Cathay Pacific Cadet Pilot Programme
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Standard is lower yes, but the EASA exam and flight training is still real and passing standard doesn't change. I see this as a chance for those with less privilage to have a go.
By the way can anyone share some experience of the video interview during cut-e test? I wonder is there any different with the old days?
By the way can anyone share some experience of the video interview during cut-e test? I wonder is there any different with the old days?
So what you are saying is, it is Okay for Harvard and Stanford and all other elite schools to lower the bar of entry in order to give the under privilege people a chance, but to keep the exam as hard as it should be. Is this your defense? Is this your mentality?
I would be absolutely worrying if you did make it to the program.
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahhahahahha. I need a good laugh on this.
So what you are saying is, it is Okay for Harvard and Stanford and all other elite schools to lower the bar of entry in order to give the under privilege people a chance, but to keep the exam as hard as it should be. Is this your defense? Is this your mentality?
I would be absolutely worrying if you did make it to the program.
So what you are saying is, it is Okay for Harvard and Stanford and all other elite schools to lower the bar of entry in order to give the under privilege people a chance, but to keep the exam as hard as it should be. Is this your defense? Is this your mentality?
I would be absolutely worrying if you did make it to the program.
Using Harvard and Stanford as examples is also absurd. Just because someone went to an "elite" school doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who didn't. Similarly, just because someone was offered a role at Cathay prior to this supposed decrease in standards doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who was offered a role recently.
- While most students in elite schools worked very hard to get in, most of them also came from extreme privileges that gave them ample opportunities to succeed. I know quite a few of these people personally.
- Some of my high school classmates who were at the top of the class were rejected from these schools despite having similar stats as those who were admitted because schools like Harvard simply cannot admit every single qualified student. Hence, admissions often come down to luck and other non-academic factors.
- What's taught at Harvard is not all that different from what's taught at nearby Boston University or UMass Amherst. Harvard just has the better brand name and connections, which has very little to do with the ability of its graduates.
- People are more than the name of their school and employer.
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What's the obsession with perceived prestige? What is your mentality? Are you afraid people are going to think less of you and your time at Cathay because the cadet selection process is not as rigorous as it used to be? I get it. Your interviews were tougher. You jumped through more hoops to earn your spot. You were the great chosen one. Congrats! You can pat yourself on the back every morning to remind yourself how special you are, which I have no doubt you are already doing. But with that out of the way, let's give the less special ones a chance to prove themselves. If they are as awful as you claim, they wouldn't pass their exams, wouldn't get their licenses, and wouldn't be flying any planes. As much as I agree Cathay is a ****ty employer, they have a lot more to lose if an unqualified pilot caused an accident than you. So something tells me actual pilots are being held to the same high standards as before, but more cadets are being given the chance to prove their worth. Thank goodness cadets aren't flying their planes, eh?
Using Harvard and Stanford as examples is also absurd. Just because someone went to an "elite" school doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who didn't. Similarly, just because someone was offered a role at Cathay prior to this supposed decrease in standards doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who was offered a role recently.
Using Harvard and Stanford as examples is also absurd. Just because someone went to an "elite" school doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who didn't. Similarly, just because someone was offered a role at Cathay prior to this supposed decrease in standards doesn't mean they are more capable than someone who was offered a role recently.
- While most students in elite schools worked very hard to get in, most of them also came from extreme privileges that gave them ample opportunities to succeed. I know quite a few of these people personally.
- Some of my high school classmates who were at the top of the class were rejected from these schools despite having similar stats as those who were admitted because schools like Harvard simply cannot admit every single qualified student. Hence, admissions often come down to luck and other non-academic factors.
- What's taught at Harvard is not all that different from what's taught at nearby Boston University or UMass Amherst. Harvard just has the better brand name and connections, which has very little to do with the ability of its graduates.
- People are more than the name of their school and employer.
