Cathay Pacific Cadet Pilot Programme

[yep_ok_whatever]

Voiceofreason: your handle does you justice. It's a breath of fresh air.

[kelevra]

My first post.

Anyways, hey all! It's gonna be my second time to apply to the Cathay Pacific Cadet programme. The first time I only got up to Stage 2 the first time. I was very intimidated and overwhelmed when I first got the invite. I thought they would never get back to me.

I vaguely remember the tests. My question concerns the Aviation Knowledge booklet.

How far into the topic are we suppose to study it?

I remember when I first got it, it seemed like brief knowledge and at first I was like "this can't be right". So, for example, I started learning the different areas of the atmosphere and almost everything I can think of associated with the topic.

Another example is when I studied the theory of flight with the simple explanation and Bernoulli's principle. I considered finding his damn paper of hydrodynamica which contained the principle.

So, back to my question how in depth are we suppose to study the Aviation Knowledge booklet?

[yep_ok_whatever]

Kelevra et al:

Yes I would like to know how in depth it will be.

[ChinaBeached]

And 22% inflation?? Seriously?? Which planet were you living on? Show me where you picked that out from.

You asked for it:

Rents up 22 per cent in Hong Kong as confidence returns to Asia* - ECA International

And to think that 10 secs of googling "hong kong rental property increase 2010" was difficult? Ooops!! I should've mentioned "TOO HARD" or I feel a sense of "ENTITLEMENT" to not need to serve facts as part of a discussion or debate??!

You owe me and those following this forum an apology - as I did you when you have corrected me in the past.

Voice, read and try to appreciate what was written. I openly mentioned to AMEND and CORRECT any data that was incorrect, especially the time lines as well as CPI figures!! Reduce those CPI figures from 5% if you wish, but once again, minimal "research" (google that word too...) shows me not far off it the mark at all: Inflation to Eclipse Hong Kong's Salary Increases in 2012 | CFO innovation ASIA

So, use my figures taken from the ACTUAL CEP contract offered me. If they have changed then say so and amend them where needed: by your figures, they have not. Change the duration periods!! Reduce inflation to 3%!!!! See what end figure you come out with!!!!! The HKPLA figures are not incorrect, as you attest to, but I freely and openly admitted that the time lines are very general - so stop trying to pick a fight about a moot point when I said the same from the beginning.

The iCadets will not receive a "PAY" increase between now and 42 years? Who the hell ever said anything of the like?? Of course the "salary" side will go up periodically (once every 10 or so years seems to be the going average from the last hoopla and CC debacle - ooops! And they came back with AHK not even 2 weeks after the agreement! You showed them!!) The CEP HKPLA is not by means of the contract terms & conditions slated to CPI. That is a fact you cannot deny. So I can truthfully and correctly argue that to budget for an increase in the CPI HKPLA is not viable. Only a fool would budget on what is not a contractual obligation. Like the same pilots budgeting on their allowances for mortgage payments - stupid.

YOUR remuneration increased because YOU are a HK National. As written before, because of the RDO and pressure to bring your package in line with the rest of the expat pilot group, CX used it against the pilot body instead. Give a little here (HK Nationals) but take so very, very, very much from everywhere else. They played you all for absolute suckers and must be wetting their million dollar beds at those commending the CEP terms and conditions!

Tell all the facts mate, not just the ones that are hidden behind your own train set. You claim it is a great offer because you came from the original HK National cadetship - something that low life Capt RH even wrote earlier in the year in one of his insulting and condescending updates how the CX cadetship is designed to sponsor and support the local HK national community. See one of my previous posts where it is quoted. Odd what they (he) says it is for but stranger still what they do with it.... How is his bank balance going as a result??

Go and amend my figures with more accurate time lines that I know and accept you can provide and use whatever CPI figures you want relative to the HK rental market and come back with the results. Make it transparent, as I did so it is open to debate. Even if the figure I came up with is doubled by your figures, it's nothing but a damn insult from what the package should be, for ALL CX pilots no matter which nationality.

No one has argued on this forum about wishing to have been "born earlier" to have been on A-Scale. B-Scale did not nor did the HK National cadetship accept or create lower standards due to it's selectivity & relatively small intake (although others will vehemently argue that point - not for me to say or buy into). What you cannot deny is that this CEP by the terms & conditions it offers has borne a new breed of disgracefully low standards whereas before CX represented nothing but the highest of standards. Go back and compare CX wannabe threads from pre iCadet days to now just for glimpse of the pathetic standards.

