SQ Pilots - Give ALPAS Your View
Guest
Posts: n/a
INSIDER107 Again well said. I think De Vaz still has not got the picture.He wants to leave July to spend more time with his family having once more shown that he has screwed the pilot force,but I now believe the Generals know that he is the main source of the problems and he will be the sacrificial lamb but the heart of the problems in SIA lie far deeper than that one man, awful as he is !
Guest
Posts: n/a
For all interested readers who do not have access to the ALPAS Collective Agreement (CA) Update of 27 March 2001, I enclose the following, verbatim (parenthesis are mine) <parenthesis is ALPAS>:
Quote:
"For many reasons, the Exco (Executive Council) has been intentionally muted, as any information put to the members may be misconstrued as agitating the members or taken out of context. However, incomplete and inaccurate information disseminated by Management at various Company forums and publications has necessitated this response.
The Makan Kechil of 20 March 2001 was again well attended. There was general interest in the Court proceedings of 12 March 2001, and the outcome of the meeting with the Company on the 19th March 2001. For those interested, a verbatim transcript of the Court proceedings is available for your viewing at the Association's office.
As for the CA meeting on the 19th, the Company maintained its now well-publicised stance, i.e. the original proposal which was rejected on 2 January 2001 was still available except that the agreement would be dated 2 January 2001 instead of 15 December 2001 (surely 2000?). Without saying too much, the Company expressed their (sic) dismay at the Association filing Section 17 of the Industrial Relations Act. On our part, we explained that the Association's action was necessitated as a consequence of the Company's filing under Section 39(4). The invoking of Section17 was to legally encourage the Company to negotiate. It remains the view of the Association, which was also the view of the President of the IAC (Industrial Arbitration Court) that "… a negotiated settlement, an amicable settlement is much, much better than an order imposed by the Court"
At the B744 Fleet Meeting on 23rd March, the Company made it explicitly clear that with the presentation of the Company's counter proposals to the Association on 22nd March 2001, the original package that was to be effective on 2 January 2001 was no longer available. The full content of this latest proposal is attached for your perusal (separate enclosure):
The principal changes, as compared to the package that was voted out, are:
1. The exclusion of Second Officers and Pilots on Expatriate terms (classic divide and rule).
2. The sole discretion of the Company to pay new First Officers and Captains a salary other than at the starting of a salary range (i.e. entry at higher salary increment to feed new meat into the grinder).
3. That the Company has the right to optimise COP's to the limit of the AOC <we will seek to clarify item 11> (i.e. 100 hours per 28 days, 1000 hours per annum).
4. There is no mention of wage adjustments for incumbents (to intimidate).
5. There is no mention of back pay (again to intimidate).
6. The date of signing will have to be clarified (to generate uncertainty).
It is difficult to be optimistic under these circumstances but we are seeking the Court's indulgence in utilising the Ministry of Manpower to assist in reaching a mediated agreement. However, if by the 8th April 2001, the CA is not concluded, we are required to inform the Court and a date for arbitration will be set. We sincerely hope that the advice of the President of IAC will not go unheeded"
Unquote.
There is an Executive Council message which follows the above and is still dated 27 March 2001.
Quote:
STOP PRESS: We have just received a response from the Registrar of the IAC and we quote "The President has directed me to inform you that he not only has no objection to your proposal to seek the good offices of the MOM's Director of Labour Relations to conciliate the matter, but he would encourage the parties to avail themselves of the mechanism set out in Section 20 of the IR Act"
Unquote.
As of the 8th April 2001, the CA was not concluded, therefore ALPAS has so advised the Court and a date for arbitration is now awaited.
May I sincerely request that any readers who care to comment on the above along the lines of "you should not be airing the Company's/Association's dirty linen in public", kindly desist. It must now be perfectly obvious to anyone with even the most modest of perception that we are now and have been for some time, dealing with an airline management that is out of control, out of touch with reality and "fiddling while Rome burns" and as such, this is a matter of the most urgent public concern.