Have you actually compared the previous process with the current one? Did you know, every assessment we went through in the previous process was designed to assess a specific skill set? Think about that, if somebody knows how to pass an exam but sucks at communication, cannot covey his or her ideas through English, not being able to work as a team, how good this pilot can be? Remember. Soft skills are just as important as Hard skills. I agree with you. Just because somebody managed to get through the door doesn't mean he or she will excel at the job, likewise, just because somebody has a bachelor degree, a master degree and a phd doesn't mean he or she will be a good pilot. There are many variables that will change the outcome. But at least the standard could filter out the bad ones at the early stage.
I use Harvard and Stanford as an example because people know them and they can easily relate to them when it comes to the standard, but you have completely taken it out of context. I should have just used Parkenshop choosing apples and oranges and lemons etc etc instead.
The CX Cadetship is a fantastic opportunity for the locals to step foot across the door, no question about it, I certainly benefited from it myself, so you cannot really say they weren't giving less specifical ones a chance. It's just the less special ones were not strong enough to compete with other strong candidates at that time. (Source from previous recruiting managers) If you think what they are doing now is giving more chance to people, how come they didn't do it 10 years ago or 5 years ago? Why have they waited for so long? If CX is not getting desperate, do you think they would be still doing what they are doing now to the program?
Common sense.
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love this. So if we go by your logic, companies should fire their Talent Acquisition department and let everybody comes in regardless of their skill sets, experiences and most importantly their interpersonal skills, as long as they have a college degree meaning they have the ability to pass exams and memorize things from a text book right? Because to your point, we need to give those less special ones to prove themselves right? For many good companies out there, reputable companies out there, they can forget about finding the best talent, because to your point, they should just open the door wide, no need to choose the good ones from the bad ones, and hoping those who got through the door will turn out to be Okay, right?
Have you actually compared the previous process with the current one? Did you know, every assessment we went through in the previous process was designed to assess a specific skill set? Think about that, if somebody knows how to pass an exam but sucks at communication, cannot covey his or her ideas through English, not being able to work as a team, how good this pilot can be? Remember. Soft skills are just as important as Hard skills. I agree with you. Just because somebody managed to get through the door doesn't mean he or she will excel at the job, likewise, just because somebody has a bachelor degree, a master degree and a phd doesn't mean he or she will be a good pilot. There are many variables that will change the outcome. But at least the standard could filter out the bad ones at the early stage.
Have you actually compared the previous process with the current one? Did you know, every assessment we went through in the previous process was designed to assess a specific skill set? Think about that, if somebody knows how to pass an exam but sucks at communication, cannot covey his or her ideas through English, not being able to work as a team, how good this pilot can be? Remember. Soft skills are just as important as Hard skills. I agree with you. Just because somebody managed to get through the door doesn't mean he or she will excel at the job, likewise, just because somebody has a bachelor degree, a master degree and a phd doesn't mean he or she will be a good pilot. There are many variables that will change the outcome. But at least the standard could filter out the bad ones at the early stage.
I use Harvard and Stanford as an example because people know them and they can easily relate to them when it comes to the standard, but you have completely taken it out of context. I should have just used Parkenshop choosing apples and oranges and lemons etc etc instead.
The CX Cadetship is a fantastic opportunity for the locals to step foot across the door, no question about it, I certainly benefited from it myself, so you cannot really say they weren't giving less specifical ones a chance. It's just the less special ones were not strong enough to compete with other strong candidates at that time. (Source from previous recruiting managers) If you think what they are doing now is giving more chance to people, how come they didn't do it 10 years ago or 5 years ago? Why have they waited for so long? If CX is not getting desperate, do you think they would be still doing what they are doing now to the program?
Common sense.
Common sense.
And no, I am not naive enough to think a corporation is doing this out of the goodness of its heart. I know they are motivated by profit, stock prices, and executive bonuses. We all know foreign pilots at Cathay cost them an arm and a leg. Since 1,000+ have left due to ludicrous pandemic restrictions courtesy of the brilliant HK/Beijing government and worsening compensations/ work environment in the past few years, Cathay sees this as a rare opportunity to replace them with cheaper local pilots in the future. And when they are barely flying at their pre-pandemic level, they have most of the bargaining power in terms of compensation. At least for now.