"whatever" will just do "whatever" anyone tells him or he thinks justifies his sense of "entitlement". There's a guy you want to depend on as an ally and colleague!!! whatever, you jump on anyone's back that serves to spank you the sweetest, without care for research of your own. And yeah, I am straight forward without the pleasantries regarding guys like you who crap on all that I and so many others worked & studied for for so many years..... because of your sense of "entitlement". I don't have to see or meet the snake to know what creates the hissing sound.

[yep_ok_whatever]

Haha I'm sorry CB, maybe it has something to do with my lack of research, my gen y arrogance and or general ignorance. But do explain how exactly I'm crapping on you?

Do you mind if I ask you a couple of straight out questions. Excuse me if they have been posted on prune before but you can't forget that I'm entitled to an answer without research due to my age and ability to crap on people heads.

How long have you been with cx for?
How long have you lived in hong kong for?
What caused you to be so bitter about the cadets (incident specific please)?

I have to say that you do have some great information that is of course important to people on this forum. It's just that your delivery is terrible. You twist peoples statements which are generally inconsequential/benign into some sort of attack on their personality.

Did you ever consider working for a politician? You'd make a good spin doctor twisting peoples words to suit your own agenda, whatever it may be.

Yes, what is your agenda? Is it to stop potential cadets from applying? To suit your own needs or to protect them from the apparent hell that is cx?

Looking forward to your sweet spanking.

[ChinaBeached]

For the very reasons you gave I won't answer your mindless questions that have been answered countless times before. Read & research, but mostly refer back to the Mark Twain quote.

a good spin doctor twisting peoples words to suit your own agenda

My "agenda" comes from first hand experience, researched facts & information received. Incoherent sheep like you label it as "spin". Again, the CEP is designed for ignorant stooges like you. If your spine were not so weak then it may not be so easily twisted. Few have presented any credible argument to defend the despicable lowering of standards as well as T's & C's at CX. One or two alone have offered corrections to errors, but that's it.

Better still, instead of making baseless accusations, why don't you grow a pair and prove what you believe I've written is wrong with researched and transparent facts?

[Voiceofreason]

You asked for it:

Rents up 22 per cent in Hong Kong as confidence returns to Asia* - ECA International

And to think that 10 secs of googling "hong kong rental property increase 2010" was difficult? Ooops!! I should've mentioned "TOO HARD" or I feel a sense of "ENTITLEMENT" to not need to serve facts as part of a discussion or debate??!

Oh dear. Rent = inflation? Try again. Not my fault you used the word "inflation" in your argument.

So, use my figures taken from the ACTUAL CEP contract offered me.

I HIGHLY doubt you were given any contract with the HKPA figures in there. How do I know? Because they aren't in there. It refers to a Pilot Allowance being paid in accordance with Company Policy. Therefore I conclude you haven't seen the contract at all.

I don't mind you quoting figures you have gleaned from somewhere and remain open to question, but when you state things as fact and categorical (which elsewhere in your post, you did) it becomes misleading.

The iCadets will not receive a "PAY" increase between now and 42 years? Who the hell ever said anything of the like?? Of course the "salary" side will go up periodically (once every 10 or so years seems to be the going average from the last hoopla and CC debacle - ooops! And they came back with AHK not even 2 weeks after the agreement! You showed them!!) The CEP HKPLA is not by means of the contract terms & conditions slated to CPI.

You insinuate that because the HKPA is not linked to any form of CPI adjustment, that it will therefore never increase. I was drawing attention to the inaccuracy of that insinuation by stating that my salary isn't either, and yet it just increased.

Who on earth budgets over what they are going to receive over the course of a 42-year career? Even if you attempt that, surely it's with a HUGE grain of salt given so many undefinable variables. You may be able to forecast the next 5-10 years POSSIBLY, but that's about it. My whole argument is that it is utterly pointless doing the kind of exercise you did in extrapolating out the HKPA over such a long period of time, and then factoring in some very hypothetical inflation rate. Both will undoubtedly change over time.

YOUR remuneration increased because YOU are a HK National.

