Thanks ...

[St_Paul_Island]

Thank you to the 48 who recently knocked back jobs with CX "until the recruitment ban was over". Only two accepted jobs. This must have been a very difficult decision for anyone to make, but shows the depth of feeling and support out there.

I know this thread will be hijacked by CX union busters - sorry, should I call you Freehills, now that we know who you are? - but I hope enough of you who refused jobs will read this message to know that you, and your names, are known. This will be over by summer's end. By then you should have a contract worth signing, and no problems with either recruitment or training.

It is no surprise that the Australians have learnt from the example of the scabs down there who cannot find any other jobs.

The AOA has supported many other airline unions' bans in the past, and they have all been recruitment bans, same as this one. The 49ers will be re-established with no loss of seniority. The recruitment ban is effective because CX cannot find enough pilots to crew the reduced fleet as it is, let alone enough to bring aircraft out of the desert or expand. It is a remarkably effective tool.

OK, naysayers, go ahead and shoot the messenger. I shall take great pleasure knowing that every response you make brings this heartfelt thanks to the top. They deserve recognition, even though you will try to drag them down.

[MT Edelstone56]

Was in Honkers recently with a couple of exAnsett mates searching for work.

I wouldn`t cross your picket line given the opportunity.

My mate,unemployed,selected for CX wont either.

A round of beer in HK is about a weeks unemployments benefit in Oz.Buy him a beer next time.

Good luck gentleman.

[BMM389EC]

St_Paul_Island, where do you get your information from? I know of more than two who have said yes.
I really hope you are for real. I am one of those who said no and have almost given up flying for Cathay. Have been told those who say no stand no chance in the future.Feel more and more like this oppurtunity is sailing off into the sunset! Leaving me with not many other options.

[St_Paul_Island]

I know of more than two who have said yes

My figures are what CX has from latest round. No idea what % that is of total contacted by CX since 9 July last year. It is affecting the ability to recruit, as they are already short of pilots and even now still have aircraft parked. Loads are around the 90% mark so it's not due to lack of passengers!

Of course they'll tell you that if you say no that will be it! They've spent years telling lies, what's a few more? Do you believe them? I don't. Other "expatriate" options are DragonAir and Emirates, both pay more and have much faster times to command. Emirates are hiring, DragonAir is about to. Those who've interviewed for DragonAir in the last few months should hear from them soon.

Don't forget Thai, Singapore, Malaysian, Brunie, Air New Guniea, South Pacific, Virgin brand X, Y and Z, Gulf Air, Kuwait, Saudia, Korean, JAL, Air Vietnam and probably a few dozen more. Anyone who claims that CX is the only airline in the entire world that will hire them is being unrealistic. If you applied to CX you must be eligible for at least a few of them - at least one I would hope! Otherwise you are saying that CX has the absolute lowest standards of experience in the entire world, which doesn't flatter you or us very much, does it?

[Wizofoz]

SPI,

Your organisation has put a great deal of effort into fighting for the 49ers, and for this I applaud you.

Can you tell me, concretely, what your association will do to secure employment for pilots who turn Cathay down in support of your ban?

It's all very well saying thanks to guys throwing away a huge carreer chance on your behalf, but will you show them the same loyalty as they have shown you and your wronged compatriots?

[St_Paul_Island]

The HKAOA has indeed in the past provided exactly the same support as it now is receiving. Recent "Requests for Mutual Assistance" responded to by the HKAOA include:

BeCA (Belgium) on behalf of Sabena - DAT - Sobelair;
US-ALPA on behalf of Atlas Airlines Inc (USA); and
Circulo de Pilotos de Chile (CPC).

There are many others, I can't be bothered to dig through them all.

Requests for mutual assistance typically include, amongst other things, an agreement to implement recruitment bans. This is seen by the international union movement as an effective industrial tool. Since the members of the HKAOA have helped other unions worldwide in this way for many years, it is only right and proper that they should receive such assistance in return.