I have no doubt many experienced foreign captains and first officers at Cathay feel betrayed and see little reasons to stay, but their circumstances are not the same as local HKers looking to get a foot in the door. Believe it or not, the current deal is still attractive to many locals even as a stepping stone, assuming the situation doesn't improve in the next few years.
As long as people understand what this program is and what it isn't, it's nowhere near as terrible as many veterans make it out to be.
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not at all what I said. Being accepted into the cadet program is NOT the same as being offered a full-time role as a pilot. If accepted, cadets still need to go through ground school and flight training. And I'm sure the instructors will realize sooner or later if someone lacked the necessary communication or language skills to succeed as a pilot. ICAO English assessment is also required prior to being interviewed. It's not like they are accepting illiterate people into the program, are they? Seems like instead of accepting only the top 1% of all applicants, they are expanding the program and accepting the top 5% or perhaps even the top 10% of applicants. I think that's part of the reason why they partnered with PolyU to offer ground school locally - so they can increase the capacity of their classes and eliminate subpar cadets before spending big money to train them in Adelaide. And, of course, to reduce training costs in general like all corporations concerned about their bottom line. I have no doubt the standards have been lowered, but let's not pretend they are hiring random, incompetent people to fly their planes. Being accepted into the cadet program is more akin to being offered an internship as a college student with no work experience. If you suck as an intern, you won't get a full-time offer. If you suck as a cadet, you will be cut. Perhaps it's not the ideal way to recruit in your view, but it is what it is.
I don't think I took it out of context. You implied prestige = competence. Harder to get in = better. A Harvard graduate = a better employee. Please correct me if I misunderstood. And by the way, schools like Harvard already do lower their standard in test scores for underprivileged students. It's called affirmative action. (Or if daddy donated a building.) The goal is to look beyond the numbers and take an applicant's soft skills, passion, and background into consideration. The ability to pass exams and memorize things from a textbook is not everything. You said it yourself.
Like I said, they are expanding the program, which means they need more bodies. Since their pool of candidates in HK hasn't increased (one could even argue the pool has shrunk...), their standards naturally decreased. The question is by how much? Some people here are implying any random moron on the streets of HK can be accepted, which just isn't the case. There are only so many applicants in the top 1%. If they want to double the number of cadets, they have to accept applicants in the top 2%. So on and so forth. Are applicants in the top 2% or 5% really that awful? At the end of the day, being an airline pilot is just a job. You don't necessarily have to be the absolute cream of the crop, one in a million, and Capt. Sully's "Miracle on the Hudson" kind of applicant to be a safe and competent pilot. There are plenty of competent aspiring pilots out there.
And no, I am not naive enough to think a corporation is doing this out of the goodness of its heart. I know they are motivated by profit, stock prices, and executive bonuses. We all know foreign pilots at Cathay cost them an arm and a leg. Since 1,000+ have left due to ludicrous pandemic restrictions courtesy of the brilliant HK/Beijing government and worsening compensations/ work environment in the past few years, Cathay sees this as a rare opportunity to replace them with cheaper local pilots in the future. And when they are barely flying at their pre-pandemic level, they have most of the bargaining power in terms of compensation. At least for now.
I have no doubt many experienced foreign captains and first officers at Cathay feel betrayed and see little reasons to stay, but their circumstances are not the same as local HKers looking to get a foot in the door. Believe it or not, the current deal is still attractive to many locals even as a stepping stone, assuming the situation doesn't improve in the next few years.
As long as people understand what this program is and what it isn't, it's nowhere near as terrible as many veterans make it out to be.
I don't think I took it out of context. You implied prestige = competence. Harder to get in = better. A Harvard graduate = a better employee. Please correct me if I misunderstood. And by the way, schools like Harvard already do lower their standard in test scores for underprivileged students. It's called affirmative action. (Or if daddy donated a building.) The goal is to look beyond the numbers and take an applicant's soft skills, passion, and background into consideration. The ability to pass exams and memorize things from a textbook is not everything. You said it yourself.