Nope, all salaries increased recently. I became entitled to the HKPA I'm assuming for two reasons: 1) Because it became quite clear to management that we should get something - indeed, we've been harping on about it to the DFO for years. But, probably more importantly, 2) they realised they would attract no-one from overseas without it and the forgivable loan. Remains to be seen if those overseas can handle the DIRE conditions we put up with in HK on such a meagre allowance. No-one else has paid for it at all - only those who are willing to come on these terms do come. It's CX who will lose in the end if not enough come, not anyone else.

BTW, the arrival of the HKPA and forgivable loan had nothing to do with CC.

it's nothing but a damn insult from what the package should be,

What should it be? According to whom/what standard? Again, it's not insulting to me (or obviously the many, many NON-HK NATIONALS joining on it). What gives you the right to say what it should be? You don't like the offer - that much is painfully, irrevocably clear. You didn't accept it as a result. No problem.

Move on.

No one has argued on this forum about wishing to have been "born earlier" to have been on A-Scale. B-Scale

But that's effectively what you're saying when you say CX are insulting everyone and need to wind the clock back to the expat terms. THE TERMS OF THE OFFER HAVE CHANGED - DONE DEAL. ACCEPT THE NEW TERMS, OR DON'T - IT'S UP TO YOU. But it's quite clear that the only people who are going to decide what the package is are not going to be influenced by people complaining about it on here.

What you cannot deny is that this CEP by the terms & conditions it offers has borne a new breed of disgracefully low standards

Go down to ADL and tell that to the faces of the cadets on these courses. You show me EXACTLY how they are not up to the same standards of all other cadets who have passed through the system from the first time it started, and we can talk again. Your assumption that the people posting on here are the same ones CX are accepting is just a ridiculous leap of logic.

Finally, I'd just like to address your use of the words "despicable", "insulting", "disgusting" and the like. Can I simply ask: why are you so offended? If you feel your worth is higher than what you are being offered, that is entirely your decision. Go elsewhere and earn more. Others may choose differently, but does that REALLY make them "stooges" and "spineless"?

I think I've come out and given some fairly good reasons for why I think CX stopped offering expat terms, but I'll summarize them again:

1) With the RDO coming into force in HK, they can't pay different terms to people doing the same job.
2) They don't want to pay expat terms for all, because they are very expensive, and because there would then be little point in having the cadet program. I am not condoning this position, just stating it as I think management would have seen it.
3) Therefore, all new contracts must be on the same terms - improved local terms.

I think Baronblue has hit the nail square and centre on the head:

I think the deal is good for young guys with no experience as the potential over a career is great IF you accept that you are a local in Hong Kong and all that goes with that.
However, for experienced guys wanting to live an expat life Emirates is now the airline of choice with free housing, electric, water bills, 100% education, transport and a tax free income, popular celebrity location. Cathay just cannot compete, so it's relying on the in house home grown talent (the known quantity). Clearly if you want to go to Cathay these days it's because you want to live in Hong Kong.

I would only add emphasize again that for many, it's not ONLY about the money. Many would not want to move to the desert, and are more interested in life in HK, even if that means a lower package.

Fancy that, eh? We're not all mercenaries.

[Krashman]

Mercenaries

I turned down a QR interview because the 'sandbox' was a no go item on my wife's terms.

HK on the other hand is a different story. No compounds, no dress codes and one day (if bases are ever offered) the opportunity, if we want, to live somewhere else.

If its not for you, don't apply. If all you can think about is 'putting you time in' and going back to the UK, North America when you can get a base your in it for the wrong reasons.

I'm not just in it for the cash, although I will still make a healthy amount of it in my career at CX.

[yep_ok_whatever]

CB:

When you insult people with very little to back up your assumptions, you make a fool of yourself. You, at the same time discredit yourself and the information you have about CX and the Cadet Programme.

As much as I know you will disagree with me and call me an ignorant, entitled, douchebag, focused on nothing but destroying aviation and crapping on colleagues, your arguments, whether for or against the cx scheme have very little merit. If you are going to put facts forward, do so. Let us analyse them, some of us are smarter than you give us credit for.

[soundbite]

The silence is deafening

[crwjerk]

Why should pilots get paid more? Because when the bolts do come loose and the circuits do fail, the ground mechanics and the engineers aren't the ones who are 10 kilometers above the ground, struggling to control several hundred tons of metal and fuel hurtling through the atmosphere at speeds approaching mach 1.

Nor are they the ones who signed for the A/C, LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE for others' cock ups. Thank you.