Now some could argue that the participation in recruitment bans by the HKAOA in the past is of little moment, and had negligible effect, and so should be discounted. Such arguments cut both ways, however; if that is the case then the argument also applies to the current ban.

If you are a member of an IFALPA union then you are obliged to uphold the ban. If you are not a member you can make up your own mind.

It has also been argued that the recent joiners had to join because they were unemployed. This is untrue. Not one recent joiner to CX was unemployed. Out of all the airlines in the world available to them, including remaining in their current jobs, they chose to join an airline (CX) under a recruitment ban.

Others claim that joining an airline is a one-off, do-it-now-of-forever-forsake-it, decision. That is also untrue. Amongst the 100,000+ jobs in aviation, there is never a time when each and every one is closed to you.

Those who recently joined? Their decision. They can expect that such lack of concern for pilots who really are unemployed - the 49ers - will be reciprocated should they ever find themselves in need of assistance.

The answer to your question Wizofoz, is that the HKAOA provides assistance to fellow union members. They are not an employment agency. You are expected to find your own jobs. However, people on this web site, such as myself, have been highlighting the many options available to you. You may find on this site reams of information and advice on joining a huge number of airlines. Such jobs may be temporary or permament; they can be stepping stones to CX in future years or to some other airline you decide to go for in the future.

We all expect to have a career flying for 30 to 40 years. Every pilot in the world is going to change employers at some stage. You will be judged each and every time on your past professional actions. Never expect a job to be permanent - ask those who've recently been furloughed. Why risk a permanent black mark against your name by joining under a ban when there are so many other options available?

[Wizofoz]

SPI,

I have a job and have no intention of joining Cathay with or without a ban.

My question was in response to the inferance in your first post that anyone turning down employment with Cathay could expect to be employed by them once the ban is lifted. I was wondering on what basis you made that inferance.

It would now seem from your reply that you made it out of pure wishful thinking to encourage support for your ban.

Yes there are many Airlines in the world. Right now very few of them are recruiting, and all have an over supply of applicants. There can be little doubt that some pilots turning down Cathay, either out of principle or out of fear of intimidation, will be surrendering their only chance of a job with a major airline. How many airlines have you been accepted by?

And for this sacrifice they will recieve your heartfelt thanks, and precious little else.

[Freehills]

Someone called?

[St_Paul_Island]

Well, I've re-read my first post, and I see no such inference. What about it is wishful thinking? It says what it says. It was a genuine thank you.

Congratulations on being the first to fulfill the prophecy mentioned in the fifth paragraph.

[Mark Six]

SPI, I support what you guys are doing and wish you every success....but....Wizofoz has asked a perfectly valid question which deserves a better answer than the one you gave. In your first post you said "- but I hope enough of you who refused jobs will read this message to know that you, and your names, are known. This will be over by summer's end. By then you should have a contract worth signing, and no problems with either recruitment or training." If that's not an inference that these pilots will be given jobs once the ban is over, then I don't know what is. It is a valid question-what will the union do once the hiring ban is over, to specifically help those pilots who have rejected job offers?

[Goondiwindi]

I don't think the Union can do anything directly to help someone get employed once that person has turned down a job quoting the ban as his/her reason. I do think that good potential employees will be contacted again after this is over and offered their job again. I am not in a position to promise that and nor is the Union. But, if you're worth your salt, you'll get asked again. Contrary to popular opinion, there are not too many high calibre pilots out there at the moment. However, I think the rewards for the person that turns down a job are twofold, direct and indirect.
The direct reward is that said person will be able to join any IFALPA Union in the world and receive the benefits thereof, which could include an employment ban should the chosen job be one where his Union is targetted for a "bust".
The indirect reward is that of being able to face yourself in the mirror for the rest of your life and know that you have done the right thing. If you give yourself any credit for having a conscience then you'll understand what I mean. If not, then you're a lost cause as far as I'm concerned.
I speak as a 49er. I am exceptionally respectful of and grateful to everyone that supports this ban. I believe that it will be the tool that ultimately gets our jobs and lives back.