Like I said, they are expanding the program, which means they need more bodies. Since their pool of candidates in HK hasn't increased (one could even argue the pool has shrunk...), their standards naturally decreased. The question is by how much? Some people here are implying any random moron on the streets of HK can be accepted, which just isn't the case. There are only so many applicants in the top 1%. If they want to double the number of cadets, they have to accept applicants in the top 2%. So on and so forth. Are applicants in the top 2% or 5% really that awful? At the end of the day, being an airline pilot is just a job. You don't necessarily have to be the absolute cream of the crop, one in a million, and Capt. Sully's "Miracle on the Hudson" kind of applicant to be a safe and competent pilot. There are plenty of competent aspiring pilots out there.
And no, I am not naive enough to think a corporation is doing this out of the goodness of its heart. I know they are motivated by profit, stock prices, and executive bonuses. We all know foreign pilots at Cathay cost them an arm and a leg. Since 1,000+ have left due to ludicrous pandemic restrictions courtesy of the brilliant HK/Beijing government and worsening compensations/ work environment in the past few years, Cathay sees this as a rare opportunity to replace them with cheaper local pilots in the future. And when they are barely flying at their pre-pandemic level, they have most of the bargaining power in terms of compensation. At least for now.
I have no doubt many experienced foreign captains and first officers at Cathay feel betrayed and see little reasons to stay, but their circumstances are not the same as local HKers looking to get a foot in the door. Believe it or not, the current deal is still attractive to many locals even as a stepping stone, assuming the situation doesn't improve in the next few years.
As long as people understand what this program is and what it isn't, it's nowhere near as terrible as many veterans make it out to be.
To CX leadership, pilots are just tools to make money, not an asset. Everything they are doing, or they have been doing are only in favor of them. I bet they realized they just need bodies to babysit for the autopilot so there isn't really a need to talk about standard. You want to leave? Sure. Pay back the money first. Besides, where can you go with P2X rating? Good luck with that.
Looking at now, I can only say that I am so blessed to have the opportunity to fly with and to be taught by many top aviators at Cathay. It was really tough, really competitive, but because of that, it makes us better, make us strong. I absolutely feel sorry to the guys and gals who are joining now, the good and the bad ones mixing up together, those are the ones they are goanna be flying with in the future.
'We are looking for future captains - people who will lead confidently, think logically, communicate effectively, and act calmly,' says Kelly Crawford, Cathay Pacific's flight crew recruitment manager. 'Our selection process assesses the applicants' discipline, determination and motivation as well as their interpersonal, problem-solving and team-building skills. We also assess academic competencies, technical aptitude and compatibility with our strong company culture,' she says. 'We want officers who are not only outstanding individually, but who also bring out the best in everybody they fly with. Most of all, we are looking for people who are passionate about flying. Applicants must be able to show us they are enthusiastic about aviation,' Crawford says, adding that the company supports diversity, having hired pilots from 32 countries.
Source from https://www.scmp.com/article/1003965...cathay-pacific
Kelly Crawford, Flight Crew Recruitment Manager, 08/2003 - 06/2018
Guess they are no longer looking for future captains.
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is a difference between giving somebody a chance and giving somebody a chance because we need them because we run out of people and we don't have any choice, which makes them a second or third choice on the list. Thank you for stating that in your last response. It's like dating with girls, well, this beautiful pretty one rejected me, I'm just gonna go with that not so pretty one and bang her hard. It's okay. Can make stuffs in my mind and I will be still fine. She might not know my intention because she is too busy sucking my cock. But the truth is, she's just a tool to me and I'm actually using her to get it off.
Hmm... yes and no. They are still investing in cadets and to maximize return, they would want their cadets to stay for as long as possible. After all, it'll be cheaper than hiring foreign pilots and retraining them. That said, it's not like cadets are going to become captains anytime soon, so it's fair to say their approach is more like "wait-and-see" depending on how this 3-year deal with PolyU turns out and whether Hong Kong will return to its former status as an aviation hub.
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In fairness, this is true in nearly all professions. On one hand, employers look for people (aka tools) to make them more money. On the other hand, employees often work for ****ty companies in exchange for money and/or future opportunities. Everyone says they love aviation, but how many people would be in this profession if it paid minimum wage? Would you? Can you honestly say your current employer sees you as anything more than a tool to make them more money? If a long-term drop in demand makes you redundant, you will still be cut no matter what an asset the recruitment manger said you were. You are special and useful until you aren't. There are better and worse employers out there, but you would be a fool to think any corporation really sees you as "family" as they like to claim. Cathay is, of course, no different.
