Hi Nig,

I, for one, wouldn't want you to be any less militant than what you already are! I personally think this company needs a good swift kick and that they have been taking advantage of us since we signed the contract last year (and long before that). We need someone who will make them stand up and take notice. I'm sure you know that there are many of us who want to see this company prosper, but, how many slaps in the face do we have to take? Huge profits, short of crews, leave buy-backs, leave cancellations, shitty airplanes. How much crap are we expected to take? This job has afforded me a life-style I wouldn't of been able to achieve most other places. I must say, I'm proud to work for CX, but at what cost? It seems like we keep bailing them out of trouble, over and over again. I don't want the shit to continue to flow downhill and on to our shoulders again and again (the laundry bill is enormous!).

Just a few thoughts. Hope you are well. See you soon!

Nigel,

You've got my vote!

Good luck,

Nigel,

Glad to hear that you are running for the leadership.

I will be brief and give you my main rant:

For nearly seven years, I have been waiting for a significant improvement in my B Scale pay package. I know there's a long list of wishes from the membership, but if I were to stand for one, it would be to rid of the B Scale. I am sick and tired of the second class treatment from Cathay!

Good luck,

Good Luck Nigel

You have got my support all the way

I do hope you will energetically sustain your campaign. It will do the Association much good to have another iconoclast as President.

The mere fact of your having the manifesto right up front shows character and good organisation, and you have chosen good words; I guess there will be a few furrowed brows up there in the Heart of Asia, and this is always good.

Gidday Nigel,

Nice to see you are running for Prez.  Personally, Ted is tired and needs a break from the job and, perhaps, we do need a more 'militant' leadership.

I think you may need to consider the plight of the Veta members in a little more detail. Rightly or wrongly there is a perception amongst many Veta crew that we were "sold out" during last years dispute. The question being asked by those who have yet to make up their minds about a new president is, what will the new committee/president do for Veta?

Some food for thought perhaps.

See ya and good luck.

Hi Nigel:

Consider it done. You already had my vote!

Good luck,

Dear Nigel,

I was going to come over but you were deep in conversation. I have been chatting already along the lines you suggest. The only disadvantage I see you have is peoples tendency to vote for the incumbent, if they have no other real opinion on it. Your manifesto was the better of the two.

I will be back in Hong Kong late next year, and when that is all under my belt, I will look forward to working with you again.

Absolutely!

Good luck

> Nigel thanks for your mail. Just a simple question. By choosing to run against Ted I presume you feel he is not taking the AOA in the right  direction.

> What will you do differently?

Apply more energy into the time-intensive areas (comms with the members etc), and more energy into planning and clarifying an overall direction. I have a plan to make our Association stronger/bigger/more effective in a few years' time. That plan will only work with application.

> By the way, I wholly approve of your actions, and I feel it is a good  thing for the AOA as a whole, who ever wins.

Thanks. I'm very comfortable that a vote is good for our Association and will put the next President in a stronger position. The number of people that I've canvassed also seems to confirm that view.

>I am not so sure over the timing of the challenge though. We have had a relatively quiet 6 mths,  and right now we are winding up to CC and more.

No choice - it's a defined annual event and I concluded that it was better that I run now rather than in one year's time when both Ted and I are a little older and a little more burnt out ;-)

> What is very important, is that we do not cause a schism within the AOA,  and we do not loose either you or Ted from participating in the AOA.

I've been nominated for a General Committee slot as well as for President. I hope that Ted would also feel he has more to offer, irrespective of the outcome. Having not been on the committee for 18 months, I know my wife will tell you that she has not noticed much difference in my AOA participation. In fact, one of the reasons GMA gave me verbally for not wanting to print my letter to Crews News was that he felt that the letter would be perceived as AOA policy!

> Nigel. If you do not win, (and taking on an incumbent President will be  an uphill struggle)

I'm well aware of the challenge and I considered this very carefully before choosing to run. It's not just "an incumbent President", it's also a mate whose done an excellent job over 2 of the hardest years I've known. In my opinion, it's time to hand the baton on to a fresher member for the never-ending relay race, whilst continuing to use all available resources. 

> do not walk away with your tail between your  legs, you are a huge asset to the cause, no matter what position you  hold.

That's just not me. WYSIWYG.

Hey Nige:

Already doing that!

Take Care and Good Luck,

Consider it done and best of luck!

Hi Nigel,

I fully support your bid to become President and wish you all the best.