Those that supported us will not be forgotten.

Those that broke the ban WILL be remembered.

[Wizofoz]

Goondiwindi,

I totaly sympathise with your position and truly believe that you do not deserve your current situation.

You are, however, asking people to support your position by turning down a job you obviously desperatley want back. Saint Paul Islands solution for these people has been "Go and join Emirates/Gulf/Singapore etc. etc." Is not that option open to you? If not, you must see the untenability of his position. Not all jobs are going to be open to all people. If you win, pilots are going to have given away their chance to work for Cathay, whilst you will regain your job, and for their sacrifice will get a heartfelt "Thanks" from you from your chair in an Airliner. If your efforts are in vain, BOTH of you will have lost the chance to work for Cathay. I think it is grossly unfair to load the responsibility for your troubles on the shoulders of young aspirants, just as desperate as you to work for a major airline, and then use (not very) veiled threats to intimidate them into your point of view.

How would you have felt if, as a young pilot just given the chance to join Cathay, someone older, richer, and with much more salable qualifications had instructed you to turn down the chance, because he didn't like the way the company had treated him?

[411A]

Getting jobs "back" for the 49+....not in your collective lifetimes.
And a "shortage" of qualified guys....in your dreams.
Come to think of it, that's all the AOA has...dreams.:rolleyes:

[Nice Wing]

If the 49 (48) pilots fired do not get their jobs back, then you have done yourself a favour by not going to Cathay. You will thank the union someday when you have a decent job and the sods at CX continue to get shafted.

[cuboardman]

To all concerned, I am one that recently said no to cx.
Current status , unemployed and getting more uncurrent everyday, however a number of short term options are coming to fro. Yes there is more than one job out there, but not the one I want. Lucky in two senses; have the right endorsement and have a big fat redundancy to live off for a while. But some people dont have the luxury that I have , given different curcumstances I may have been forced to say different. Add big mortgage, kids, wrong endorsement and the answer would have been different. A basic survival instinct comes before loyalty to a union. A good man becomes a scab ???? I know one that said yes, and he really is forced to . If the world excess is slowly absorbed as it seems it will, then no probs, but if not then more will cross as their situ changes. The union has bought some time but thats about it.
Frankg : its a bit hard to aviod the qu when asked directly:are you are willing to defy the ban.

[Wizofoz]

411a,

I am attempting to have a reasoned arguement with people I respect but disagree with. Your vitriolic tosh is neither helpful nor welcome.

Butt out.

To all at Cathay, there have now been posts from a small number of the many who are turning down the chance at a secure future because of your problems. They now outnumber the 49 you are trying to help. Obviously you put the rights of your members ahead of the welfare of other proffestional pilots, yet expect them to make sacrifices in support of your cause. You then have the temeritty to threaten sanctions against those that refuse to burn themselves in support of people in a more privilaged position than them. Will your association pay the wages of an unemployed pilot that STAYS unemployed because of your ban? Of course not...not one of us, not our problem. But he better do what you say in any case, or else.

Can you honestley say the welfare of aspiring pilots played any part in your decistion to instigate this ban?

[411A]

Of course not.....only to intimidate others....and to accept upgrades at the expense of their dismissed "brothers".
Clearly CX management has seen thru this facade, and have no real reason to give in now.

[ironbutt57]

The only people getting shafted besides the 49-ers are the folks who valiantly passed up employment with cx because of the ban....by them a beer?....how about sharing your paycheck with them since they are supporting you selfish morons.....how about some sort of union support for their employment with cx after the ban ends.....poor silly sods

[Goondiwindi]

Wizofoz

1. I'm not instructing people to hold off joining CX. IFALPA are telling.

2. How do you know that I'm not a young guy that's been fired within a few years of joining? Guys were fired from 2 - 22+ years seniority.

