tris06

I suppose the tacky old business class seating on the 747's they renovated we light in comparison... I love the new business class. I suppose its a first generation issue and so the next refit in a number of years they can look how to reduce that weight. To be honest in today's context of B787's and A350's the B777 is not that efficient considering almost every airline and his dog has one already. I see them getting rid of the B777 within 6/8 years.

hayzel7773

It was already stated before that all 10 leased 777s would be returned once the A350s had come in. They were just fillers.

baggyred

May be more of a TPE question, than a BR question - but roughly how long should I allow to get from the lounges in T2 (either BR or SQ) @ TPE to get to a gate at T1? I'll only have some light carry-on and mobiity isn't an issue

Will there be a transit security check?

And would it be best to walk or get the skytrain between terminals.

coolfish1103

If you walk fast, 15 minutes. If you walk slow, 25 minutes.

Transit security check is available on both terminal. You will see it along with duty free shops.

I think train is only available on the arrival level so you will be making a detour.

lolstebbo

Are they going to also get some A35Js or pick up the 6 A359 options they have?

hayzel7773

I see them firming the 6 options. They need to figure out their horrible financial situation and labor relations first.

bzcat

I do not have a position on the union's demand. I was just explaining to people not familiar with the situation that it is not political. It is a purely labor dispute. DPP and KMT both support the management approved union, which of course does not negotiate with management (or negotiate at all). TFAU is a real independent union and that is something very new in Taiwan. Hence CI management (and the DPP Govt) do not really have a good idea on to handle the negotiation. They are not used to having an equal partner in collective bargaining negotiations.

Kevin Liu

http://focustaiwan.tw/news/aeco/201707040017.aspx

coolfish1103

The strike would have never been legal in the first place had the Taoyuan mayor never approved it. Sure the FAs can still strike regardless whether it's legal or not but they will have no firming position at court.

Approving the strike is a political decision.

bzcat

The major of Taoyuan is a local official, he has no jurisdiction over national labor laws. He cannot "approve" a TFAU strike anymore than he can approve of me boycotting 7-Eleven because they once charged me the wrong price for a bag of chips. According to Taiwan’s Act for Settlement of Labor-management Disputes, strikes may legally begin once industrial negotiations fail to reach a compromise and over half of the union workers voted in favor of a strike. TFAU can and did call a strike. It didn't need anyone's approval other than its own members (of which 96% voted for strike authorization).

Remember, the strike was called by TFAU, an independent union that did not have any Govt officials or management on the board. CIU, the official union that supposedly represents all CI employees (not just cabin crews) didn't call the strike. CIU has CI management and thus Govt appointed position on the board. If CIU members want to call a strike, then the motion to vote on a strike authorization has to be approved by the CIU board, which has management/Govt appointees. Which of course means in practice, CIU never can call a strike, and thus has no real bargaining power.

The difference between the 2016 and anytime before that is the existence of an independent union. Not which political party was in charge of a local municipality.

Now you can argue that the fact an independent union was allowed to exist rather than ruthlessly crushed and its leaders jailed on anti-government charges a "political decision". But I'm not sure we are still talking about airlines.

coolfish1103

http://www.eventsinfocus.org/news/750

It doesn't matter if he is just a mayor of a city. He represents the city. The city has the administrative rights to exercise compulsory arbitration between the two parties (CAL and Taoyuan FA union) indefinitely. The mayor decided to "help" the union by getting rid of the labor director who continues to exercise the rights. He gave administrative order to the labor department to not exercise compulsory arbitration.

Strike became legal, union then exercised their voting rights and voted for strike. Then the union took the day of the President's trip to Central America as the day to act (so the DPP president got shocked by her own mayor), by announcing all flights will cease operation the next day 6pm before the day of the strike. The President of CAL resigned shortly after, and then Ministry of Transportation got rid of the CEO, citing not suitable in fixing this.

hayzel7773

Coolfish is correct on this issue. The main reason why the strike was ever "approved"(for lack of a better word) was to replace CAL management with DPP friendly people.
Little did this mayor know that it would cost them big, as it made the President look hypocritical with her plane being the only one to depart that morning more than the required amount(20 crew in addition to deadheaders).
To make matters even worse during that short duration, the Chairman ignored the Chairman-to-be's calls, texts, and emails and basically left with everything in shambles, leaving the new Chairman to have to clean everything up(Most of top management had also quit that night).
Now both sides are back to compulsory arbitration over CAL supposedly not keeping their side of the agreement. Definitely won't be seeing them coming off any time soon!

hayzel7773

CI has new UM(Unaccompanied Minor) rules.
1. No UMs in business class.
2. The age eligible for UM travel is now 5-12yrs(No longer 3 months to 12 years).
3. They must be booked in RBD-W/U/Y/B/M adult fares for all sectors, no exceptions.

bzcat

I don't think we have a dispute with facts. We have a basic disagreement of the role of Govt in a labor dispute and how civil society can exercise its rights in a democratic society. You deemed the mayor's decision not to suppress the union as a political act to favor labor. I viewed it as ensuring the Govt is staying neutral.

The role of Taoyuan City labor department is to mediate and you cannot mediate effectively if you are favoring one side or another. In this particular case, CI management forced the mayor's hand by asking for arbitration and the union responded with a request to hold strike authorization vote. Those were the positions the two sides were holding. It would have been inappropriate for the Taoyuan City Govt to side with CI management and compel arbitration at that point. The mayor was ensuring the city appears impartial so it can continue to mediate. If he sides with management and blocks TFAU from holding a strike vote, that is essentially union busting, and a real political act to favor management.

And again, the root of the situation is the fact that there were two sides to begin with. My point all along is that TFAU is not political in the context of DPP-KMT. It transcends party politics. TFAU was able to organize and hold collective bargaining talks because it is independent. This is a new development in Taiwan. It's not useful to view this solely in the DPP-KMT lens because Taiwan has never had this kind of labor activism.

This is the last thing I will say on this as I believe we are now off topic...

Kevin Liu

I'm seeing the firm orders as well; however, they don't have much time left as option must execute before the end of 2017.
Also, they've been talking about narrowbody renewal that should be announce before the end of last month.
Didn't see that in this year's PAS ........
Wondering what happened ......