Hmm... yes and no. They are still investing in cadets and to maximize return, they would want their cadets to stay for as long as possible. After all, it'll be cheaper than hiring foreign pilots and retraining them. That said, it's not like cadets are going to become captains anytime soon, so it's fair to say their approach is more like "wait-and-see" depending on how this 3-year deal with PolyU turns out and whether Hong Kong will return to its former status as an aviation hub.
Hmm... yes and no. They are still investing in cadets and to maximize return, they would want their cadets to stay for as long as possible. After all, it'll be cheaper than hiring foreign pilots and retraining them. That said, it's not like cadets are going to become captains anytime soon, so it's fair to say their approach is more like "wait-and-see" depending on how this 3-year deal with PolyU turns out and whether Hong Kong will return to its former status as an aviation hub.
But, Is that what we are seeing at Cathay? Hell No! First, they pushed through COS18, which is such a humiliation for all pilots across the board, (given how much effort and time they have invested in), then they folded Cathay Dragon without any signs, and now rehired them back in much lower salary package. 17 years Captain, one email, gone! Now, the experienced chaps have had enough of this, one by one, walking out of the door, and some genius at the management says, you know what, there is a huge demand in the local market, let's screw them, let's take advantage of them. Afterall they are desperate, they are hungry, and they don't care much about what we do with the contract, with the standard, with upgrade time so on and forth, they will still keep knocking on the door. Don't hire the smart noisy one, hire the foolish, obedient one, often the quiet one, because they dare to say a thing. Still too expensive to train them? Let's take away their allowance for three years, so each of the individual has to contribute half of the fees. Never had I needed to contribute anything during my time at CX, except for the bond! That's the company has gone down to.
I tell you what, if each of one of them could hold back and say No and stop giving more oxygen to Cathay, CX will eventually have no choice but to be forced to improve the conditions, to improve the standard. They will finally wake up and realize..Nonononono. We can't screw them anymore. As I have been telling the younger guys, CX cadetship program is just one of the ways. With countries relaxing their immigration policy, one could easily take an advantage of it and build a successful flying career outside of the fragrant harbor. Yes it can be done and I have seen it in my eyes. Question is, are you willing to do the hard work.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Straya
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's really funny to see how FM responded on the current selection process, and you can't help but start wondering if FM is one of the management guys, coz his view is pretty much in line with CX leadership. Yes, by spreading the net you will get as many fishes as you want in a short period of time, but at the same time, you are dividing your soldiers as well. Guys in the previous system will always look down on the ones that come after them, and guys who joined the workforce now will always feel being looked down by the ones in higher rank. Whitsunday is a great example as he is a local. The workforce has been so divided for years between expats and locals. What CX should do as a leader is to unite their soldiers as one voice, instead they are using some cheeky tactics to screw them. Idiots. This will fire back. Mark my words.
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there,
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there,
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Hong kong
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chloe just ask a simple question, you either answer her and let her know why 4 is basic requirment, or keep you opinion to your self, but I guess it's a bit hard for you isn't it?
And for the record I have my ICAO level 5 at 2019, and I studied for 6 years for the interview and even got into final interview pre-covid, however I don't have tons of money to put me throught flight school for 20 hrs. nor I can abandon my parents and go to flight school somewhere else, yet I still got and hour on trial flight, did a ground school GFPT done, am I among those sub-standard to you? Because I don't have connection and/or money?
When I said perviously less privilege one I mean EXACTLY this. You don't know what other people go throught, so please don't judge other people too early and harshly.
Also Chloe, ICAO 4 is basic minimum for ATPL (Airline Transport Pilot Licence), so I don't think less then 3 gonna cut it. Beside english is international flight language mean your life depends on it when you are in the air, so maybe try to improve your english before consider further.
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Hong kong
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi there,
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
I just receive an email asking me to do the ICAO English test. I saw the criteria that it needs to be Level 4 for the standards. Anyone out there who did not have a score of 4 but still get to another stage? Any one did the computer test? What is it about and can it be prepare?