3. I think you've got the wrong end of the stick. No one in HKAOA or IFALPA is threatening anyone. I think you'll find most of that comes from the company itself.

4. I would like my job back, you're right. Would you not if you'd been sacked without just cause? Or are you another one that believes "we must have deserved it"?

5. How do you know that I have not tried to get another job? I applied to 2 airlines within a week of being sacked (and others since) and have good reason to believe that they won't take me because CX have told other airlines not to take 49ers. Is that fair?

6. Underneath it all, I believe that this is a moral issue and if people wish to join now then they are probably beyond having the reasons behind the ban explained to them. However, once the HKAOA wins this dispute the airline will be a much better one to work for. It will be there for these guys in a few months. Have a bit of patience. If the cause is lost, then you'll all have a much better life and possibly even a career with a contract that means something more than the paper that it's written on if you join all these other airlines that you've mentioned.

7. The over-riding fact that makes me know that the Union is doing the right thing in this regard in particular is that I know the management don't like the ban.

Good luck to you all whichever way you jump.

I don't fancy your social life if you break the ban. And that's not a threat, it's a fact!

[ironbutt57]

cuboardman....at least you had the honesty to spell things out the way they are for you, and to also say things might have been different if your family needs were more pressing....now you need to call in your markers from the hkaoa people who you have made a great sacrifice to career wise....lets see how much support you get.....glad to see at least the family comes first....:) :)

[411A]

CX had a unique opportunity to cement good relations with their pilots some time ago by accepting local recruits, training them to proficiency, thereby creating rapport with the locals in HKG.
Management tried this for awhile, trained local guys, but apparently they were not liked by the expats in the training department because several left the company, hounded out no doubt by those who wanted to keep it an "'ole boys club", expats only. How do I know? Because I have flown (in another company) with one or two of these local guys, and their stories are the same and confirmed by several other retired CX guys. Failure of management to back these local guys up together with the "'ole boys club" to keep it that way has fostered absolutely no support for the HKAOA "action" in the local media. The AOA is seen for what it is....a group that only wants more, never mind the realities of the present economic climate.
The seeds of discontent were sown a long time ago.

[HUSTLER]

Your a LYING **** 411A

Tell me right now which airline you flew with where there were local pilots that were hounded out of CX.

I bet you wont because it will expose you as the lying **** that you are.

No local pilots have ever been hounded out of CX, quite the opposite!!!!!

Just **** off you shi! stiring old *****
It must of really hurt you when Cathay rejected you

BTW have a go at this heartless ******'s comment on the Middle east forum RE: Gulf air 320 crash.

HUSTLER


(you might try moderating your own language ! On this occaision I have saved you the trouble)

[411A]

Well then HUSTLER, the airline was AirAtlanta Icelandic, and one of these fellows (a superb pilot) has moved on to Dragon Air, and the feedback I get is that the atmosphere there is rather more local friendly.

Truth hurts just a bit, yes? And, I never applied to CX.

Next Question? OVER :p

[1-stripper]

411A:

Please give us the initials of the individual and we'll know if you know what you are talking about.

[41IA]

Absolute fabrication, old man.

[411A]

Well hello there 41 "eye" A, you must a second cousin of 4 eye eye A that was on the forum some time ago.

Sorry 1-stripper, the rules say no names...but think back to about 1995...you should be able to figure it out.

As I mentioned before, the AOA cannot turn the clock back. Yes indeed the CX crews of yesteryear had a very sweet deal....but the operative word is....HAD. Also suspect that the company management will not accept any more nonsence from the "association"...hard times ahead guys. Even the California courts gave you a cold shoulder.

Can't you'all take a hint? And as for the UN.......:rolleyes:

[Wizofoz]

Goondi,

I'm sorry we have to converse in between rants from that tosser 411a.

