Goathead, I agree. This is amazing to read. I can see them squirming in their seats answering some of those questions. Wish I had time to make it down to the court room.

Read Day 7, its a page turner.

Not a good day for the CX camp........
The servile, obsequious SC representing CX seems to be making little headway with the court either...........

I needed a dictionary for that one NJ.

naughty johnny

What can I say? Just beautiful. After checking my dictionary, (Yes I had to as well), I nearly spilt my coffee everywhere.:D:ok:

" The servile, obsequious SC representing CX seems to be making little headway with the court either..........."

Adrian Huggins is a good and experienced SC. Obviously, he's made little to no headway because the company instructing him don't have any real defence against the 49ers claim :}

Anyways, good fun reading Grossman examining NR, Tyler and Chen - dynamite :ok:

truth -v- cathay
 

NICHOLAS PETER RHODES has no misgivings about telling it as it was.
Cathay could not prove any of the suspicions ( "probabilities" in the words of other Cathay witnesses) so could not use the discipline procedures so dismissed the pilots instead.

Reads like Cathay have lost. Where's Murray Gardner, John Findlay and the others in the HKAOA who gave up for their own purposes?

Renting videos.

It is very interesting and very satisfying to see the Tyler/Chen/Rhodes team finally facing the music for the actions they have taken. You just have to smile when the "three amigos" trip over themselves and accidentally blurt out "half-truths" under clever questioning, whilst they try to stick to the scripted answers they have been told to memorize.

His Lordship makes particularly perceptive comments and sees right through the otherwise cleverly crafted political answers offered by the trio. It will be extremely interesting to see His Lordship's final summing up of the reliability and truthfulness of the evidence given by these three witnesses.

The Management
What have you got to say?

Just goes to show how worthless the AOA really is.

Gave up on the 49'ers, just like they will give up on any current member(what makes you any different?).

Keep wasting your money supporting that outfit, AOA stooges.

AOA..SO GAY. :cool:

Well now, this should be a warning to MANAGERS, that THEY will stand before the rule of law personally and ANSWER for decisions made.

18 of the 49ers are having their day in Court.

The defendant CX managers of the day are turning and squirming as they give evidence to try to justify their shameful actions which are now exposed to the public gaze "of the fair-minded man in the street" and the judgment of an independent Justice.

As an AOA member of many years, I say that this would never have come to this stage without the early moral and monetary support of the Union. It is true that when the AOA in trying to seek a pragmatic solution, that better courses of action might have been taken.

Never-the-less, only the early concerted effort by the AOA union and the subsequent stoicism of the 18 has culminated in the public exposure of the shameful and repugnant behavior of those in CX management who were arrogant enough to think they could act in such an immoral way and in contempt of the law of Hong Kong.

Agree with the views but with respect.......

.....it ain't over til the fat lady sings.


Hopefully we will hear her hitting high Cs when the time is right

N

Long time observer, first time poster.

Check out the transcript from day 7 of the proceedings (page 133 lines 3 to 6).

If SK's answer was acceptable in a court of law, why wasn't the same answer acceptable to crew controllers when they were asking for assistance from crews?

Or was SK trying to be funny....?

STP

"touché"!!!

Well, CXtreme, you might have a 6 on your spoken English, but your written English leaves much to be desired. One does not "get" a heart attack, nor is "phone's" the plural of "phone."

Let he who is without sin cast the first stone.

The CPG is confident we will withstand the current wrongful dismissal case brought by the former CP employees.

If this case demonstrates anything is that We in Management are a very heartless people and our DFO has demonstrated this in his cross-examination. He will rise high in our organization. The termination of the pilots has done its job very effectively which was to put fear in the pilot group and you have responded flawlessly. The pilot group is so fearful of being terminated that they WILL do what is expected of them i.e. using discretion to extend a FDP or reduce rest, work on G days, not argue with crew control and accept a duty whether legal or illegal just to name a few. Extending the FDP has helped us pave the way in the new AFTL’s with longer hours and that is the direct fallout of having a fearful pilot group.

This case may show the rest of the world that we are a heartless employer but that is who we are at The CPG. It is expected of us so we can make money for our shareholders and ultimately for us in the way of BONUSES. We are paid very well to be that heartless and it will continue. . Other airlines of the world wish they can be this unkind to its employees/pilots but labor laws stop this action.

We may have to pay 18 ex-employees some cash but we will not be held personally responsible as some of you are expecting. The sum may be in the 1.5-2.0 years salary but that is a small amount compared to having a non-compliant pilot group. These terminations have served us well in the past and future terminations will continue to serve us well.