One can only marvel at the management bunker mentality which perpetrates such as the above and which evidently disregards the vital requirement for an urgent safety audit post "SQ006", the collapsing morale of pilots bereft of credible leadership, the increasing bitterness and cynicism of members continually evaded by de Vaz & Co in their search for professional respect and a just settlement to the CA dispute plus the seeming desire to turn away desperately need recruits with their endless examples of an entrenched obduracy.
What can the Court be thinking of SQ as the drama unfolds?
Quote:
"For many reasons, the Exco (Executive Council) has been intentionally muted, as any information put to the members may be misconstrued as agitating the members or taken out of context. However, incomplete and inaccurate information disseminated by Management at various Company forums and publications has necessitated this response.
The Makan Kechil of 20 March 2001 was again well attended. There was general interest in the Court proceedings of 12 March 2001, and the outcome of the meeting with the Company on the 19th March 2001. For those interested, a verbatim transcript of the Court proceedings is available for your viewing at the Association's office.
As for the CA meeting on the 19th, the Company maintained its now well-publicised stance, i.e. the original proposal which was rejected on 2 January 2001 was still available except that the agreement would be dated 2 January 2001 instead of 15 December 2001 (surely 2000?). Without saying too much, the Company expressed their (sic) dismay at the Association filing Section 17 of the Industrial Relations Act. On our part, we explained that the Association's action was necessitated as a consequence of the Company's filing under Section 39(4). The invoking of Section17 was to legally encourage the Company to negotiate. It remains the view of the Association, which was also the view of the President of the IAC (Industrial Arbitration Court) that "… a negotiated settlement, an amicable settlement is much, much better than an order imposed by the Court"
At the B744 Fleet Meeting on 23rd March, the Company made it explicitly clear that with the presentation of the Company's counter proposals to the Association on 22nd March 2001, the original package that was to be effective on 2 January 2001 was no longer available. The full content of this latest proposal is attached for your perusal (separate enclosure):
The principal changes, as compared to the package that was voted out, are:
1. The exclusion of Second Officers and Pilots on Expatriate terms (classic divide and rule).
2. The sole discretion of the Company to pay new First Officers and Captains a salary other than at the starting of a salary range (i.e. entry at higher salary increment to feed new meat into the grinder).
3. That the Company has the right to optimise COP's to the limit of the AOC <we will seek to clarify item 11> (i.e. 100 hours per 28 days, 1000 hours per annum).
4. There is no mention of wage adjustments for incumbents (to intimidate).
5. There is no mention of back pay (again to intimidate).
6. The date of signing will have to be clarified (to generate uncertainty).
It is difficult to be optimistic under these circumstances but we are seeking the Court's indulgence in utilising the Ministry of Manpower to assist in reaching a mediated agreement. However, if by the 8th April 2001, the CA is not concluded, we are required to inform the Court and a date for arbitration will be set. We sincerely hope that the advice of the President of IAC will not go unheeded"
Unquote.
There is an Executive Council message which follows the above and is still dated 27 March 2001.
Quote:
STOP PRESS: We have just received a response from the Registrar of the IAC and we quote "The President has directed me to inform you that he not only has no objection to your proposal to seek the good offices of the MOM's Director of Labour Relations to conciliate the matter, but he would encourage the parties to avail themselves of the mechanism set out in Section 20 of the IR Act"
Unquote.
As of the 8th April 2001, the CA was not concluded, therefore ALPAS has so advised the Court and a date for arbitration is now awaited.
May I sincerely request that any readers who care to comment on the above along the lines of "you should not be airing the Company's/Association's dirty linen in public", kindly desist. It must now be perfectly obvious to anyone with even the most modest of perception that we are now and have been for some time, dealing with an airline management that is out of control, out of touch with reality and "fiddling while Rome burns" and as such, this is a matter of the most urgent public concern.
