NZ court case
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: hongkong
Posts: 47
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see there a few self proclaimed legal experts here that over looked the fact that the pilots not only lost the case, the company also got costs. Ouch. Who is paying those?
Would anyone like to advise us why costs were awarded, being the legal experts you are?
Would anyone like to advise us why costs were awarded, being the legal experts you are?
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: HKG
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is the AOA there for the majority or the few?
The attention these two blokes are attracting to CX pilots in NZ risk the base, let alone the tax treatment. Surely my subs are better spent elsewhere.
What is the greater good?
The attention these two blokes are attracting to CX pilots in NZ risk the base, let alone the tax treatment. Surely my subs are better spent elsewhere.
What is the greater good?
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: The Cesspit
Posts: 400
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of commencing a debate about Gobwin's law, read the charter of the AOA.
The AOA is neither there for the majority or the few. We pay our subs for what is right. Occasionally that may result in a perceived short term loss. e.g, the defense of the 49ers. Unfortunately too many then decided to favour the majority rather than what was right. Maybe had we had some moral fortitude then we wouldn't be in this mess now.
The AOA is neither there for the majority or the few. We pay our subs for what is right. Occasionally that may result in a perceived short term loss. e.g, the defense of the 49ers. Unfortunately too many then decided to favour the majority rather than what was right. Maybe had we had some moral fortitude then we wouldn't be in this mess now.
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The NZ court recognized the two pilots had a personal choice to retire at age 55 or 65. They made a personal decision, for whatever personal reasons.
The company won big. Awarded the win and sent the bill for the court cost to the pilots. Ouch. Looks like the court considered the case frivolous. Might be a good time to stop and cut the loss.
The company won big. Awarded the win and sent the bill for the court cost to the pilots. Ouch. Looks like the court considered the case frivolous. Might be a good time to stop and cut the loss.
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Honkytown
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely. Talk about noses in troughs; particularly when you consider that one of these esteemed colleagues is the very first to tell people 'you knew what you signed up for'. Hypocrisy at its finest.
I'm glad for the outcome, for the sole reason that it doesn't jeopardise the other based crew positions.
I'm glad for the outcome, for the sole reason that it doesn't jeopardise the other based crew positions.
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: HKG
Posts: 396
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PW
'Maybe had we had some moral fortitude then we wouldn't be in this mess now.'
By moral fortitude do you mean telling the other guys that 'we should keep our heads down' and 'if you haven't got your ducks lined up by 55 you are a fool', then staying on RA55 expecting a new COS, then when it doesn't come going to the company admitting defeat and asking for COS08, not getting that, so then taking legal action?
The kiwis I have spoken to aren't very pleased. The few are risking the many.
I agree that the AOA should take the high ground, but in this case I don't think they are.
It has become another example of guys just looking after themselves.
'Maybe had we had some moral fortitude then we wouldn't be in this mess now.'
By moral fortitude do you mean telling the other guys that 'we should keep our heads down' and 'if you haven't got your ducks lined up by 55 you are a fool', then staying on RA55 expecting a new COS, then when it doesn't come going to the company admitting defeat and asking for COS08, not getting that, so then taking legal action?
The kiwis I have spoken to aren't very pleased. The few are risking the many.
I agree that the AOA should take the high ground, but in this case I don't think they are.
It has become another example of guys just looking after themselves.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Usually Somewhere Else
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you look up the "2b" costs in the nz court website you'll see the costs structure that was awarded to Cx. It does involve legal fees etc, however it's based in a formula rather than actual costs.
Join Date: Aug 1999
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I thought I read in one of the updates that the case was being appealed (again). It didn't say by who.
My understanding is that because it was a Court of Appeal decision, it now becomes 'law' so it affects everyone in NZ. If true then some 'other' effected party in NZ may be appealling the case - not Brown.
My understanding is that because it was a Court of Appeal decision, it now becomes 'law' so it affects everyone in NZ. If true then some 'other' effected party in NZ may be appealling the case - not Brown.
