How about this?
 

I believe the HKAOA should look at the pilots being offered employment at CX as an investment. Have them join the union before accepting employment at CX, and them pay them their salary while the hiring ban is in effect. Once the dispute is resolved, they can officially accept employment with CX and avoid being put on the glorious list of scabs......that is somewhat similar to what ALPA does in the US, i.e., when a pilot group goes on strike, other pilots groups pay their strike salary.

It seems to me only fair that if the HKAOA/IFALPA/ALPA wants prospective new pilots' support, they should provide evidence to them of the union's commitment to fair representation!

Frankg,

From reading your recent replies to other postings, you seem to be very opinionated, however, you do not provide any reasonable explanations for your arguments......would you care to share your thoughts with some of us?

...southflyer, whatever you're smoking, I want some.

Please read the other postings that frankg has made wrt the ban...

"and please be guided accordingly."

41IA,

I do not smoke!

However, I see the ban as a one sided approach; you expect someone else to pay for your management's apparent unjust actions, i.e., potential new hires that might be giving up a once in a lifetime opportunity.

As far as frankg's replies, yes, i said recent, because when asked about the flip side of the coin, replacement upgrades, there is not a reasonable explanation being offered by him/her.....just the act accordingly slogan!

Like someone else with some common sense on this forum stated: Please lead by example!!!

Now, if you are looking for something good to smoke, then maybe you should not be flying widebodies.