I have and will continue to actively canvass support for your election among my peer group.

Once again all the best,

Nigel,

Good on you for going for it - I must say I admire your bravery to potentially take on such a mammoth task!

Dear Nij,

Thank you for your email.

I am pleased to see that you are running for President. From time to time we have not agreed on certain items in question, or indeed on aspects of the broader strategies but I have always respected your open way of doing business. Indeed WYSIWYG.

I feel that having an election for President can do nothing but good for the Association. I only wish that there were sufficient candidates to allow an election for the committee also.

You will be under no illusions as to the difficulty of  the task ahead to obtain a majority vote over Ted, mainly because of the "comfort level" in the "known". In your own case there is also more than a little fear of the "unknown". It is a fact that the open use of the "m" word does not sit comfortably with some. I encourage you to, however, not to attempt to please all of the people all of the time, but please do be seen to be open in listening to them.

Nigel,

I have been doing just this since, literally, the moment I found out you were running.

In short, I am an overt supporter. To use a phrase first coined by the Australian Labor Party in

1975................."It's Time".

Good luck Nigel, you have, and will continue to have in the future, a great deal of support.

Cheers,

Hi Nigel,

I take my hat off to you, wish you good luck, you have my vote and I will be talking to others.

Nigel,

I will do my bit as requested. It is certainly being talked about. I am on XXX weeks G days at the moment as I am out of hours.

Good luck, and thanks for running.

Can do Nige,

You have at least my vote,

Good luck,

Nigel

Don't want you to get a swelled head or anything but as soon as the ballot hit my mailbox i crossed out the other name and left you with my vote. I beleive you have the RIGHT STUFF including the right amount of militancy.

Hope you win! My friends have been informed. I think sitting on the fence waving a stick right now is not the way to go. Best of luck and see you soon.

Nigel,

I have been bending many ears for many hours. You have my support 100%.

Hi Nigel ,

Consider it done.

Rgds

Hi Nigel,

Great to hear your going for the Pres, too right I will tell everyone.  Go for it Nigel - you will do it well. Best of luck

No worries, mate.

G'day Nigel,

 I really can't afford to let another year (10%-ish of my remaining time in CX) to produce so little in the way of concrete, substantive results on vital issues such as rostering. Ted's performance last year - together with everyone involved in the AOA - was wonderful, especially in unifying an essentially "splitist" bunch of guys, but I feel very strongly that it is time to push our cause in stronger terms. The risks, however, have to be manageable.

You have my vote. Good luck!

Nigel,

If you're that keen to do a thankless task, then you have my support.

Hi Nigel,

When I first saw your name on the ballot, I knew who I would be voting for. I think it is healthy to finally have a real vote President, as opposed to always having only one candidate.

I do believe honestly you are the best man for the job. I have openly told people in DB that I will be voting for you. That has started some to rethink the status quo. I told them that I worked with you on the Tri-motor. Your past dedication to AOA duties speaks for itself. A few people have asked if you are too radical. I said, personally I think not, however I would love the company to believe so. We could win some battles with the mere presence of an intelligent icon that the company is afraid to make mad.

Good luck Nigel.....talk at ya later..

Nigel, I have given you my vote and have already been actively following up part two of your request. Good Luck,

Hi Nigel,

Thanx for the email. I have been actively promoting your bid for President with anyone who will listen since you announced you were running, and will continue to do so. Good luck, but I don't think you will need it!

Hi Nigel,

You're right, I do know what kind of person you are, what you stand for and I appreciate your straight forwardness and transparent characteristics. By way of encouragement, I personally voted for you upon receiving the ballot. As I'm enjoying my first day of XX weeks leave today, I doubt that I'd be able to help a great deal in promoting my views, and thus your strengths, to our peers.

I wish you success. Thanks for keeping democracy alive.

Best of luck Nigel

You're too late pal, I've already voted for you!

Am backing you hard in conversation as well.

Best of luck

Sure thing Nigel

What is your view on CX retirement age

That's interesting - you're the second guy in 5 minutes on that!

The only provision for service beyond 55 in our contract is by-pass pay, which is punitive for CX and is not really intended as a long-term solution. Equally, it is flexible and doesn't give CX the automatic penalty of having to pay higher salaries (to more senior crew) even during a downturn.

If CX forecast a long-term shortage of pilots (as most analysts do), then it is a problem they would have to address and presumably request a CoS change.