This sum may be taken out of the current SLS but we may need to ask for more and the fearful pilot group will comply.

In the future we will not terminate en masse but will terminate individuals if they have a tendency to fall out of line. Do you want to be that next person? If you are terminated at The CPG, the other airlines of the world will see you as a difficult pilot and will not want to hire such a troublesome pilot. It will serve us well and good luck in finding that next employer.

If you don’t know, this case has been decided at the Hong Kong Club months ago, as we are impervious to Hong Kong Law. The current Judge will show leniency to The CPG as not to make a mockery of Hong Kong Law. Don’t expect large payouts as one may expect in the United States of America if any at all.

Remember, the DFO is still your boss and you are still the employee. He does not care what you may think of him when this is all over and he will never lose any sleep for ruining the families of 51 of his employees and a catalyst in the death of two.

To My Bonus.

The Management

"The current judge has been spoken to months ago..."

Well, The Management, when your insinuation, in a public forum, that a judge of the HK judiciary has been 'spoken to' - with all the libellous connotations that such a scandalous remark carries - reaches his Lordship's attention, you better hope that Pprune are willing to protect your indentity when a Summons for Contempt of Court is issued against you and them.

Know what, I think I might just email the Court myself.

Here's to your imprisonment!

Battling barrister
 

Having just read Day 1 transcript it appeared that Huggins SC had been instructed by CX to really batter the 3 witnesses to fix a particular point in the judge's mind that they were unreliable witnesses with precious little moral scruples:

MR HUGGINS: In my respectful submission, on issues of credibility, even discovery doesn't require documents to be disclosed

HIS LORDSHIP: In my court it does. This is not Perry Mason, Mr Huggins.

A judge has been libeled by The Management. Il-thought out, shooting from the hip, insensitive, without legal cross checking, ruthless and defamatory.

He really is a pilot manager.

Very well indeed Mr Grossman
 

Mr Grossman represents 18/49 and is speaking to Nick Rhodes.

MR GROSSMAN Well, yes. This is what this case is about, isn't it?
What you decided to do was, because there was threatened industrial action, to get rid of a whole lot of people, shoot the hostages, as it were, to encourage the others not to participate?

HIS LORDSHIP: I think you can make that submission, Mr Grossman.
MR GROSSMAN: Very well.
HIS LORDSHIP: You have effectively put the point.
MR GROSSMAN: Very well.

Chaps, The Management's post may be offensive to you but I believe it to be one of his best posts. He most certainly is not a Pilot Manager and I invite you to study the final paragraph of his post. Whilst the above attack by Mr Grossman hits hard, The Management's final paragraph is brutal and, sadly, poignant.

I think we have seen the last of The Management for a while...:E

Having read the transcripts, I take my hat of to NR for at least being honest in describing what was done.

The thing that troubles me however is that he used probability theory as his key defence.

What then is the probability of JSW being fingered after he appeared as number 180 on a Star Chamber list of 184 with a score of 2

As to the hand-written CCList at the bottom...:yuk:

His Lordship is remarkably well informed on the whole sad saga and I would be extremely surprised if he doesn't use his own probability theory model on the 'cull' to flush out the key issues and reach a fair conclusion, although it is likely to be fish heads and rice and not the filet and cab sav appropriate for ex-Brittania F/O's.

Is this true... Flight Deck conversations recorded???
 

Huggins to Rhodes, Day 6 Page 183

Huggins. Finally, subject to any reminder that Mr McLeish may give to me about anything I have left out, tape-recordings on the flight deck: was there a routine whereby flight decks were recorded? Crew control --
there were tape-recordings, were there not, of exchanges between crew control and individual pilots?

Rhodes. Yeah, I was going to say there are tape-recordings on the flight deck, but the tape-recordings in crew control, we tape every conversation between the pilots and the crew controllers, and those tapes are discarded after nine months to a year, I believe.......

My understanding of the CVR is that it is voice recording on a special device that can only be interogated by a special machine and there are limited machines in the world. I further understand CVR's are not routinely interogated, only when a serious event has occurred. I therefore don't believe Rhodes is referring to the CVR; what is he referring to or is this a typo?

To my knowledge all communications with IOC and Crew Control are recorded for 'quality assurance' purposes.

The Management
 

I know I'm new here but isn't The Management being ironic?

Or am I missing something....?