It isn't an excat copy of the test, but it include most cut-e in cathay, only numeracy isn't the same. However I do advice you look for more informations about the interview process, as this show your passion.
There are many information in the net, if you seriously considering this path, do some more research first, last time they ask me the bypassing ratio of CX fleet, while I am a 1 hr flying time candidate ^^".
Join Date: May 2022
Location: Fragrant Harbour
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Since you think I was criticizing on a specific member in my previous post which I did not, I was purely directing my message to flying_melony as we were discussing on issue that relates to the current standard and tactics, now I can say this. As a job seeker, you are supposed to read carefully on the job advertisement and pay careful attention on the requirement. That's your job. On the Job Advertisement under the requirement section, it says and I quote "Achieve ICAO (International Civil Aviation Organization) English Language Proficiency level 4 or above". The key words, "level 4 OR ABOVE". Plain and simple. Okay. Let's say you are lazy, you didn't read anything on a JD. There is a free dictionary on your computer and in your palm where you can access 24/7. People use it to buy things, shop for clothes, book hotels, find their next vacation spots so on and so forth. Even my 68-year-old granny knows how to use google search. So don’t give me baloney. The fact that this member chose to come here without researching tells me how serious this person is to the job, and quite frankly, with this kind of spoon-fed attitude, he or she has no place in the cockpit, let alone about succeeding in life.
And for the record I have my ICAO level 5 at 2019, and I studied for 6 years for the interview and even got into final interview pre-covid, however I don't have tons of money to put me throught flight school for 20 hrs. nor I can abandon my parents and go to flight school somewhere else, yet I still got and hour on trial flight, did a ground school GFPT done, am I among those sub-standard to you? Because I don't have connection and/or money?
When I said perviously less privilege one I mean EXACTLY this. You don't know what other people go throught, so please don't judge other people too early and harshly.
When I said perviously less privilege one I mean EXACTLY this. You don't know what other people go throught, so please don't judge other people too early and harshly.
Also Chloe, ICAO 4 is basic minimum for ATPL (Airline Transport Pilot Licence), so I don't think less then 3 gonna cut it. Beside english is international flight language mean your life depends on it when you are in the air, so maybe try to improve your english before consider further.
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Somewhere
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's really funny to see how FM responded on the current selection process, and you can't help but start wondering if FM is one of the management guys, coz his view is pretty much in line with CX leadership. Yes, by spreading the net you will get as many fishes as you want in a short period of time, but at the same time, you are dividing your soldiers as well. Guys in the previous system will always look down on the ones that come after them, and guys who joined the workforce now will always feel being looked down by the ones in higher rank. Whitsunday is a great example as he is a local. The workforce has been so divided for years between expats and locals. What CX should do as a leader is to unite their soldiers as one voice, instead they are using some cheeky tactics to screw them. Idiots. This will fire back. Mark my words.
Some of you don't seem to understand that CX Captains don't make the rules despite what the word "captain" may imply; management does. And to put it harshly, the people in management don't give a **** about your struggles. They are here to help CX make a profit, raise their stock price, answer to the shareholders, and fatten their own piggy bank through bonuses/stocks. So when whitsunday asked me what I thought CX's intentions were, I answered from CX management's pov because that's the only one that matters whether you agree with them or not. Whatever internal conflicts you mentioned and other complaints pilots raised are irrelevant to management. Besides, it's pretty clear the end goal is to replace most, if not all, expensive expats with locals, so why would management care about some temporary internal conflicts? You said the workforce has been divided for years between expats and locals, yet the company still hasn't collapsed. Perhaps unhappy pilots don't have much of an impact on their bottom line?
So what will happen when/if demand returns and they don't have enough pilots? Well they will have to increase compensations to attract and retain pilots. It's a free market and everyone -- and I really do mean everyone -- has a price. If the price is right, more than enough people will put their hatred for CX and the HK/Beijing government aside to come work for CX and live in a shoe box as they have done for many, many years. Mark my words.
This is NOT to say I agree with them, but this is the harsh reality. I sound like one of the management guys again, don't I?