[ChinaBeached]

The silence is deafening

Why? Because at FL370 I couldn't jump onto the internet to reply in your timeframe?

When you insult people with very little to back up your assumptions, you make a fool of yourself

You have a self proclaimed feeling of "entitlement" for the CX job because GA is "too hard" - but not that you've even tried. So where are my "assumptions" false about you? Does that make you selfish? Yes. You have not offered but ONE piece of logical evidence to defend the CEP that you so eagerly wish to join, not know any real facts. Does that make you naive? Yes. You take advice or opinions only from one side of the debate, ignoring the other side and making baseless accusations. Does that make you ignorant? Yes. Assumptions you say? No.

(I never called you a "douchebag", but since you used the word to describe yourself, I'll "assume" it to be extremely accurate).

Voice: I have the EXACT HKPLA document in my hand now. My apologies for calling it the "contract". You are right, and I take back that term "contract". But, that does not negate what is written on it and the fact that I was sent it from CX HR along with the offer of employment. PM me if you wish & I'll provide you with the names and email addresses as well as contact numbers from the precise document.

You're really pulling at straws to try to differ CPI with rental costs. I suppose GDP has little to do with living standards or interest rates on consumer confidence?? The HKPLA is completely and undeniably linked to the HK rental market fluctuations in so far as it is stagnant and not reflective of any changes. As it is, that is a fact. To "assume" CX are your friend and will raise the HKPL because they are just great guys in your eyes is laughable. There's a best seller exposing the CX corporate culture & methods of how they treat the pilot body - read it. You want to bank on CX's management's good will to just give the pilots more money. Good luck with that bet.

Yes, I insinuate that because under the terms of the contract CX have zero incentive to ever offer an increase in the HKPLA. You seem to want to bank on their well established good nature I suppose? Too funny.... Unsecured financial gambles - hang on? Wasn't that Lehman Bros and a little GFC we had recently? How did that thinking work out in the long run???

BTW, the arrival of the HKPA and forgivable loan had nothing to do with CC.

Who said it did? I didn't. I clearly stated it was from the RDO where the AOA were fighting for the HK Nationals to be on the same T's&C's as the majority of the pilot body by way of housing and rental assistance. Instead CX used it against the pilot body. Yeah...great guys.

Nope, all salaries increased recently.

And the last salary increase before that one was when? When you were still considering why you need to know algebra! And it took the threat of CC to make it happen....and then like I said, CX turned around and threw AHK in your faces.

My

very hypothetical inflation rate

you say? I think I was very kind to use a flat 5%!! When the highs go upwards of 22% and the lows of around 3 - 3.5% then I think a 5% basic average is if anything damn kind to use over a 42 year period. I offered you to use another rate with your own more accurate career path time lines. You haven't. Prove me wrong.

Who on earth budgets over what they are going to receive over the course of a 42-year career?

Any intelligent person that does not consider their long term future and result at the end of the career they are entrusting a company to, that's who. To not have a gaugeable idea or consideration, like your new pal "whatever" and co., reeks of stupidity and ignorance.

For you to deny that entry level standards have not been despicably lowered is again, laughable. You truly believe that a pilot with thousands of hours of experience, often as Capt in light aircraft, > 5700 kg category turboprops, as well as jet aircraft are of a lower standard to a kid with zero hours, zero experience and zero credentials? Come on. Get a damn reality check. It is obvious why you defend it: you came from the cadet system. Now, nowhere have I EVER said that cadets can not be trained to a suitable standard. Where experience lacks, training must replace it. But what has CX down with the SO training? Recently they've lowered the FFS training from 12 to now only 6 (I believe) training sessions before being released for line ops. Again, CX show their true colours of cost cutting at the expense of standards. The common consensus amongst the many friends I have at CX is that CX is a checking airline, not a training airline. To deny that reputation is to also hold your head in the sand.

your use of the words "despicable", "insulting", "disgusting" and the like. Can I simply ask: why are you so offended?

