Thank you for your brickbats - I'm happy to take it on the chin if I'm wrong.
I was thinking about the court case (MG vs CX) - I don't know what the outcome was (was it put into abeyance?), but I thought the thrust of it was that because AFTLS and RPs had such a huge effect on our lives, that they were to be considered as part of our COS.
I will talk to the AOA next week and find out.
Edited to add:
I called the AOA, and whilst I didn't get a definitive answer on the court case, it was explained to me that (in Canada and Australia) the AFTLS (and RPs) are most definitely part of the COS. That makes them subject to the EA proceedures currently in place.
So, although that won't effect me here, I fail to see how the company can implement three or more sets of AFTLS, or even why any of those based would vote for such a system.
Last edited by jed_thrust; 25th November 2011 at 01:55.