Join Date: Jul 2019
Location: Hong kong
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's almost as if I was trying to understand and explain the current selection process from the pov of CX Management. I am not one of the management guys, but thank you for acknowledging I did a great job.
This is NOT to say I agree with them, but this is the harsh reality. I sound like one of the management guys again, don't I?
This is NOT to say I agree with them, but this is the harsh reality. I sound like one of the management guys again, don't I?
To be fair, I believe most of us trying for the cadet program now knows about this as well, and we are using this opportunity just as much as they are using us for cheap labor. So please remember, don't get divided by whatever management is doing, always stand together to fight for YOUR own right.
And thanks for the insight, might be helpful for the interview
Join Date: Oct 2022
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 48
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You might not the like he said it but everything he said is true. In my view I think whitsunday is being completely honest and forward. Reminds me of my American pals. Rude but honest.
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Straya
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's almost as if I was trying to understand and explain the current selection process from the pov of CX Management. I am not one of the management guys, but thank you for acknowledging I did a great job.
Some of you don't seem to understand that CX Captains don't make the rules despite what the word "captain" may imply; management does. And to put it harshly, the people in management don't give a **** about your struggles. They are here to help CX make a profit, raise their stock price, answer to the shareholders, and fatten their own piggy bank through bonuses/stocks. So when whitsunday asked me what I thought CX's intentions were, I answered from CX management's pov because that's the only one that matters whether you agree with them or not. Whatever internal conflicts you mentioned and other complaints pilots raised are irrelevant to management. Besides, it's pretty clear the end goal is to replace most, if not all, expensive expats with locals, so why would management care about some temporary internal conflicts? You said the workforce has been divided for years between expats and locals, yet the company still hasn't collapsed. Perhaps unhappy pilots don't have much of an impact on their bottom line?
So what will happen when/if demand returns and they don't have enough pilots? Well they will have to increase compensations to attract and retain pilots. It's a free market and everyone -- and I really do mean everyone -- has a price. If the price is right, more than enough people will put their hatred for CX and the HK/Beijing government aside to come work for CX and live in a shoe box as they have done for many, many years. Mark my words.
This is NOT to say I agree with them, but this is the harsh reality. I sound like one of the management guys again, don't I?
Some of you don't seem to understand that CX Captains don't make the rules despite what the word "captain" may imply; management does. And to put it harshly, the people in management don't give a **** about your struggles. They are here to help CX make a profit, raise their stock price, answer to the shareholders, and fatten their own piggy bank through bonuses/stocks. So when whitsunday asked me what I thought CX's intentions were, I answered from CX management's pov because that's the only one that matters whether you agree with them or not. Whatever internal conflicts you mentioned and other complaints pilots raised are irrelevant to management. Besides, it's pretty clear the end goal is to replace most, if not all, expensive expats with locals, so why would management care about some temporary internal conflicts? You said the workforce has been divided for years between expats and locals, yet the company still hasn't collapsed. Perhaps unhappy pilots don't have much of an impact on their bottom line?
So what will happen when/if demand returns and they don't have enough pilots? Well they will have to increase compensations to attract and retain pilots. It's a free market and everyone -- and I really do mean everyone -- has a price. If the price is right, more than enough people will put their hatred for CX and the HK/Beijing government aside to come work for CX and live in a shoe box as they have done for many, many years. Mark my words.
This is NOT to say I agree with them, but this is the harsh reality. I sound like one of the management guys again, don't I?
Join Date: Nov 2022
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just received an email, and it asked me to join a video call to do this initial assessment test which include:
- Monitoring ability
- Spatial orientation
- Complex control
- Applied numeracy
- Multi-tasking
- Reaction speed
- Work related behaviour
Where would you recommend to source out the information that were mention in above? The test is 120min. Once again, much appreciated for the help! I have zero background.
- Monitoring ability
- Spatial orientation
- Complex control
- Applied numeracy
- Multi-tasking
- Reaction speed
- Work related behaviour
Where would you recommend to source out the information that were mention in above? The test is 120min. Once again, much appreciated for the help! I have zero background.