Something of that magnitude would be a membership-wide decision, which - if ratified - would have to be followed by individual contract change. Retirement age continues to be a political "hot potato" in many regions, so I have no doubt it would spur many a letter and comment!

In summary, my view is that, if it comes up, it would have to be researched and debated like any other major change. Being 46, and not wishing to work beyond 50 (unlikely but nice thought), I don't have a strong opinion in either direction as an individual. The President, however, would be bound by the constitution (as above).

Hope that answers your question.

Nigel.

Nigel

Thanks for the prompt reply. It has always been an emotional issue anywhere in the world in any airline .It was ficercely debated in Australia , it was changed from 55 to 60 and after a week everybody forgot about it. The main thing is that everybody has the opportunity if they want it. Young people can be very short sighted on these issues. I do realize that the Company would have to initate discussions on it. Regards

In all my discussions with you over the years, you have always come across as someone who will listen to an opposing or alternate view and concede a point if it's reasonable. You've also always argued your points convincingly and calmly. All this makes me believe you'd be a good AOA president

Yep, we've had a few fairly long discussions and I respect your views regarding the AOA and where to go next. You can be assured that you have my vote. All the best.

Thanks for standing up Nigel.

Nigel,

Thank you for your E-mail concerning the hustings for the A.O.A election. As far as I am aware we have never met, I don't know you and you don't know me. However I am a XXX based, B-scale F/O on the 747-400 and I am a member of the A.O.A, and last year I felt unwell during the "negotiations" and was sick. I supported the action and am bitterly dissapointed at the outcome.

I am not sure you have fully defined the depth of feeling amongst the members of my era (joined in {>1995} ). We have seen the association roll over for COS 84, roll over for B-scales, roll over for ASL and last year you capitulated in a spectacular display of spinelessness and rolled over for MASSIVE pay cuts for your members. When is this continual erosion of our pay, benefits and status going to stop?

Please convince me that the A.O.A is not just a toothless debating society and I MAY vote for you.

REPLY:  I've had a couple of similar messages on similar topics and I can't address the points in sufficient depth in an email. Writing, whilst expedient, is definitely not always the best form of comms on all subjects.

I've checked your roster and reckon that we could both be free in HKG on XX June, when I would be very happy to meet you to discuss your points in detail with you. Please send me a suggested time and venue.

Nigel;

I am writing to you directly because a) you solicited some comments in your last email and b) it is just too hard to find the email addresses and actual names of the current POs.

Referring to the latest weekly update, this association has no business reviewing freighter pay in light of the massive pay cuts that were imposed on the majority of the pilots last year. To make matters worse the massive profits being enjoyed this year make it even harder to understand why the cuts must continue. I am sure I am not alone in telling you that I resent any efforts by the association, that I have steadfastly supported for the last six years, trying to improve the lot of anyone flying freighters. The pilots at Cathay Freighters should never have been allowed to join this association and I resent any energy spent on their behalf. In spite of what the company wants us to think WE ARE NOT ON THE SAME TEAM!

I will seriously reconsider my membership in the HKAOA if there is continued effort on behalf of CX Freighter pilots. I hope I have made my concerns clear.

REPLY:   You and I know each other pretty well and are in agreement on many issues. I can't cover all of your points effectively in an email; we've seen that does not work.

Why don't we meet and discuss this over a beer when you next come to HKG? I think your roster has you in town on XX June and I can be free that day. Please send me an email suggesting a suitable time and venue.

Dear Nigel,

I have been {supporting your cause} since your flyer in my mail box.

All the best,

Hi, Nigel

I'd love to do that but I'm on leave at the moment. You have my full support!! Hope when I come back, you're the new president!

Nigel,

I am happy to do so. Have already put in a few words here and there. I'm on leave for a few weeks now, back for the run up. Good luck,

Hi Nig,

Just got your email. Rest assured you have my full support. I know both you and Ted very well and he has done a tremendous job, especially during the events of the past couple of years. 

The B scale issue is the most important problem from my perspective and it has to be resolved. Trying to raise a family in this town on B scale salary is tough.

And then there's rostering!

> Dear Nigel,

> Thanks for your email. I am on leave till XX July so will not have  much influence before then.

Ok, thanks. Enjoy your leave.

> Whist I have not been active in the AOA  for many years your and others work is still very much appreciated. I  have to say my initial reaction to seeing two names on the ballot  sheet instead of the normal one was a surprise. I know you both and  Ted does have a track record as President. I don't doubt you are any  less capable. What is your agenda for standing against Ted?

