that is the case (and someone can correct me if I am wrong) why do you feel the need to voice an opinion on the matter?
Mr Water Check's comment implying that an airline should treat its pilots with respect and honesty is laughable. Can someone tell me what makes a pilot more honest than the next man? As for respect:- You are payed to do a job that most of you love doing and as Mr Kangar says, if you don't like it ..... leave.
Of course none of you commenting or moaning about this policy are intending to leave.
'Empty vessels.....'
'Those that can do. Those that can't teach.'
The truth of the matter is pilots are no different to any other people although I appreciate that many of you think you are. They are prone to take the odd 'sicky' like everyone else.
Now you may think that CX is being a bit silly with this policy. I would have have a tendency to sympathise with you if this was unique. However no matter what line of work you are in, people are always watching you. I think the only mistake CX management made was making it public.
Mr Kangar, to a certain extent, has missed what this excersise is about. Why pay a pilot n thousand a month when you can get someone to do the job for n/2 thousand per month. If this policy results in you leaving then so what. The airline will replace you. Sure there may be a few spates of industrial action along the way but the long term picture has to be looked at beyond the flared nostrils of one or two self opinionated pilots.
If you think monitoring staff sickness compromises safety, it is clear that you feel you could be pressurised into flying when you are sick. If that is the case you should give up flying.
If a pilot is always sick then maybe he shouldn't be flying at all.
No doubt I will be posting later.
Guest
Posts: n/a
...everyone, don't (please) respond to David. He either is completely niaeve, are works for managment. Treat him (and 411A) with the silent contempt he deserves. If he doesn't understand the implications, then there is no point explaining it to him. Ignore him, and others like him.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Depends whether it's enlightened discussion or not. Kangar writes that the disaffected should leave. Easy when you type it fast. And what of the family, schooling, spouse/partner, seniority, and the probable fact that what you REALLY want is to resolve the problem with your current employer and get on with life? No one really wants to kiss off years of work with a carrier simply due to a short term management problem.
What I read here is a call for help. the policy is dangerous and irresponsible. It is not a reason to leave a life and start anew on the other side of the world.
Good luck to all CX crews. Stay together and fight this. And above all...check 6...
What I read here is a call for help. the policy is dangerous and irresponsible. It is not a reason to leave a life and start anew on the other side of the world.
Good luck to all CX crews. Stay together and fight this. And above all...check 6...