One can only marvel at the management bunker mentality which perpetrates such as the above and which evidently disregards the vital requirement for an urgent safety audit post "SQ006", the collapsing morale of pilots bereft of credible leadership, the increasing bitterness and cynicism of members continually evaded by de Vaz & Co in their search for professional respect and a just settlement to the CA dispute plus the seeming desire to turn away desperately need recruits with their endless examples of an entrenched obduracy.
What can the Court be thinking of SQ as the drama unfolds?
Guest
Posts: n/a
Insider107
There is an old saying that "for deaf people to hear, you need to make an explosion."
Don't you think that MdV and gang are not behaving like fools, they are behaving like idiots. I would put it this way that this can only be termed as a disastrous delibrate approach by the gang. I always thought over these years that every one who works for SQ has to put company's interest above yours. Sorry, I was wrong, now I feel that these are we pilots only, who have to sacrifice your own interest for the company's.
Obiviously, it is clear now that the above does not apply to the coterie of MdV. I read every where that SQ wants to expand. The way CA impasse is being handled, we feel that forget biding for Air India with TATA of India, they are not worth selling them the shares of Air Burundi or Air Rawanda. I don't know whether these companies exists in africa or not but even if they exist, they are worth nothing.
"DOES SQ WANTS TO EXPAND OR CONTRACT" what do the so called Damagers (Managers) want.
Is there any right thinking person in the hierarchy of the SQ, who can avoid this disaster about the CA or are we wanting more of SQ006 for which the MALT has been put for brewing at the 4th floor(STC).
When we have spoken to the local fodder also, they say I need to save my back side before thinking about the company I work for. What a sad state of affairs. Moral of the front work force absolutely at the NADIR.
May God bless one of the best airline in the world.
There is an old saying that "for deaf people to hear, you need to make an explosion."
Don't you think that MdV and gang are not behaving like fools, they are behaving like idiots. I would put it this way that this can only be termed as a disastrous delibrate approach by the gang. I always thought over these years that every one who works for SQ has to put company's interest above yours. Sorry, I was wrong, now I feel that these are we pilots only, who have to sacrifice your own interest for the company's.
Obiviously, it is clear now that the above does not apply to the coterie of MdV. I read every where that SQ wants to expand. The way CA impasse is being handled, we feel that forget biding for Air India with TATA of India, they are not worth selling them the shares of Air Burundi or Air Rawanda. I don't know whether these companies exists in africa or not but even if they exist, they are worth nothing.
"DOES SQ WANTS TO EXPAND OR CONTRACT" what do the so called Damagers (Managers) want.
Is there any right thinking person in the hierarchy of the SQ, who can avoid this disaster about the CA or are we wanting more of SQ006 for which the MALT has been put for brewing at the 4th floor(STC).
When we have spoken to the local fodder also, they say I need to save my back side before thinking about the company I work for. What a sad state of affairs. Moral of the front work force absolutely at the NADIR.
May God bless one of the best airline in the world.
Guest
Posts: n/a
SQ pilots will be most interested to note that the ALPAS Extraordinary General Meeting (EGM) vote of 2 May 2001 produced an 83% majority in favour of returning to the Company an acceptance of terms equal and not worse than the Collective Agreement (CA) offer of 15 December 2000, made by SQ to ALPAS.
Perhaps both parties plus the Industrial Arbitration Court (IAC) will be pleased by this outcome, given that SQ goes along with it - the Members, as they will now receive their substantial backpayent, the Company, as it will be able to advertise its new improved pay scales to attract desperately needed pilots plus operate the 777 beyond the present 4200 NM agreement and the IAC (for which, read the regime) as dirty washing will not now (hopefully) require to be publicly laundered.
