Turbo Beaver said:
You say there was an offer from Nick R. in principle only. Didn't know if you noticed but Nick does not have any principles. He is the guy that fired the 49ers in the first place. Dave called it on Nick's recommendation. Who do you think is running Flight Ops, not Ken? Nick told the AOA (April) in front of the Labor Board that he would just fire 20-30 Pilots and the rest will be so scared that they will tow the company line.
By National News in London.
9 October 2002
(c) 2002 South China Morning Post Publishers Limited, Hong Kong. All rights reserved.
Cathay Pacific sacked pilots en masse in July last year because they had attitude problems, an airline executive has told a hearing into an unfair dismissal claim in Britain.
Cathay's director of flight operations, Ken Barley, told the Employment Tribunal sitting in Croydon, south London, this week that he had sought legal advice before the sackings.
He had been advised the dismissals could not successfully be challenged in Hong Kong, Mr Barley said in testimony.
Mr Barley told the tribunal that the decision to dismiss the pilots was made in Hong Kong "where the purpose of several meetings (was) to review the employment history of all officers and assess their attitude towards the employer".
So it would seem that:
Some manager thought up the idea.
Some manager gave the idea the green light.
Some manager instigated the idea.
A Court observer also mentioned that it was revealed that some 25 managers and sub-managers were involved in the “Star Chamber” style “executions”.
The lives and careers of some 49 pilots and the lives of their families have been devastated. The damage has been done. The only question that still needs to be addressed is:
What is “some manager” going to do to try and fix the problem, or offer in compensation?
One would think Cathay management would start by
actually talking to the AOA rather than exposing the Company’s ethical standards to the public through the necessary disclosure in the various law Courts.
Perhaps the Company could start by paying more money to "Stone Masons" rather than to Freehills?