-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
SIA pilots urged by union to boycott dinner
- Thread starter MarrickG
- Start date
SIA is gov't controlled, so it's pilots vs the Spore gov't. Spore has the reputation for poor employee rights & suppressing wages.
Sure they can join SIA & face alot of hassles that Spore worker faces but why would they want to
If their services are in demand internationally, isn't it more hassle free to join other world class companies
SIA pilots are in demand internationally.. a senior SIA pilot has ATPL rating and is likely to be 777 or 747 or 345 or 380 qualified...these qualifications are in demand by most airlines
If LKY, GCT, Jaya, WKS dont get a pay cut, who shd the SIA pilots geta pay cut?
S
suicidalpap
Guest
Spot on! These ministers are getting millions on top of their pension money.
Working for an airline is more than just about pay. Most local carrier would of course prefer for fly for their flag carrier than jump ship to another airline. They deserve credit for fighting for an improvement than simply jumping ship to another airline which they could do easily.
Locke> You seem to misunderstand the issue a little. Don't forget than re-employment becomes mandatory in 2012. Being retired at 62 as opposed to being employed at lower pay is not the scenario. Hence the need to negotiate the pay packages for pilots upon reaching 62 when they are offered re-employment. As it stands, SQ is saying "forget all the pay rises you worked so hard for, the last 30 years, we are cutting your salary back to starting Captain pay the day you turn 62". My question is does this sound fair to you? Bear in mind here a pilot's job simply does not change in any way, shape or form when you turn 62. Thus you are asking someone to do the exact same job, at a much lower pay simply because of his age. Before anyone should lambast, put yourselves in the shoes of the pilots and ask yourselves, if you were them, would you accept SIA's proposal?
Locke> You seem to misunderstand the issue a little. Don't forget than re-employment becomes mandatory in 2012. Being retired at 62 as opposed to being employed at lower pay is not the scenario. Hence the need to negotiate the pay packages for pilots upon reaching 62 when they are offered re-employment. As it stands, SQ is saying "forget all the pay rises you worked so hard for, the last 30 years, we are cutting your salary back to starting Captain pay the day you turn 62". My question is does this sound fair to you? Bear in mind here a pilot's job simply does not change in any way, shape or form when you turn 62. Thus you are asking someone to do the exact same job, at a much lower pay simply because of his age. Before anyone should lambast, put yourselves in the shoes of the pilots and ask yourselves, if you were them, would you accept SIA's proposal?
and LKY, GCT, S jaya, etc dont have a Ministry to take care of...their job scopes have shrunked...why are they retained in the Cabinet at such an old age? why shd pilots be asked to geta pay cut ? the pilots still have to retain their flying proficiency, their flying responsibilities, their currnecies, their annual medicals, etc..
if anything the ex cabinet ministers shd get a pay cut after 65
Dear Black
62 is retirement age, wether you stick on past retirement age is at the pleasure of management and subject to negotiation. As I put it ALPA is being arseholic about it.
The choice is between retirement with NO PAY and NO WORK or Retirement but at a lower pay.
If they can't agree, then all the older pilots can retire at sixty two and be replace by younger pilots. If they believe they can still draw the same pay package at 62 with other airlines then they can are free to join them
Locke
62 is retirement age, wether you stick on past retirement age is at the pleasure of management and subject to negotiation. As I put it ALPA is being arseholic about it.
The choice is between retirement with NO PAY and NO WORK or Retirement but at a lower pay.
If they can't agree, then all the older pilots can retire at sixty two and be replace by younger pilots. If they believe they can still draw the same pay package at 62 with other airlines then they can are free to join them
Locke
Dear Tracy
One is a political issue and bad leadership, the other is a management issue and as a shareholder in SQ I am on the side of management. I will vote against the PAP this coming GE that said and done
Locke
One is a political issue and bad leadership, the other is a management issue and as a shareholder in SQ I am on the side of management. I will vote against the PAP this coming GE that said and done
Locke
"if anything the ex cabinet ministers shd get a pay cut after 65"
Oppositin should pick up this one immediately.
It would surely resonant with Ah Bengs & Ah Lians.
never mind whether it is logical or reasonable.It wins votes,that is what counts in an erections.
Likewise for SIA mgmt..if the SIA pilots decide that they are not in favour of a pay cut, SIA can choose not to employ >62 yr old pilots..and opt yo train new pilots. so as u said that ALPA is arseholic, I said the same of SIA...let it be a willing emplyer, employee...no one shd be compelled to do what he doesnt want...unlike you, I, like ALPA, believe a 62-yr old SIA pilot with 380 or 777 rating is highly marketable and doesnt have to only work for SIA...so let the negotitaion continue and see who blinks..
I hope that because of this bad pilot management policy,, younger pilots will leave SIA for Cathay Pacific, Thai, Emirates, etc...before they reach 55...let's how SIA will manage the exodus
Dear Locke.
If SIA management get what they want, a meaningless pay cut at 62, then yes, I fully expect that many pilots will simply show the middle finger and retire at 62, play golf or try another airline on expat terms.
