NZ court case
 

Believe that CX has won the appeal on retirement age. So what happens now?

Yey! Bye Bye New Zealanders.... weird bunch, all a bit retarded if you ask me. Maybe the Judge realized Cathay would be much better off without em. Very good judgement really!

Richard Cranium.

If it's a wind up, not funny in the least. No irony, sarcasm, innuendo or any element in your comment that makes it even slightly amusing.

Up yours.

So what happens now?
 

The answer to that is easy - just wait for the next lawsuit to begin, it's inevitable . But of course there's still the outstanding ongoing litigation and, as one can most certainly anticipate, the new as of yet to be launched..
"Age discrimination" anyone ??:eek:

What was the retirement age on the contract they agreed to when they signed up?

Good old Cathay! Another victory against their own employees. Well done!

In New Zealand you cannot contract out of state legislation. It's illegal to discriminate on age here so, with possibly very few exceptions, any age limits in a contract would be null and void.

Blimey. If that's the case then why was the original decision overturned?

Local Labour laws are usually the winners. ICAO approved 65 long time ago. Most airlines went along with it. Mate of mine, with a ME carrier faced huge problems because the local carrier refused to accept the ICAO ruling, siting local labour laws. He fought, got lawyers involved and was mightily stitched up.

Everyone is a legal expert all of a sudden...

Which jurisdiction applies in the case on contract law?

https://www.claytonutz.com/knowledge...tion-agreement

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_contract_laws

Laws can be complex and sometimes conflict--and how they are decided depends on the venue they are heard in and by whom they are heard. What seems like a slam dunk (either way) often isn't -- depending on the judge or jury. Especially if there is activism involved; many decisions involve not only the law but also what the person hearing it and deciding it wishes it to be and court in civil cases is usually a roll of the dice (with the defendant usually having a greater risk of loss). This is why the overwhelming majority of cases settle or bargain a plea.

FWIW regulatory or state agencies usually win because they operate kinda outside of traditionally defined law.

A good lawyer knows the law.

A great lawyer knows the judge.

"Which jurisdiction applies in the case on contract law?"

No single answer as some of the contracts were signed in Hkg others out of Hkg.

The judges basically said that if you choose to remain on Cos99 because it benefits you, you cannot ask for the benefits of Cos08 when Cos 99 does not suit you anymore.

They did not look at it as a age discrimination case but as a contract case.

Anyone on cos99 knew that 55 was the agreed retirement age written on the contract which they signed. If they weren't happy with it they should have joined a different airline. They were given a chance to sign over to cos08 but decided not to.

They had an opportunity to sign over to COS08 and 65yr age retirement and they didn't, then later they asked to do same and the door was already shut. Sounds fairly consistent with what happened in HK.
What exactly was their case in law? Was it based on tears and milk?

So, it may seem this case may be one of those rare exceptions.

However all it needs is an appeal heard in front of another judge who sees it as an age discrimination case rather than a contract case and all bets are off.

At this stage I'd say it's one all, as there's been a judgement in both directions.

Ever heard the saying
'Having your cake and eat it'
Classic case!

Time to hang up the boots me thinks there are going to be more in the near future crying because they didn't sign to RA65

It's all about control in this case & a vindictive attitude towards A scalers, I can't see it lasting. The company are just moving into a triple whammy era of 55 retirees, 65 retirees and C scale leavers who've done their 6 years. All at a time of limited training capacity and planned expansion.

I'm expecting a new CoS shortly with age 65 for all and most benefits just short of the failed TA, with encouragement to approve it from the AOA together with thinly veiled threats from the company of what may happen if we don't.

I agree that the triple whammy is about to happen. I heard figures of +400 guys reaching 65 and 55 by 2018 (10 years since Cos 08). Add to that a few new joiners and it will quickly become unmanageable.

I agree about a new contract, but by judging history, Cx will try and give nothing or take stuff away for exchange to 65 and bases...both of which they need.

...have you heard the term ...have your cake and eat it!

Yes, as ever CX are trying to have their cake and eat it. Let's just try not to serve it up on a silver platter for them!