Members may, however, wish to reflect that a course of action taken along the lines advocated at the very start of this thread would certainly have produced a fair measure of goodwill from SQ/IAC with acceptance of the numbers, which, after months of subsequent effort look not to have been bettered and, more importantly, this goodwill would have allowed all the energy and emotion of the subsequent negotiations and maneuvers to have been, perhaps, successfully directed towards achieving the much more important CA signature date of 21 November 1998, sequencing expiry of the former CA on 20 November 1998. As previously mentioned, this outcome would have had the merit of ensuring a 3 year term (rather than now potentially a 5+ year term) for the new CA, with negotiation starting shortly in anticipation of an expiry date of 20 November 2001. This would have allowed SQ to gracefully further increase pay rates in November 2001, following realisation that even the “new improved” rates were not assuaging the now publicly admitted desperate shortage of pilots.
In anticipation, therefore, does ALPAS have a strategy to counter the next possible move by SQ to boost pilot recruitment - either the payment of a joining bonus or pilot entry at a higher salary increment than first year level, both of which would be detrimental to the past efforts and loyalty of presently serving pilots.
Views on this last matter are keenly sought from ALPAS members.
Perhaps both parties plus the Industrial Arbitration Court (IAC) will be pleased by this outcome, given that SQ goes along with it - the Members, as they will now receive their substantial backpayent, the Company, as it will be able to advertise its new improved pay scales to attract desperately needed pilots plus operate the 777 beyond the present 4200 NM agreement and the IAC (for which, read the regime) as dirty washing will not now (hopefully) require to be publicly laundered.
Members may, however, wish to reflect that a course of action taken along the lines advocated at the very start of this thread would certainly have produced a fair measure of goodwill from SQ/IAC with acceptance of the numbers, which, after months of subsequent effort look not to have been bettered and, more importantly, this goodwill would have allowed all the energy and emotion of the subsequent negotiations and maneuvers to have been, perhaps, successfully directed towards achieving the much more important CA signature date of 21 November 1998, sequencing expiry of the former CA on 20 November 1998. As previously mentioned, this outcome would have had the merit of ensuring a 3 year term (rather than now potentially a 5+ year term) for the new CA, with negotiation starting shortly in anticipation of an expiry date of 20 November 2001. This would have allowed SQ to gracefully further increase pay rates in November 2001, following realisation that even the “new improved” rates were not assuaging the now publicly admitted desperate shortage of pilots.
In anticipation, therefore, does ALPAS have a strategy to counter the next possible move by SQ to boost pilot recruitment - either the payment of a joining bonus or pilot entry at a higher salary increment than first year level, both of which would be detrimental to the past efforts and loyalty of presently serving pilots.
Views on this last matter are keenly sought from ALPAS members.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Outcome of EGM of 2nd May:
There is a mixed feeling amongest the members of ALPA-S here in SQ.
Some feel that the best has been achieved, others feel betrayed.
Many a time I feel is it really worth having a pilots' association in this island state. Earlier 92% of the member pilots had voted against accepting the proposed CA. 4 months later, 82% of the member pilots have voted for accepting the same CA.
It appears that these are not the members who control their mind and thought, actually their mind and thought are controlled by someone external forces.
Lot more is left to be answered like:
--- who were the people advocating against the proposed CA in January.
--- Who were the people came out with the thought of approaching the minister to resolve the impasse over IAC and CA.
--- who are the people calling for an EGM for giving the mandate to Executive Council of ALPA-S to accept the CA.
--- Who were the people advertising so vigorously among the pilots that they should not waste their vote on the 2nd of May. I have never seen such kind of compaign in FCC about not wasting your vote (not even during the elections of ALPA-S)
--- who are the people to gain the max. out of the CA.
It appears the whole game is stage managed here in SQ by few people. The members have no thought of their own. They all are so scared to air their views anywhere on the island. These so called people had created fear-psychosis in the minds of the pilots in January and once again in in May now. Wake up you guys have your own thoughts.