STP

STP
 

the only thing you're missing is that apparantly half the people on this forum can't understand sarcasm, even when nearly 4 years of posts by a certain author are dripping with it.........:ugh::E

Thanks for clearing that up Ron. Say "hi" to Veronica for me.

STP

Blackadder: "Baldrick, have you no idea what irony is?"

Baldrick: "Yes, it's like goldy and bronzy only it's made out of iron."

It is amazing how many on this forum must have Baldrick as their middle name:}

Hey Ron, how's the weather in "Whale's Vagina"? :}

I can't believe that people still don't get the management. I think they understand that it is meant as satire, I don't think anyone here is stupid enough to think it is actually Cathay Management making these posts.

My opinion is that the truth hurts, and people like Calibre Hily wear their heart on their sleeve. Grow some skin Calibre, instead of getting angry at the truth, try and redirect that anger were it really belongs. :D

Sqwak7700

"The Management" is boring, that is why we do not"get" him or her. The supposed satire or whatever is just tedious.

Gosh iceman, can't wait to fly with your scintillating sense of humour:{

The Management
 

I think 'The Management' is Nuri Vittachi 'avin' a laugh!

http://www.augk18.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/jester.gif

The Management

You were wise to edit. Satire it certainly was but if you rely on what 'right thinking people' make of it, then it pays to be a bit more circumspect in a public forum.

DEFAMATION:
Defamation is an injury to a person's character or reputation such that a right thinking person would think less of the injured person as a result of the injurious act. For there to be a defamation, the person injured must be living. There are two types of defamation, libel which is a defamation which is written down and slander which is a spoken defamation. It is a defense to an action for defamation that the words said or written were true.

SATIRE:
1 : a literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule or scorn
2 : trenchant wit, irony, or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly

SARCASM:
1 : a sharp and often satirical or ironic utterance designed to cut or give pain
2 a : a mode of satirical wit depending for its effect on bitter, caustic, and often ironic language that is usually directed against an individual b : the use or language of sarcasm

7700,

I don't for one moment believe The management is CX management and frankly, even if he were management, it wouldn't make any difference to me.

For the record I use to find his posts quite incisive, but since returning from his self-imposed exile, he has lost his edge and sounds more like the shadow of his or her former self - a bit like a 10th re-run of Friends - not that witty or clever anymore.

My objection is not that 'the truth hurts' or other such like rubbish you claim. I object to him libelling a High Court judge in a public forum.

He/she has wisely censured himself since, quite obviously, he couldn't stand by 'the truth' of his allegation.

In the process of this - his very first climb down on Pprune - he has, once and for all, demonstrated that he has very little else to contribute to this forum in the name of veracity, sarcasm or irony.

Sad self-destruction, in some ways, but he he was waning anyway.

HC

Indeed, the AOA membership majority voted in favour of withdrawing financial and legal aid to the 49ers. Despite 90%+ of them telling us NOT to accept the interview deal for a position at the bottom of the seniorty list in return for dropping all legal challenges. Most of the 49ers were then forced to capitulate and it was only the determined 18 which brought about the court case these last few weeks. A grand total of three CX pilots turned up to hear any of the case - outnumbered by FAU members! Shame on us.

Anyway, back to more brave talk about current trivia.

Does one need to be present to be supportive? After all, the Court case will proceed whether one or one thousand people attend. I'm quite certain the outcome will be the same.

I also don't appreciate your suggestion that the AOA as a whole, didn't support the 49ers. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm quite certain that I contributed a sizable sum of my monthly salary, as did every AOA member, to help support the 49ers for a number of years. I have no qualms with that at all.

You may also recall, the first vote to withdrawal financial support was voted down by the AOA membership. The President at the time elected to hold a second vote, something which should never have happened. Personally I voted 'no' on both counts.

What tarnished my perception, was the hostility displayed by a number of 49ers towards colleagues, including myself, who had unquestionably displayed support morally, politically, industrially and financially but where labeled 'screw you Jack', simply by execution of the final vote. Very similar I might add, to what N.R. stated in day 7 when a number of 49ers where terminated, simply due to the unjust reason of 'guilty by probability'.

In summary, please don't misconstrue my words here. To this day, the 49ers have my full support, but please don't state the the AOA wholeheartedly abandoned them. We are a democracy and unfortunately the voting margin, on the second vote, tipped the way it did. It certainly was not a landslide vote and as such, clearly no reason to tarnish everyone with the same brush.

Agree 100% with GG. Couldn`t have said it better myself. Speclialy tonight!:ok:

GG very well put. I was in the same boat as you and agree with all your points. When is the next day in court anyone ?