As my manifesto said, I am not standing against Ted as much as standing for the job. Ted finally decided to run for the position, too, after I had committed to standing.

> I note  your comments that you are not trying to directly oppose him but  somewhere along the line you are not happy with his approach to our  problems.

Nope, sorry, that's not what I intended to convey. As I've said elsewhere, it's more of 2 guys on a team wanting to be captain, each thinking they still have something more to offer. I'd like to think that I am the fresher of the 2 and am campaigning on the issue that we really have to get a load of problems sorted out once and for all so the pilots, management and our Company can be more efficient and all of us more profitable!

> However if you are elected you will both have to work  together as Ted will retain a place on the committee.

And vice versa. I was also nominated to the Committee and there were insufficient numbers to generate a committee election. I hope that we will continue to be active on the same "team" irrespective of who wins.

> I have my own  axe to grind in relation to the handling of the integration of ASL  into CX mainline. It seems amazing to me that we have a situation  where there will be pilots over 55, continuing to work for a section  of the airline they joined years after I joined CX, on the day I will  have to retire at 55 {within 2 years}. I am not necessarily going to work  after 55 however I would like to have the choice. I believe there  should be some system agreed with CX (I have heard they would like to extend the 55 limit) where the retiring age is extended by a year  every two years to 57 or greater.

Prior to the formation of ASL there  was some work and discussion with CX about extending the retiring age  I believe. Where do you stand on this issue? I know it is contentious  and some will say I have had a fair crack of the whip however the  present situation is not right even if it wasn't of the AOA's making.

Excuse me if I copy-and-paste my reply to this point, as I have had it before:

>>>>

The only provision for service beyond 55 in our contract is by-pass pay, which is punitive for CX and is not really intended as a long-term solution. Equally, it is flexible and doesn't give CX the automatic penalty of having to pay higher salaries (to more senior crew) even during a downturn.

If CX forecast a long-term shortage of pilots (as most analysts do), then it is a problem they would have to address and presumably request a CoS change.

Something of that magnitude would be a membership-wide decision, which - if ratified - would have to be followed by individual contract change. Retirement age continues to be a political "hot potato" in many regions, so I have no doubt it would spur many a letter and comment!

In summary, my view is that, if it comes up, it would have to be researched and debated like any other major change. Being 46, and not wishing to work beyond 50 (unlikely but nice thought), I don't have a strong opinion in either direction as an individual. The President, however, would be bound by the constitution (as above).

Hope that answers your question.

>>>>>

> You have my vote but, as President, I will be bringing the above  subject to your attention!!! With kind regards and good luck,

Thanks very much for your support and wishes. I don't think I'm a "shrinking violet" and, having worked directly for the last 3 Presidents, I know he has to deal with lots of "hot issues"!

Nigel, you have my vote, I too, feel that action needs to be taken and now is the time.

I want equality, equal pay for equal work, not 5000 cnd$ difference per month for guys showing up in YVR to fly the same airplanes, not less for guys who fly boxes in the same a/c on the same AOC. I think it is time for 1 pay scheme. I thought maybe last year it would happen, I was wrong, I guess the company would feel we would be too united under one plan. you have my support,

REPLY:  Thanks for your support.

I don't want to dampen any enthusiasm - actually the opposite. I'm, by nature, impatient and would like things sorted out today or, at worst, tomorrow. Experience has taught me that dealing with CX always takes about 4 times longer than anticipated - so how about by the end of next week ;-)

If I get in, I would expect a period of preparation/planning followed by some sustained slog by us.

It will not happen overnight but NOW is the time. Their plan is divide and rule, mine is unite and succeed.

You already have my vote. I have no qualms with talking to the boys about what you stand for and what they can expect from you. I know that you are well liked and respected amongst the cabin crew and I'm sure that you also have the vote of confidence among a number of LEPs. Keep up the good work and let me know if you need any help.

All the best, and you have my vote

A very interesting business, and one that CX are no doubt following very closely. The chaps have a clear chance to either demonstrate their dissatisfaction or capitulate. If you get the vote I would think that Ken etc would see that as a clear statement of intent not to be done over any more.

The real issue is that having taken the hit in HKG and on the bases we need to get ALL A scales active again, and perhaps add an increment or two to reflect longer career expectations now.

I have already cast my vote. Best of luck with your campaign.