Understands that when we voted against the CA in January the "Generals" in the management thought the same way as if they were still in the armed forces and this was the mutiny and revolt by the soldiers. This mutiny had to be crushed and lesson taught to the soldiers for the days to come. Well they have done so and are victorious.
We all have sealed our fate by voting for the CA on 2nd May. SQ as a company has gained every thing in the years to come.
In future whenever new CA has to be signed there should be no negotiations (to avoid wasting time). The CA should be presented to the Exe. Council for signature and if not signed, you know the the shape of the things to come. So guys we have shown that we don't exists.
WHAT A SHAME FOR ALPA-S AND ALL OF US.
Its high time that the ALPA-S office should be closed down and we all can even save the membership fee what we are paying to the ALPA-s.
Havean was not going to fall for us if IAC would have decided the fate of the CA. Whatever stand we had taken should have been maintained. This would have been better and we would have remained united. Unity and integrity is paramount to the existance of any association. Now what have we done, for few thousands dollers, we have sold the unity and integrity of ALPA-S for the years to come. The world pilots' bodies are progressing from where to where. Let us look at our fate. Certainly this is no way to run an association. As it is earlier there was a divide in the union. We guys on 744 never thought that the A-310 crowd ever existed in the ALPA-S but now we have demonstrated that none of us exist. Its a total SHAME. The executive council of ALPA-s, we should buy them bangles and should hang our head in shame ........
There is a mixed feeling amongest the members of ALPA-S here in SQ.
Some feel that the best has been achieved, others feel betrayed.
Many a time I feel is it really worth having a pilots' association in this island state. Earlier 92% of the member pilots had voted against accepting the proposed CA. 4 months later, 82% of the member pilots have voted for accepting the same CA.
It appears that these are not the members who control their mind and thought, actually their mind and thought are controlled by someone external forces.
Lot more is left to be answered like:
--- who were the people advocating against the proposed CA in January.
--- Who were the people came out with the thought of approaching the minister to resolve the impasse over IAC and CA.
--- who are the people calling for an EGM for giving the mandate to Executive Council of ALPA-S to accept the CA.
--- Who were the people advertising so vigorously among the pilots that they should not waste their vote on the 2nd of May. I have never seen such kind of compaign in FCC about not wasting your vote (not even during the elections of ALPA-S)
--- who are the people to gain the max. out of the CA.
It appears the whole game is stage managed here in SQ by few people. The members have no thought of their own. They all are so scared to air their views anywhere on the island. These so called people had created fear-psychosis in the minds of the pilots in January and once again in in May now. Wake up you guys have your own thoughts.
Understands that when we voted against the CA in January the "Generals" in the management thought the same way as if they were still in the armed forces and this was the mutiny and revolt by the soldiers. This mutiny had to be crushed and lesson taught to the soldiers for the days to come. Well they have done so and are victorious.
We all have sealed our fate by voting for the CA on 2nd May. SQ as a company has gained every thing in the years to come.
In future whenever new CA has to be signed there should be no negotiations (to avoid wasting time). The CA should be presented to the Exe. Council for signature and if not signed, you know the the shape of the things to come. So guys we have shown that we don't exists.
WHAT A SHAME FOR ALPA-S AND ALL OF US.
Its high time that the ALPA-S office should be closed down and we all can even save the membership fee what we are paying to the ALPA-s.
Havean was not going to fall for us if IAC would have decided the fate of the CA. Whatever stand we had taken should have been maintained. This would have been better and we would have remained united. Unity and integrity is paramount to the existance of any association. Now what have we done, for few thousands dollers, we have sold the unity and integrity of ALPA-S for the years to come. The world pilots' bodies are progressing from where to where. Let us look at our fate. Certainly this is no way to run an association. As it is earlier there was a divide in the union. We guys on 744 never thought that the A-310 crowd ever existed in the ALPA-S but now we have demonstrated that none of us exist. Its a total SHAME. The executive council of ALPA-s, we should buy them bangles and should hang our head in shame ........
