It is well known that Mr Slossar wanted to close all the bases before onshoring began, primarily because of the difficulty for the company in satisfying what are often conflicting rules between different jurisdictions. When you look at what is happening in Canada and Europe he was right.
Housing costs were not an issue.The only reason it did not happen is because Flight Ops said he could lose a third of his crew.
With the exception of the US, the current policy is to allow the bases to decline. As FOs take their commands in HK they will not be replaced and it goes without saying that there will be no new commands on the bases. This is already happening as is evident to everyone.
My understanding is that the basings review will re-assess the establishment on each base. It is entirely likely that where a base is overcrewed, then crews will be offered a transfer to HK. Seniority will decide who goes. Manchester and Vancouver are in the crosshairs.
The US is unlikely to be affected since a judge has already decided that US based pilots work for a HK company, whereas in the UK, Canada and Australia onshoring transfers the employment and therefore the tax liability to the onshored jurisdiction. The laws in those jurisdictions are clashing with HK laws and since CX is a HK enterprise the company cannot avoid HK law. Neither can it avoid onshored law. The company is in a vice and should never have onshored, but hindsight is terrific asset.