International Labour Office Report on HKSAR Govt and Cathay Pacific

[FlexibleResponse]

This Report makes for some interesting reading for those interested in the facts as determined by ILO so far:

International Labour Office Governing Body
Interim Report Geneva March 2003

Complaint against the Government Of China/Hong Kong Special Administrative Region presented by the International Federation of Airline Pilots' Associations (IFALPA)

http://www.ilo.org/public/english/standards/relm/gb/docs/gb286/pdf/gb-11-p1.pdf

Case 2186, Pages 84-99, paras 335-384

[shortly]

I guess you don't have much going on in your life FR. Or perhaps you are into political double talk. Well whatever, there are more important issues just at the moment.

[FlexibleResponse]

As I wrote above, this thread was posted as a service to those who are interested in reading about the facts.

[FlexibleResponse]

ILO slaps Cathay's wrist.
(The Standard)--A key United Nations body has asked the government to prevent
any interference or intimidation by Cathay Pacific Airways against pilots
belonging to the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers Association (HKAOA).
The request is among four recommendations made in an interim report by the
International Labour Organisation's (ILO) committee on freedom of association
following a probe into the sacking of 50 Cathay Pacific pilots in July 2001.
Cathay last night rejected the report, saying the sackings were in accordance
with the pilots' contracts, which were legal in Hong Kong.
The committee launched its investigation after a complaint by the
International Federation of Airline Pilots' Associations (IFALPA) against the
Hong Kong government.
In its ruling, the committee said it "requests the government to take all
necessary measures as soon as possible to put an immediate end to all acts of
interference, anti-union discrimination and intimidation against HKAOA and its
members".
The HKAOA described it as a fair report. "It's more about the company and the
Hong Kong government. The report speaks for itself," it said.
The government said it had not seen the report.
The committee was commenting on what it said were "open threats of dismissal
in case of industrial action" made by Cathay Pacific in company newsletters to
flight crew published in January, March and September last year. Other acts of
discrimination and intimidation by Cathay Pacific included many threats
against the HKAOA, its members and their families stretching back to July 1995
and a withdrawal of trade union facilities in 1997 and 1998.
The 15-page report also called on the government to prevent any future acts of
interference, discrimination and intimidation. And it asked the government to
keep the committee "informed of measures, including any legal action, that may
be initiated with regard to such acts".
The committee said Cathay Pacific was " in flagrant violation to the voluntary
nature of collective bargaining and article four of (ILO) convention 98" when
it unilaterally imposed changes to pilots conditions of service.
Consequently, the government should take "all necessary measures as soon as
possible to put an immediate end to practices which are contrary to article
four".
It was also concerned by the government's failure to take legal action against
Cathay Pacific when it sacked the pilots after they took "lawful" industrial
action in July 2001.
The Labour and Justice departments decided not to prosecute Cathay Pacific
because there was insufficient evidence to show the airline had broken the
law. This did not satisfy the committee, which now wants the government to
show it the evidence that led to this conclusion.
Cathay Pacific sacked the pilots after the HKAOA launched a work to contract
when the airline introduced new rostering practices without consulting the
pilot's union. In its submission to the ILO, IFALPA pointed out that 50 of the
51 pilots initially sacked (one was subsequently reinstated) were union
members.
"Eight were trade union officers or involved in the day-to-day operations of
the trade union. Three out of four members of the HKAOA negotiating team were
also dismissed," it said.
Quoting an affidavit by then Cathay Pacific director of flight operations, Ken
Barley, to the Labour Department after a complaint by some of the sacked
pilots, IFALPA said flight crew were "not terminated on the ground of any or
any alleged misconduct" and that "none of the plaintiffs were dismissed for
any or any alleged offence or for any or any alleged breach of contract".
IFALPA said the dismissals were solely due to trade union activities and
industrial action on July 3, 2001.
Some of the 50 pilots are now taking action in the High Court against Cathay
Pacific claiming they were unfairly sacked.
The committee said it hoped the High Court would give its ruling as soon as
possible and asked the government to keep it informed of the outcome.

[bonajet]

who voted for the ILO anyway?