Guest
Posts: n/a
Friends,
Better learn your lesson quickly. If you wanted to be treated properly with professional respect then make sure the "Generals" and other 4th floor is given short, sharp, shocks periodically as is done in the other democracies around the globe. Than we have the guarantee that they won't ill-treat us.
Tell me if my work is being done as it is in a proper professional manner then why should I pay you a penny more....and why should should you get? So as long the aeroplanes are flying normally and we have this kind of ALPA-S we can forget of anything better. We have to learn the hard way that the managements of airlines only understand power, and unless you wield it in your favour, they will wield it in theirs.
Better learn your lesson quickly. If you wanted to be treated properly with professional respect then make sure the "Generals" and other 4th floor is given short, sharp, shocks periodically as is done in the other democracies around the globe. Than we have the guarantee that they won't ill-treat us.
Tell me if my work is being done as it is in a proper professional manner then why should I pay you a penny more....and why should should you get? So as long the aeroplanes are flying normally and we have this kind of ALPA-S we can forget of anything better. We have to learn the hard way that the managements of airlines only understand power, and unless you wield it in your favour, they will wield it in theirs.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Twitchy, I have to correct you on a few points. First of all Singapore is not a democracy or anything like a democracy, if you live here you must have noticed. Therefore I find it unfair that you criticize the executive council for what they achieved , negotiating under the sometimes threatening circumstances that are the norm in this “Democracy” must somtimes be difficult or unpleasant at the least.
The only way this council could have achieved something better is when they would have had a strong back-up from the members. An ALPA-S member stated on the union website : “ Only pull your gun when you are ready to shoot”. The problem with the members is that not only are they not ready to shoot, they even haven’t got the ammunition. With the members only firing blanks you shouldn’t be surprised with the results. I have one advise for you Twitchy: TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!!!!!
The only way this council could have achieved something better is when they would have had a strong back-up from the members. An ALPA-S member stated on the union website : “ Only pull your gun when you are ready to shoot”. The problem with the members is that not only are they not ready to shoot, they even haven’t got the ammunition. With the members only firing blanks you shouldn’t be surprised with the results. I have one advise for you Twitchy: TAKE THE MONEY AND RUN!!!!!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Congrats ALPA-S. At least your guys get a meaningful payrise plus backpay. Compare that to another high profile airline, who got less than the inflation rate.
The "Generals" were trained in the art of war. You guys lost some ground in this particluar battle, but the (moral) high ground is still yours. SQ are going to have trouble finding crews, especially Captains, for their airplanes. There will be time to regroup and fight again.
Democracy is a hard regime, especially in Singapore. It takes negotiating skills, tact, unity and patience, none of which pilots are famous for. Hang in there guys, you will prevail.
Anyone care to state what percent you did get? Just so I can be envious!
The "Generals" were trained in the art of war. You guys lost some ground in this particluar battle, but the (moral) high ground is still yours. SQ are going to have trouble finding crews, especially Captains, for their airplanes. There will be time to regroup and fight again.
Democracy is a hard regime, especially in Singapore. It takes negotiating skills, tact, unity and patience, none of which pilots are famous for. Hang in there guys, you will prevail.
Anyone care to state what percent you did get? Just so I can be envious!
Guest
Posts: n/a
Farside.......thanks for correcting me, its a dictatorship or we can call it a dictatorial democracy. But you can run with your money from here not me. How I wish we had wings like you.
L1011......the pay rise is yet to come. This will amount to 15 to 18% if and when it is given. No need to congratulate ALPA-S for that. The EGM (extra ordinaty general body) meeting, members have authorised the ALPA-S to go and sign the collective agreement as it was offered by the SQ management in Dec. end. This island, all the agreements are arrived at unilaterally by the management and later on pushed down your throat as collective/bilateral ones.
What happens if now the management does not offer the same condition as of Dec. 2000. Once again these people here in ALPA-S will have to call for another EGM and take the mandate to pick up the bread crums thrown out of the 4th floor. And we like beggers will pick up those one too as is being palnned this time.