Great to see that there will actually be a real election for the position of president.

Having worked with both you and Ted, I feel that the Association will be in good hands however the vote works out. I must admit that I was surprised to read your campaign prospectus. Not that I don't think that you would do a good job, but rather that you were looking for more time to spend with family and other interests. Gotta run. Good luck with the election.

Dear Nigel,

Thanks for the message re: the election of AOA President. Whoever wins, I just hope it doesn't split us into factions. The most important thing at the moment, (as ever), is unity. Hope all goes well. Nice to hear from you.

REPLY:  That's the prime goal, which I hope is apparent from my manifesto etc.

WOW! This is all riveting reading and I'm not being facetious here. If Nick Rhodes on email disagrees with your stance on the CoS for B scalers and wish you luck all the same, I think the sparring is being conducted in the most gentlemanly way.

> Thanks for your E-mail. I salute you for your courage in running for a tiring, sometimes thankless position. Several questions. How do you  think the management team will regard a switch in leadership?

Don't care, really. Our policies will not change overnight, just the team's energy level. Instead of "Same Team, Same Dream", I think "New Team, More Steam" might be more appropriate.

> What  will you do differently from Ted? I'm sure you could do a good job and I think you will be getting a lot of votes. Best of luck

I think I can do as well as Ted as we both have our strong points. I'd like to think that I am more energetic.

> Well put. If you want a go, which you obviously do, I'll put out the  good word at FL310 and appropriate watering holes. See you around,

Dear Nigel,

I have been trying my best. I think there are still people, who have not voted, but those that I have talked to have favoured Ted. The reason is that he is the incumbent. I am going on leave, before it is canx! Good luck - I hope you make it.

Hi Nigel:

It's really good news to hear that you're running for the presidency of the AOA. I will try my utmost best to try to get my fellow colleagues to support your election!

Good luck,

Good luck with your candidacy for President.

I hear tell that you are on the path to higher things. It is not for me to say who should be or would be the boss but I do think it is important that there IS a boss. It is in everyone's interest that the AOA is well represented and strongly led. Good luck.

As for feedback from the few flights I've done, the impression I've gained about the election is that most guys feel that voting for a change, ie: you, is a way of sending a message to management. My guess is also that you are more well known than you may think. All the best

OK Nigel....will do..good luck.

Greetings Nigel

I know of one DEFINITE vote for you, ( nudge, nudge!), and am already on your electioneering bandwagon !. SO far nobody has thumped me !!!!!!. Here's voting for you !.

> Barley is running a campaign for you - how did you get him on side? He is open on the flight deck that he doesn't want you - guess what effect that has on the boys voting preference - perhaps you should be advertising that fact!!

Unlike his predecessor, I don't think Ken would enter into the matter of AOA Presidency. He will deal professionally with whomever is the next President voted in by the Members. A cursory look at his roster shows that he has not done much flying recently and this is probably just wishful thinking ;-)

> If you become president and we have CC in force during your presidency will you apply Rule 7.20 without hesitation and actually expel members if they are in violation of a CC motion.

> The other thing is if a member is expelled will he loose his "Loss of Licence Income Protection Insurance" once the current period of his insurance expires.

> This is what I want can, you deliver!

The easy answer, to win votes, is to answer: yes, yes, yes. However, it's not quite that straightforward....

If Motion 5 is voted in by the Membership tomorrow then it will become an Association Resolution. The Motion contains a direct link from any Resolution to Rule 7.20, which concerns members' conduct. The caveat is "without just cause".

When I was previously on the Committee and compliance with contracts was in effect, we set up a definitive and confidential procedure to evaluate alleged resolution breaches. Two Principal Officers independently looked at rosters etc to assess if there was a case to answer. If they thought there was then it was passed to the Gen Sec, who would re-assess and then contact the member concerned. Most often, it stopped there. On a few occasions, it came before the General Committee for discussion. The end result was that a few members resigned and, after my time, I believe a couple were expelled.

Members also have recourse to Rule 7.22, Aggrieved Members Rights, which is an appeals procedure. Basically, the Member can convene an EGM to resolve a committee decision. Don't think that was ever used, which tends to reinforce the validity of the procedures!

It should also be noted that Rule 7.20 covers lesser sanctions such as temporary suspension etc.