Because that's how I and many other colleagues view this situation. Not one guy or girl I know at CX believes differently, and there are many who vary from senior Base Capts to present day DESO's. The same with colleagues at a range of other airlines - all saddened by the turn CX has taken. I use those words as I believe they are apt to describe the type of person who demands out of a sense of "entitlement" or other to actively promote the lowering of the industry as a whole, and not just CX. I and the many friends and colleagues worked and studied harder than these ignorant children can ever fathom. They decide hard work is not for them and so seek the alternative that only detracts from a once proud industry, let alone airline. But what's worse, they do so all the while without a care for what it is they are doing despite being told. Yes, those words are very deliberate and very apt. You think people who actively yet naively seek to crap on all you worked for for so many years deserves a better title?

You did not live off 2 min noodles, take it in turns to maintain the control column with your knees so keep your hands warm, drive for weeks on end to be told day in, day out no jobs were on offer, fly into the freezing layer just to maintain above LSALT for fear of losing your job if you didn't or couldn't because you needed those hours, fly in 48 deg heat 8+ sectors a day..., and so on, and so on....just for the privilege of a CX DESO interview. You don't "get it" and so you defend those like you who's hardest task in aviation has been the CX cadetship.

No Voice, we're not all mercenaries. Few if any pilots ever wanted to fly for the money. But to actively pursue a course that detracts from the industry, your (hopeful) colleagues and promotes the lowering of it shows zero integrity.

[Voiceofreason]

Not sure why I'm still bothering, but I guess I'm a sucker for punishment.

I have the EXACT HKPLA document in my hand now.

Fine, if you do. Then you would know the exact details are not how you put them in your first post. Just saying.

The HKPLA is completely and undeniably linked to the HK rental market fluctuations

Nope. It is simply an allowance. TBH, I see one day when they will simply add it into the overall payscales. All it is is an additional monthly cash allowance. Nowhere does it say it is linked to housing.

Now, I fully admit that none of my other benefits are linked in any way to the CPI or any other COLA index or similar. But then, I don't see very many other companies, let alone airlines, actually have a pay which varies according to cost of living. Perhaps the UN?

CX turned around and threw AHK in your faces

Do you even know what happened? Basically, nothing. How is that even relevant to pay increases? Yes, it was a while since the last increase, but we ended up getting another.

I offered you to use another rate with your own more accurate career path time lines. You haven't. Prove me wrong.

I replied saying it was disingenuous to try and factor in 42 years worth of inflation and completely discount the possibility of any further increase in the HKPA. There is virtually no point in doing that because if CX never increases salaries AND OTHER ALLOWANCES SUCH AS THE HKPA no times in the next 42 years, the airline will not exist. It simply will not happen. Therefore, over to you to try and factor in some kind of hypothetical increase to salaries/allowances to balance out your equation.

To not have a gaugeable idea or consideration, like your new pal "whatever" and co., reeks of stupidity and ignorance.

To make assumptions based on some back-of-a-fag packet calculations using stats and figures you selectively include to make your point reeks of bloody-mindedness and over-simplicity. Of course you can have an idea of what the package is worth RIGHT NOW. I assume you would also factor in CPI in any other pay offers too, therefore reducing it's worth in the future? To not do so would surely be misleading?

All you can do is compare what is on the table now. That's it! Who is to tell if the other airline is going to expand massively, contract massively, cease to exist or otherwise fundamentally change within the space of the next 42 years? Make your plans for the next 5-10, and re-evaluate. Such is the variability of the industry we find ourselves in.

Therefore, simply forget CPI or anything of the sort - it will be pretty similar in other places and companies too, therefore if you have the same variable across all calculations, you can discount it.

For you to deny that entry level standards have not been despicably lowered is again, laughable. You truly believe that a pilot with thousands of hours of experience, often as Capt in light aircraft, > 5700 kg category turboprops, as well as jet aircraft are of a lower standard to a kid with zero hours, zero experience and zero credentials? Come on. Get a damn reality check.

Your turn to re-read what I wrote. Never have I said that you should compare an experienced entry pilot with a cadet in terms of entry level standards. What you were saying, however (or at least how it seemed) was that the entry level standard of cadets has been lowered. I dispute this wholeheartedly.

But what has CX down with the SO training? Recently they've lowered the FFS training from 12 to now only 6 (I believe) training sessions before being released for line ops. Again, CX show their true colours of cost cutting at the expense of standards.

Do you know of any other airline that performs quite as many training sectors? Do you know how many sectors EK performs before it's check to line for DEFOs? Perhaps worth asking before you denigrate CX's standards.