What a great Airline of the world. They really know the art of sc**ewing its own people. And we all have to enjoy this unavoidable rape.
L1011......the pay rise is yet to come. This will amount to 15 to 18% if and when it is given. No need to congratulate ALPA-S for that. The EGM (extra ordinaty general body) meeting, members have authorised the ALPA-S to go and sign the collective agreement as it was offered by the SQ management in Dec. end. This island, all the agreements are arrived at unilaterally by the management and later on pushed down your throat as collective/bilateral ones.
What happens if now the management does not offer the same condition as of Dec. 2000. Once again these people here in ALPA-S will have to call for another EGM and take the mandate to pick up the bread crums thrown out of the 4th floor. And we like beggers will pick up those one too as is being palnned this time.
What a great Airline of the world. They really know the art of sc**ewing its own people. And we all have to enjoy this unavoidable rape.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sorry Twitchy but I have to disagree with you again. You have exactly the same "wings" that I have. The big difference is that at one point in my career I left my very comfortable surroundings to look for greener pastures , which I eventually found. You make it sound that only the expats can leave and shop around, but I fail to understand why the local pilots in SIA, who are all well qualified and licensed, have this idea (or is it fear) that they can't leave. Believe it or not but we expats also have families, we also leave home and friends, we also have kids that go to school, and we also miss our countries at times. And when it comes to "picking up the breadcrumbs" it is only you who decides to pick them up, you always have the choice to look for "bigger crumbs" and that is at the end of the day the decission that only you yourself can make.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Was is not two years ago or so when SIA gave the pilots a nice approx 22% pay cut?
Now an increase of 18% or so. Ah, my math not so good, bend me over please (not to get shafted), need help to pick up the bread crumbs.
Thank god I took the money and ran.
Now an increase of 18% or so. Ah, my math not so good, bend me over please (not to get shafted), need help to pick up the bread crumbs.
Thank god I took the money and ran.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Farside--
Some of the SQ local Captains would like to leave for those "greener pastures" but they realise that the Singapore ATPL is not that well accepted elsewhere. Can recall several that were trained in LGB on the DC-10 and wanted to have an FAA eximiner sit in for the final rating ride so as to be able to get the rating on their FAA license. Good 'ole Charlie Chan (anyone remember him) said a resounding NO. Without that "foreign" license, it is an uphill battle.
Some of the SQ local Captains would like to leave for those "greener pastures" but they realise that the Singapore ATPL is not that well accepted elsewhere. Can recall several that were trained in LGB on the DC-10 and wanted to have an FAA eximiner sit in for the final rating ride so as to be able to get the rating on their FAA license. Good 'ole Charlie Chan (anyone remember him) said a resounding NO. Without that "foreign" license, it is an uphill battle.
Guest
Posts: n/a
There's no turning back if you do go, even after retirement because Big Brother is watching your every move.
Originally deleted (in fear of big brother
) and re-posted again.
[This message has been edited by WSSS (edited 08 May 2001).]
Originally deleted (in fear of big brother
) and re-posted again. [This message has been edited by WSSS (edited 08 May 2001).]
Guest
Posts: n/a
Sad to say my fellow flight deck collegues,
that with current affairs, we at SQ are looking at a total removal of CA in 3 years time. Especially with a flood of new management appointments.
Not impossible for management to do so and impossible for the "association" to stop.
far fetched?
that with current affairs, we at SQ are looking at a total removal of CA in 3 years time. Especially with a flood of new management appointments.
Not impossible for management to do so and impossible for the "association" to stop.
far fetched?
Guest
Posts: n/a
This is slightly off topic, but WSSS, I can relate to that ... a mate of mine left Singapore some 30 years ago and he still gets called up for not voting in elections! And he's moved house about 6 times since he left Singapore and they were still able to track him down.