So what I'm trying to explain is that the President doesn't have any autonomy here. It's not an emotional, 'witch-hunt' scenario. It is a carefully balanced procedure for ensuring that your Association's resolutions are complied with. Your whole committee is bound to follow a Resolution and, as President, I would act no differently than Ted in the matter. It would be without hesitation and to expulsion, if deemed appropriate, as has already been the case.

I think it would be fair to say that neither of us wishes to see anyone leave the AOA but the Rules are quite straightforward: if someone doesn't follow a Resolution, voted in by greater than a 2/3 majority of their peers, they probably shouldn't be in our Association anyway. Remember "just cause".

> The other thing is if a member is expelled will he loose his "Loss of Licence Income Protection Insurance" once the current period of his insurance expires.

As far as I am aware, ALL Association benefits are for members only. Once you're out, all benefits cease to apply - not just Income Protection, which must be one of the cheapest insurances around.

> This is what I want can, you deliver!

I think it's not really a problem - it's procedure.

Dear Nigel,

I've put in my vote for you before my leave. Good luck!

Good luck Nigel have done already!

> Hope the campaign goes well.

Thanks. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

> Something that has always struck me as unfair is the concept of paying profit share based on salary - when there is a 'discontinuity' in the  scales - i.e. A and B scales.

> I hope you might be able to give this some attention if you get elected since:

At the risk of losing votes here, let me give my answer, which might not be the one you'd like.

> 1. We are likely to receive a reasonable profit share next round - so this will become a real issue.

Yes, which will include ~120m saved from the salaries of those who joined pre-93.

2. Resolved in the right way it might  be useful in eventually getting us all on a single scale

yes

- which is, I  believe, high on your manifesto.

yes.

>

> I have never bemoaned A/B scale: I knew what the score was when I  joined - which I was not forced to do. (Of course reserve the right to  negotiate an improvement in my contract!).

A concept reconfirmed last year by management, when they re-negotiated mine (for the second time since you joined).

> What I find unfair is that having introduced B Scales, the company  continued to pay profit share pilots based on multiples of salary.

Qualified agreement.

> The profit share formula is up to the company - as I understand it.

Mainly - it's "amendable company policy"....

> Generally a profit share scheme should reflect the contribution made by  employees and I imagine that this was what the company was thinking when  they first devised a formula for profit share. While there are many ways  of dividing up profit share, salary based does not seem unreasonable -

> AS LONG AS THE PAY SCALES REFLECT CONTRIBUTION MADE. They did then -  they certainly do not now.

> In fact, I make a bigger contribution to the bottom line than an A  Scale colleague - I do the same job for less. On that basis I should  receive MORE, not less profit share.

Your logic is good. Let me put in a couple of rhetorical questions:

1. I earn more, for example, than GMA and someone in Airline Planning who decides strategy. They may argue that their contribution to the bottom line is greater than mine. Who should get greatest profit share? 

2. I earn more (HK$) than a more senior captain on a base, yet we both could sit in the same seat doing the same job. Who should get greater profit share?

> So, why not establish the principal with the company that:

> For the purposes of calculating profit share, they put ALL officers on  the same "Notional Scale" - A Notional 'A' Scale. Then at least B Scale  officers, in receiving an 'equivalent A scale salary multiple', would  receive a much fairer share of the profit.

I like the idea of paying pilots who joined since 93 a greater share of the profit. Realistically, however, I do not see management agreeing to changing the profit share formula, in the manner you suggest, to give an advantage to any individual group of employees. How would they sell the idea to the other 11000 employees?

> .........and who knows, having established with the company, the  principal of a single Notional scale, perhaps we would be closer to  getting everyone back on the same real pay scale.

That's the real point, I think. It is past the time that we should have abolished different salary scales and all their attendant divisiveness. If we had a merged scale, the problem of second class profit share payouts would not arise. Further divisiveness should be resisted e.g. paying second rate C&T allowances, as is being offered to some officers.

It's not the answer you want, XXXXX, but I prefer to put the horse before the cart. You should be getting comparable pay whether or not this management chooses to declare a profit.

To summarise, my aims are:

1. Common COS for all

2. Common Benefits in each base area (including Hong Kong)

3. Industry Standard RPs

4. Common salary scales

> Kind regards and good luck with the election,

Thanks again. More than luck, I need 50% of the votes plus 1.

Thanks also for your support last year. Together, we can make a difference.

Remember, the views expressed are not necessarily my opinion!

HKAOA Presidential Election 2002:

Vote again FOR Your Future, Vote FOR Nigel