You did not live off 2 min noodles, take it in turns to maintain the control column with your knees so keep your hands warm, drive for weeks on end to be told day in, day out no jobs were on offer, fly into the freezing layer just to maintain above LSALT for fear of losing your job if you didn't or couldn't because you needed those hours, fly in 48 deg heat 8+ sectors a day..., and so on, and so on....just for the privilege of a CX DESO interview.

And there we have it - we finally get to the core of the issue. You are personally upset that the goalposts have changed. CX has widened the net to attract more people into the industry, and you are saddened because you are no longer one of the "privileged few" (I use that term loosely, so don't go overboard in criticising me for it) who gets invited for a DESO interview.

Can you seriously blame the guys going for it? If it's no longer as tiresomely difficult to get in, how, again, is that your problem? You seem to be both attacking those who are making the offer (CX) and those who choose to accept it. This is a business transaction defined by market economics. You missed the boat in terms of the expat package, and I'm sorry for you for that. But other people aren't so blinded to think that it will come back, and choose the option and make the best of it. They make the choice they feel is right for them. It is egotistical in the extreme for you to assume that you know their needs/wants better than they do.

[etrang]

What goes up also goes down

Interesting link CB

It seems HK rents can go DOWN as well as up. Who would have thought it? According to your link rents fell 25% in 2008/9, and from 2008 to 2010 there was still a net decline despite a 22% increase in 2009/10.

Hong Kong has witnessed some of the biggest price increases in the world, reflected in a jump up the ranking from 9th to 3rd position over the year. The price of renting two-bedroom accommodation rose by 22% to US$2 830 a month between 2009 and 2010. This contrasts with rent falls of around 25% the previous year.

You're really pulling at straws to try to differ CPI with rental costs. I suppose GDP has little to do with living standards or interest rates on consumer confidence??

You seem very confused about economics. CPI and rental rates are quite different. The rate of change in GDP does indeed have very limited correlation with interest rates or consumer confidence. Absolute level of GDP is of course quite unrelated.

[rororo123456]

after the ICAO assessment, normally, how long does an applicant wait for the call? (next stage or rejection)

[404 Titan]

etrang

You seem very confused about economics. CPI and rental rates are quite different.

It would also appear you are confused as to the relationship of rental prices (a component of housing costs) which is a major component of the Market Basket of consumer goods and services and the CPI (inflation).

It seems HK rents can go DOWN as well as up. Who would have thought it? According to your link rents fell 25% in 2008/9, and from 2008 to 2010 there was still a net decline despite a 22% increase in 2009/10.

You sit here and accuse CB of cherry picking housing rental figures but you are guilty of exactly the same thing. The fall in rental figures you quote occurred during the Global Financial Crisis which is hardly representative of long term rental trends. The reality is that rental rates in Hong Kong from 1999 to 2009 increased by 13% according to official HK government figures. Since 2009 rental rates have increased a further 22%. That represents a 37.86% rise in rental prices since 1999.

Voiceofreason

Do you even know what happened? Basically, nothing.

BS nothing happened. CX B744BCF's were gifted to AHK rather than be wet leased to them which was the past practice.

Yes, it was a while since the last increase, but we ended up getting another.

Speak for yourself sunshine. I got zip. The last payrise I got was in 2001. How about your ask an A scaler how many payrises they have had since 1993.

[goaround737]

Apologies for taking the thread off-topic, has anyone attended a stage 2 recently. Care to share your experiences?

[ChinaBeached]

eTraing - as per most on this thread, read & completely comprehend before activating foot-in-mouth. To deny rental prices have trended nothing but up in HK over the recent history and will do so in the future is just dumb in the face of all the evidence & data. Same with you, refer to the Mark Twain Quote.

Voice - you have obviously shown your "company man" approach to this issue. You are tainted by your cadetship background as a HK National: coming from zero experience (correct me if I'm wrong) & without receiving a housing package. Hence you defend the slap-in-the-face increase & CEP in general. You use your history & background as the basis to argue. Likewise, I use mine as I have freely admitted many times.

Now, I fully admit that none of my other benefits are linked in any way to the CPI or any other COLA index or similar. But then, I don't see very many other companies, let alone airlines, actually have a pay which varies according to cost of living.

Really? That unknown company is called "CATHAY PACIFIC" and you will find it in the "Accommodation & Rental Assistance Policy" paragraph 4.4. You are playing semantics. The rent one pays is a direct impact on one's "cost of living", so call a spade a spade, and not a "digging tool" to try to smooch more company-man points.

