Nosegear
no contradiction, as I explained that the ban adversely affects any other pilot in the world who wants to join Cathay. The question is whether I can justify this statement. I'll have a stab.
To ask someone to sacrifice something in order to show support for you and lend weight to your argument is fine if you yourself are willing to make the same, or similar, sacrifice yourself. In this instance, and due to the rather one-sided labour laws in HK, this has not been possible.
By imposing a ban on employment, the AOA is asking anyone with aspirations to join Cathay to put those aspirations on hold. A position in which you find yourself, and one in which you feel happy to oblige. However, ther are numerous people who had started their Cathay application long before the ban was even heard of, and long before the 49ers were sacked. Some of those have been successful, and are awaiting the job offer. A friend of mine from your neck of the woods even had the letter telling him that he had been successful before the maximum safety initiative was instituted. If he gets the letter offering him the job that he worked his socks off for, the AOA is asking him to say no.
Whether or not he takes the offer is for him to decide. He has a wife and family just like those that were dismissed. There will likely be many others in his position of being caught between the trenches. Some of them will take the view that life would be made too unbearable by some the current pilot workforce, and turn down the offer, thus ending their chances of a career with Cathay. IMHO that constitutes curtailing or damaging someones career, and it only takes one person to be so adversely affected to make the ban insupportable. Potentially damaging the careers of people you do not know, to protect, or in this case reinstate, the careers of those you do know, does not seem to me to be promoting worldwide pilot solidarity.