Please believe I have the utmost sympathy for your position and DO NOT think you or your mates deserved your sackings. They were totaly motivated by power mongering on the part of Cathay management. My problem with the ban is it is using less financailly able, less qualified pilots as sacrificial lambs in your dispute.

To answer your queries:-

1. IFALPA instigated the ban on your behalf at your request.

2. Obviously you are fairly senior or you would have corrected me, but even someone with 2 years at Cathay is in a better position than someone with 5 years flying a 206 out of Kunanurra

3. Anyone who joins under the ban has been quite overtly threatened with a Scab title and ostricisation. Read your own last comment. If that's not a threat, I don't know what is.

4. See my opening comments. You got screwed. It's a discrace. But is it right to use the careers of people you've never met as weapons in your fight?

5. I doubt that you can't find another job because you're a 49er. There are thousands of pilots out of work. You are in the same position you want to put Cathay aspirants in, just another pilot in a tough job market. If you are offered another job, and a ban is put on your accepting it, how will you feel?

6. It is arogant in the extreme to lecture others as to what is or isn't moral. Have patients? Easy for you to say, as your association is paying you. Will you in turn lend financial support to an out of work pilot who throws away their chance to work for Cathay? I doubt it.

7. "Management don't like it". Well that's all right them. Guys will have a rosy inner glow about that while their house gets re-possessed.

I consider the ban immoral. Why not take direct industrial action against Cathay? Because you may suffer consequences. Solution, have others fight the battles for you.

Not the action of honourable professtionals

Edited because I can't spell

[41IA]

You are the spreader of lies and untruths. If you want to impress the readers here, try shutting up for a day.

[411A]

Good gosh, it's 41 eye A...again.
Generally find that those that shout the loudest...have something nasty to hide.
Could this be....you?
As I said before, the seeds of discontent were sown a long time ago.
Thanks for proving my point.

[Al E. Vator]

um....411A dear chap. Have watched your contributions with some merriment for a while now. May I suggest your criticisms of others as illinformend are as relevant to your good self?

First of all you criticised the AoA "Come to think of it, that's all the AOA has...dreams"...forgive me for not being fully up with your movements, but weren't you going to set up some big Tristar operation ex HKG. How's that going?

Your comments re CX being an old boys club are wrong. Trust me on this, they are trying desparately to recruit locals but the candidates just aren't there. They would love to crew their fleet with locals but very few individuals in Hong Kong (locals) are interested in lowly paid jobs such as aircrew. Stockbroking, Medicine yes indeed but flying is not an interest generally. Another big problem is the disruption to family life - a big negative for the locals. The locals that are in CX are great guys/gals and it would be nice to have more but the proble is categorically supply-based, so you are way off the mark.

Finally, Dragon Air are in essence the same as CX. Different (lower) payscales than even CX B-Scale, moderately better morale but rotten destinations. Similar problems with trying to recruit locally. Locals within the airline are great but even fewer want to fly for Dragon when they could chose the 'heavy metal at Cathay.

So all in all, I would have to say sir, your frequent posts contain nearly all of the errors you so venomously attack others for. It is a little hard to take you very seriously.
============
PS: I don't work for Cathay, I'm not a member of the AoA and I ain't one of your loathed goddamned Limeys that seem to cause you so much angst;)

[Goondiwindi]

Wizofoz

My final comments on this thread.

1. When you are in a Union and your management does this to you, you'll be glad that IFALPA can instigate this ban for you. I hope that you never need its services.

2. What's wrong with making it 5 and 1/2 years at Kununurra and then taking the job. At least they do have a job. Yes, I am being supported by my Union. But by God I'd trade places with the guys that are paying their dues any day, if for no other reason than pride.

3. Being ostracised is a fact not a threat. I considered joining Ansett in '89 until I realised that it would a) be wrong and b) I would have been ostracised. I knew the score. I made my decision. No threats there, were there? I did not feel threatened.

4. I wish I could give you the info re why I can't get a job and by whom I've been blackbanned. I'm keeping my powder dry. But please accept the fact that I've tried and been not just refused but totally ignored. I do have some leads but to tell you would give away my identity; sorry.