To make assumptions based on some back-of-a-fag packet calculations using stats and figures you selectively include to make your point reeks of bloody-mindedness and over-simplicity. Of course you can have an idea of what the package is worth RIGHT NOW. I assume you would also factor in CPI in any other pay offers too, therefore reducing it's worth in the future? To not do so would surely be misleading?

a) I do not ever consider myself using the back of fags as you eloquently put. (I just thought it fun to play with semantics, as you choose to).
b) The figures I used & you ridicule are based on the exact same figures you have & also provided. The variables of time frame & percentage change in the rental market costs I also freely admitted to be a loose ball-park figure. You claim it impossible to look into the future to try to predict financial affects. That is your choice to throw your head in the sand. But to not look into financial histories and futures based on that history, the present market climate as well as a resultant future prediction is just stupid. I though more of you than to argue from such an irrational point.
c) Of course I would factor CPI into any other pay offers. I do not invest in share portfolios in Zimbabwe because of the out of control inflation. Ooops! Am I trying to mindlessly predict the future based on the very recent past, present & future? How silly of me! Am I misleading myself for using some minimal research & appreciation of the financial climate in Zimbabwe? Come on feller - get a grip and be honest with yourself.

You obviously seem to believe that CX management are great guys & wish to bank on them improving remuneration instead of actively seeking ways to drive them down. Have you read Warham's book? He could not of written what he did if they were not completely true for fear of litigation. But for incredibly hard fought efforts & threats of CC to just keep base salaries in line with CPI, you seem to think CX management will just do this out of a matter of course from time to time?? 404Titan's words should ring home - unless you also decide to ignore those facts or taint them by some other means.

denigrate CX's standards

Eh? I merely commented on CX's reduction of FFS training for (CEP) SO's that has reduced from 12 to now only 6 as I understand it. What other airlines do was never bought into comment. My point is that CX has lowered it standards in recruitment & training for nothing but GREED. So, are 12 x FFS better than 6 for training a kid with nothing but a fresh CPL? Are 12 FFS's more expensive that just 6? Again Voice, you need to get real about what your airline is doing & not seek back-slapping justification of "but at other airlines...". Saying that "at other airlines" they do this or that does not negate the fact that CX's own standards have been reduced. Again - wake up!

And there we have it - we finally get to the core of the issue. You are personally upset that the goalposts have changed. CX has widened the net to attract more people into the industry, and you are saddened because you are no longer one of the "privileged few" (I use that term loosely, so don't go overboard in criticising me for it) who gets invited for a DESO interview.

No mate - you understate the movement of the goalposts. They have been made so wide that a blind person in a wheelchair facing the wrong direction could kick a goal and feel "entitled" to do so. And you think that makes a person "privileged"! It took experience, knowledge, study & discipline to kick the goals in the former game that was being played. Previous to this discussion, I thought more of you. I thought you could argue with substance. I over estimated you. My time in GA was nothing special but for teaching respect for the industry and fellow pilots. And I will go to town on you for the term you used. The likes of you feel that the efforts other guys went through to get where we wanted to be is worthless. You think we deemed ourselves as "the privileged few". No. We deem ourselves as EARNING the privilege to join and contribute to aviation. Nowadays those with the experience that CX used to attract rarely apply and in fact turn CX down. There is a reason for that if you would only choose to open your damn eyes. Are you trying to tell me that if pilots with the experience that used to make them competitive for a DESO job applied today that these kids with zero hours, zero credentials & zero experience could compete? There is a reason they are being interviewed. They are the result of those with experience, credentials & hours not applying or taking the job. They are the CHEAPEST OPTION, not the best candidates in the market. These kids are the product of lower standards in recruitment born by an insulting remuneration package to those who know what airline pilots are worth. They are what's left from others turning it down or not applying.

Can you seriously blame the guys going for it?

Yes. Generally speaking they detract from the industry, not contribute to it by this entry means.

If it's no longer as tiresomely difficult to get in, how, again, is that your problem?