Your position is "The choice is between retirement with NO PAY and NO WORK or Retirement but at a lower pay. "
My position is why should this be the case, with just those 2 options? Thats probably what the union is working towards. If they can't agree, then elevate it to the highest possible authority and take what comes out of it. If the pilots are still not happy with the post-62 deal that they end up with, then they can retire at 62 and give SIA the big 'fuck you'. Such a result should not preclude any union fighting tooth and nail for what it thinks is fair and due to them. Doing the same job past retirement age with a pay cut IMO sets a dangerous precedent. The union has every right to fight this as best they can. They may not succeed, but that doesnt mean they shouldnt fight the good fight. Thus they have my full support
Last edited:
The only reason SIA should not apply the rules to the existing pilots is, these guys joined the industry with the expectation of good pay good retirement benefits etc. Now they are in the industry you cut the benefits that's not right.
But it is perfectly alright to stipulate to new aspiring pilots, look, these benefits are gone because you aint that special.
To me, pilots, doctors and the likes are "protected" sectors on the premise these guys need to fulfill very stringent requirements... in actual fact a lot more can do the job.
If these guys don't wake up their fxxking idea, they will be replaced by ahtiongs and ahnehs pilots, trust me.
But it is perfectly alright to stipulate to new aspiring pilots, look, these benefits are gone because you aint that special.
To me, pilots, doctors and the likes are "protected" sectors on the premise these guys need to fulfill very stringent requirements... in actual fact a lot more can do the job.
If these guys don't wake up their fxxking idea, they will be replaced by ahtiongs and ahnehs pilots, trust me.
To my knowledge, this has already been occuring since the SARs crisis and the Ryan Goh saga. SQ pilots are leaving in droves, and who can blame them?
I have it on good authority that as a result of the mass exodus of pilots, SQ has been forced to ramp up the hiring of expat pilots (with much larger pay packages than locals) to make up the shortfall till the start of the financial crisis in 2009
These expats continue to draw a globally competitive salary, well above that drawn by those on local terms
I am also hearing whispers that the current pay package proposed by SIA (the second offer by SIA mentioned in the article which the union also rejected, without releasing the details) for post-62 local pilots will be well below the salary drawn by an expat who starts his first day of work with SQ. So, the man who spends the last 3 decades taking the shit from the company whilst staying loyal gets rewarded at 62 with the priviledge of seeing some junior angmo pilot only JUST join the company and already make more than him.
Sound fair to you?
Last edited:
Dear Tracy
Above 62 , the chances of a pilot retaining his rating's disappear rather quickly and its usually down to health. One failed medical and its bye bye career but it makes for safer flying for the flying public.
Every airline pilot out there understands the risk and benefits and that continued flying after 62 or 63 diminishes considerably. A pilot at sixty two no matter how highly qualified is not A VERY attractive hire for any International Airline.
And the fact is if all the old farts F O faster it means more promotional prospects for younger pilots
Locke
Above 62 , the chances of a pilot retaining his rating's disappear rather quickly and its usually down to health. One failed medical and its bye bye career but it makes for safer flying for the flying public.
Every airline pilot out there understands the risk and benefits and that continued flying after 62 or 63 diminishes considerably. A pilot at sixty two no matter how highly qualified is not A VERY attractive hire for any International Airline.
And the fact is if all the old farts F O faster it means more promotional prospects for younger pilots
Locke
SIA has bad HR management policies..I applaud ALPA for standing up to SIA Mgmt....
Dear Black
Two seperate issues local, expat pay and post 62 pay. Its either retire with NO PAY or work but at a reduced pay. At some point in time pilots above 62 are at risk of failing medical's and having health problems, Management is right in this regards
Locke
Two seperate issues local, expat pay and post 62 pay. Its either retire with NO PAY or work but at a reduced pay. At some point in time pilots above 62 are at risk of failing medical's and having health problems, Management is right in this regards
Locke
they should retire. what happened to their financial planning when they were healthy pilots making more money than the average joe? if they need to continue to work just because they need the money, they can blame themselves and their lack of financial planning skills. i don't want to fly in a commercial jet if i know the chances of a pilot getting a heart attack mid flight are a mile high.
why shd a pilot get a pay cut just because he is post 62 when he is doing the same job and having the same responsibilites as when he was 61?
are you saying that sia is doing the pilot a favour by employing him after 62 and the pilot shd be thankful and therefore gratefully doing the same job for less? the question is....is sia willingly hiring the pilot after he is 62 ?
does a doctor at MOH get a pay cut after he turns 62?
I already addressed the first point but as to the second. Yes, pilots after 62 are more prone to failing medicals, but once you fail a medical, no pilot flies. It's as simple as that. Any health problem past 62 that doesn't revoke the very stringent airline transport-class medical will have no impact on a person's ability to fly. If a pilot doesn't fly, he doesn't get paid. The risk is fully borne by the pilot and the company is not out of pocket for a single dollar if a pilot fails his medical and loses his licence. Any perceived risk is wholly offset by the sheer amount of experience that a post-62 pilot carries with him which allows him to do his job better than a starting captain, who will be drawing the same amount of salary for doing the same job, if the company has it's way
ICAO already recognises the fact that a pilot should be entitled to work till 65 if he is so able.
You applaud? Check out the age of your pilot before you fly next time. Hope that you're not appalled.
Similar threads
