quite simply there is no law that compels any person or corporate body to employ any given person, hence the dismissals CANNOT be UNLAWFUL,
Tamali,
Maybe not where YOU live. Have a look here-
http://www.job-watch.org.au/index.html
As you will see, under Australian law, dismissal for a prohibited reason is UNLAWFUL dismissal, and is remedied as I outlined above. One of these reasons is union membership, and it would not be hard to prove that this was the main reason for the 49er dismissals.The Australian high court has already asertained that the Australian bases pilots are subjest to Australian law.
As for British law, WRONGFUL dismissal, as opposed to UNFAIR dismissal, holds the following-
Wrongful dismissal should not be confused with unfair dismissal. Wrongful dismissal is based on contract law, as well as statute. If an Employer dismisses an Employee, and in doing so, the Employer acts in breach of his contractual obligations or in breach of his statutory obligations to give the Employee notice, then the Employer will be liable to the Employee, for damages for wrongful dismissal. Any damages will be assessed on the basis of what the Employee would have received had the Employer not breached the contract.
Note the last sentence.
Ask yourself this- If the best the complainents can hope for is three months pay, why did the company offer 10? The reason most accepted the company offer was because they didn't feel they could fung their legal action after the HKAOA pulled the rug out from under them, not because they thought the deal was in any way reasonable!!