I think the major point here is that it's not a matter of what one considers 'fair' or not but that the company is breaking the law in NZ (as well as potentially several other venues) and shouldn't be doing this in countries it wishes to do commerce with--and by doing so faces not only civil litigation but also action by the governments themselves. Just like if they were breaking the flying rules, other discrimination rules, alcohol rules, customs laws, or industrial safety rules within that nation. A HKG based head in the sand approach or convenient 'interpretation' doesn't bear any relevance in that these cases will be adjudicated in and by their respective country. If CX doesn't like that fact they'll have to stop flying there or going through their airspace.
Disturbing is rather than accept that fact and deal with the situation--by coming up with a mutually beneficial solution which complies with host nation laws (and is actually in everyone's best interest as well; we NEED these experienced and capable pilots to continue with the company if they wish to do so)--they are want to pi$$ away all kinds of money in legal resources and fines. Moneys that could be used elsewhere to do good things. OUR money.