5. I'm sorry if you feel I'm being arrogant and that I'm lecturing. Don't pay me any attention if you think that! I know what I consider right and wrong. You in turn have your own values. I can look at myself in the mirror in the morning and see no hypocrisy, nor reason to feel guilty at my actions. I have a conscience. It is clear. If you can do the same, then that is all well and good. I doubt that the people that broke the ban are so able. If they are, I do not wish to ever know them.

6. I don't think anyone who says "no" now is throwing away their chance. I believe it'll come back. When it does, the company they join will be a much better one than the one they would have joined if the ban had not occurred. I regard their delay as an investment in a better and more secure future. That too is what I am striving for. Don't think for a minute that I would not love to be in a position to support my fellow 49ers. However, I'm not sure that I would feel any compunction to support someone already in a job that is considering becoming a replacemnet worker at my colleagues' expense. We'll have to agree to disagree on that one.

7. You missed the point about management not liking it. The fact that they don't like the ban means that the tactic is having the desired effect. That does give me a rosy glow even though it's me that's having my house repossessed.

8. Finally, as for Direct Action. If you only knew who I was you'd know that I stood up several times at Union meetings and Focus nights and advocated strike action. I would have put my money where my mouth is. Unfortunately, I got knocked out of the ring in the first round. I'm sorry to keep on about consciences but mine is absolutely clear on this one. I would have gone on strike for this dispute and have paid the ultimate price anyway.

9. I am very conscious of the demands that I ask of others when I request thier assistance in this fight. Believe me, I'd like not to have to ask. One day though I'll repay the favour with interest.

[Wizofoz]

Goondi,

Let me stress that I have the utmost repect for you and sympathy for your position.

Both you and Saint Paul Island have stated a belief that pilots who turn Cathay down now will be employed in the future.When pressed SPI retreated from that position and has been silent on the issue ever since.

To my mind the only way you could justify the ban is if you gave a concrete assurance that anyone who knocks Cathay back will be treated in the same way as a 49er, e.g the ban will only be lifted if they are employed along side the guys that were sacked.That is the only way you can "pay them back with interest".

If you recieve your job back because of the sacrifice of others, and then do not do at least as much for them, I would hope that look in the mirror gets just a little difficult.

[Diesel8]

No dog in this fight!!!

But I would doubt that CP would hire people who turned them down due to the ban, unless there were no other suitable candidates. CP management sounds rather vindictive and this would be right up their alley.

Sounds like the ban is slowly having an effect. However, I still wonder about the people who upgraded and why there has been no strike. Yes, I am aware of the laws in HK, well some of them at least through reading them here, but if all the pilots walked out, CP would be hard pressed to find anyone to operate and doubt they could afford to fire all.

I do so strongly hope, that the union will stand up for those, who turns the opportunity down now and by that shows solidarity. How the union can know who these people are, I do not know, but suffice to say, they make a big sacrifice and quite possibly, with the way the market is right now, will lose their opportunity to pilots with lesser morals.

Best of luck to all involved!!

D8

[411A]

Well Al E. Vator, our operation will not be in HKG, but located 570nm SE, HKG will be used for heavy letter checks only. And not a large operation either, small and friendly, with NO "union" problems.
You could be right of course about the lack of local recruits. SQ found this same problem, but solved same by going to Malaysia for many of their pilots. Wonder why CX did not do the same as there were quite a few very good candidates there....I should know as I trained many at SQ on the 707. Some very talanted guys, especially directly onto the 707, not an easy thing for a pilot with only 270 hours of light aircraft experience, as many of the locals had. But then SQ had a rather large training budget at the time....surely CX could have done the same.

[41IA]

you tired old Spanish Athlete...