Let me replace "tiresomely difficult" to what those of us who once sat CX on a pedestal as "privileged to be considered". My problem? With your polarised view of CX's greatness, you refuse to see a bigger picture. You don't think other airlines see CX for what it was & what they are doing now? Personally I've had many cockpit conversations as well as layover bar chats with other pilots about CX's massive backward steps. And before you try, no:- not all conversations were started by me. Some of the most outspoken have been CX crews themselves. It is the problem of all airline pilots when they see their job and career spat on by greed and ignorance from airline management as well as new joiners alike. You on the other hand prefer to sit pretty & defend it, because in your eyes YOU are better off (naively so), despite the long term airline and industry effects of this behaviour.

What you were saying, however (or at least how it seemed) was that the entry level standard of cadets has been lowered. I dispute this wholeheartedly.

You're so very wrong. The ONLY avenue for ANY applicant to CX is via the CEP. A kid with zero hours is a cadet as is an applicant with 10,000 hrs as PIC of widebody jets. So by CX's deliberate default of course the entry level standards have been lowered!! Put your money where your mouth is. Let's put the average iCadet interviewee in the 747 Classic sim and get them to perform the entire sequence on raw data, taking off from Kai Tak, tracking outbound via the backcourse, climbing/descending turns onto VOR & ADF radials & bearings, engine failures and raw data ILS to go-around, then land. If standards have not been lowered, then what's the problem? That was the minimum standards "we privileged few" had to deal with as opposed to "What do your parents think about you becoming a pilot?" Still dispute this wholeheartedly bearing in mind that ALL new joiners to CX are "cadets" now??

You seem to be both attacking those who are making the offer (CX) and those who choose to accept it.

Yes. What's your point? Greedy & immoral management as well as those condoning it by acceptance.

This is a business transaction defined by market economics.

What a defeatist load of BS. How did CX management by the likes of TT and now JS or that chief pilot sell-out RH adapt their own salary packages by market economics? They cut new joiner remuneration & as a result receive massive bonuses. That is not market economics. That is sheer and unadulterated GREED. CX's record profits came prior to the CEP taking any form of affect to their bottom line. Again, remove your head from management's sand pit.

They make the choice they feel is right for them. It is egotistical in the extreme for you to assume that you know their needs/wants better than they do.

As the overwhelming evidence proves, nearly every CEP hopeful on this thread shows little to NO knowledge of the job they seek, nor has the minimal desire to read about it first, let alone seek first hand clarification from the source. The right choice for them is, by admittance recently, due a feeling of "entitlement" or that other paths are "too hard" despite never even trying. You personally condone this because you personally came from the CX HK National cadet scheme. I have NEVER mentioned or laid claim to know what is better for them. I KNOW what is better for the industry or what will make them better pilots, or even pilots with some iota of credibility.

[CharlieVictorSierra]

goaorund737 why are you apologising?

It has become more of an entertaining 1st year economics lecture. While it is quite interesting, it is becoming more a clash of heads between already employed or previously employed CX crew over what affects the rental rates etc etc. With all due resect gentlemen, it has become tiresome to read and extremely technical, most of which I dont believe many will understand or care to read anyway!

In threads previously, it also seems that a few players are taking constant digs at eachother just for the sake of it, pulling each others sentences apart time and time again to prove a point, very seldom admitting they are wrong, thus it looks like there will be no end to the arguments. Maybe it deserves its own thread then?! I personally do not think any of it is contributing to the subject of this thread AT ALL!

The apology by goaround737 to ask a direct question about the programme (which was ignored completely, whether it was a repeated question or not) is clear evidence of this...I dont think thats really fair.

Again, with all due respect, thus please treat me with the same respect.

[ChinaBeached]

CVS - the terms & conditions are technical in nature & very few if any iCadet hopeful has tried to seek any knowledge of them, let alone listen to both sides of the debate. Let's see if in the next 5 pages we get another "How do I update my file" or "How long does it take....." or "what is the salary / housing allowance / time as SO, etc...."

This argument is extremely well placed on this thread.

I have admitted I have been wrong in previous posts and apologised when it has been pointed out.

Not contributing to the thread?? How so?? You'll find find that nearly every question asked has been asked countless times previously. Those asking just can't be bothered to read - and yes there is a lot of sifting to be done, as with any research. But if this "passion" is there as they claim then a few hours shouldn't hurt? Least of all a direct call to CX!!!???

If this "argument" has done anything I trust it highlights the emotions this iCadet program evokes, the detriment to the airline industry it makes as well as the long term ramifications of one's decision to join CX under these terms.

Tiresome & extremely technical? welcome to long haul flying.