Say it...PHILIPPINES

I might have to eat my fedora if you ever get an aircraft up, odds against 200:1

You say you were in SQ 25 years ago. Personally, I have my doubts. Whatever the case, it's time to move on, old man. Things have changed. Stop living in the past (or whatever dimension you're in) ...and leave your paranoia behind.

[411A]

Better order up some ketchup for your fedora....tastes better that way. Might also need it for the crow from CX management....

[Wizofoz]

411a,

As your incesant BS makes this forum a joke and makes intelligent debate difficult, I'll do you a deal... PUT UP OR SHUT UP!!!

Give us a time limit by which your state-of-the-art L1011 airline will be operating, and agree that if it is not up by that time you will STOP USING THIS SERVICE.

I wish you would realise that your stupid comments do nothing but weaken the side of any debate you claim to be on.

[411A]

Wizofoz--
You may consider my comments inappropriate...but I certainly do not. I have been around a long time in aviation....and find that the CX guys are living in the past....expecting the same perks that many of them enjoyed many years ago. But times change....but their thought process apparently does not...to bad for them.

Have been informed that our financing was approved today...so expect ops to start shortly...many things to do so cannot give an exact date. It will depend very much on the maintenance state of the aeroplanes...and not limited to the L10 either.

Will be in HKG in June...usually stay at the Excelsior....come around and have a beer and I will fill you in....if you're interested.

[Wizofoz]

411a,


I don't live in Honkers and won't be there in June, but I'll monitor your progress with baited breath!!

What's the name of your outfit?

[41IA]

No name, no planes, no AOC, no pilots, no funding, no contracts...

What are you smoking, o aged one?

[411A]

All will be revealed, Wizofoz, in due course.

[St_Paul_Island]

...and Saint Paul Island have stated a belief that pilots who turn Cathay down now will be employed in the future.When pressed SPI retreated from that position and has been silent on the issue ever since.

Utter rubbish! I have not retreated from that position, quite the contrary, I restated it once in response to your first query. Ever since then you have wilfully ignored what I have said and repeated your own incorrect views ad nauseum. That is not a debate, but a monologue. I have not responded because I see little point answering someone who repeats the same thing over and over and over, regardless of what others say.

You seem to expect that a union is responsible not to its own members, but to recruit new joiners to replace its own members. Ludicrous!

I challenge to tell us all what help you will give me, if I refuse an offer to replace you in your job. Are you offering a bribe for my non-action? Should I get a medal because I haven't murdered anyone today? This is insulting.

A simple message of thanks to all those who have turned down jobs at Cathay while the ban is in place. You have made the correct decision for your own career by doing so. There are many others in airlines around the world, including CX, who have done the same in the past and who have gone on to fly great careers. Goondiwindi is one of them (see #6 in his post above), so am I. We don't expect to be showered with gold for what we both felt to be fundamentally right, indeed we hardly give it a second thought from day to day; this is just a measure of our character and what we believe in. Don't let others tell you that self-interest should override your own sense of what is right or wrong; you have many years ahead of you.

[Wizofoz]

SPI

Quote from my post:-
"My question was in response to the inferance in your first post that anyone turning down employment with Cathay could expect to be employed by them once the ban is lifted. I was wondering on what basis you made that inference. "

Quote from your reply:-

"I have re-read my post and see no such inference"

Well, which is it? Do you believe pilots turning Cathay down will be employed later? If so, on what do you base that belief? Are you willing to suggest to the HKAOA that they treat people who are out of work because they turned down a job with Cathay in the same way the 49ers are being treated?

Yes there are many other airlines, but if it is so easy to get a job with one, why don't YOU go and work for one?

As to your challenge, if I get sacked, that is between ME and my employer. If YOU are offered a job, that's between YOU and your employer.

I offer you a similar challenge. If you accept a job with another airline, that's one less job available for the pilots who have turned down Cathay. Will you and the other 49ers undertake to NOT accept a job with any other airline until the ban is lifted one way or the other? You expect people not to take "your" job, will you agree not to take someone elses?