Editing Cathay Pacific (section)

===2000–2010: Industrial troubles and acquisitions===
[[File:Cathay.pacific.a340-600.b-hqb.arp.jpg|thumb|Cathay Pacific operated three Airbus A340-600s from 2002 to 2009.]]
The year 2000 saw Cathay Pacific experience labour relations issues while completing the acquisition of Dragonair.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/06/business/worldbusiness/06cathay.html|title=Cathay Pacific Deal Is Seen to Gain Control of Dragonair|last=Bradsher|first=Keith|date=6 June 2006|work=The New York Times|access-date=28 January 2020|language=en|issn=0362-4331|archive-date=28 January 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200128172610/https://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/06/business/worldbusiness/06cathay.html|url-status=live}}</ref>

====The 49ers – employment dispute====
In 2001, the Hong Kong Aircrew Officers Association (HKAOA) launched a "[[work to rule]]" campaign to further its campaign for pay improvements and changes to roster scheduling practices. The action involved pilots refusing to work flights that were not scheduled on their roster. Although this alone did not cause extensive disruption, rostered pilots began to call in sick for their flights. Combined with the work-to-rule campaign, the airline was unable to cover all of its scheduled flights, and cancellations resulted. Cathay Pacific steadfastly refused to negotiate with the HKAOA under threat of industrial action.<ref>{{cite news|title=Pilots' work-to-rule causing delays at Cathay Pacific|url=https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Pilots%27+work-to-rule+causing+delays+at+Cathay+Pacific.-a076664432|publisher=Kyodo News International, Inc.|date=4 July 2001|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-date=30 July 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200730121143/https://www.thefreelibrary.com/Pilots%27+work-to-rule+causing+delays+at+Cathay+Pacific.-a076664432|url-status=live}}</ref>

[[File:CX333 TPE.JPG|thumb|A Cathay Pacific [[Airbus A330-300]] at [[Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport]].|left|alt=A Cathay Pacific Airbus A330-300 at [[Chennai International Airport]].]]

On 9 July 2001, reportedly following a comprehensive review of the employment histories of all its pilots, the company fired 49 of its 1,500 pilots. This group became known colloquially as "the 49ers". Nearly half of the fired pilots were captains, representing five percent of the total pilot group. Of the 21 officers of the HKAOA, nine were fired, including four of the seven union negotiators.<ref name=Hopkins>{{cite web|last=Hopkins|first=George E.|title=Cathay Pacific Pilots on the Brink|url=http://www.cathaypilotsunion.org/generaldocs/USalpaarticle02.pdf|date=May–June 2002|publisher=Air Line Pilot|page=20|access-date=4 July 2009|archive-date=20 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201020115347/https://cathaypilotsunion.org/generaldocs/USalpaarticle02.pdf|url-status=usurped}}</ref>

Then-HKAOA president Captain Nigel Demery took the view that "the firing was pure intimidation, a union-bust straight up, designed to be random enough to put the fear in all pilots that they might be next, no reason given".<ref name=Hopkins/> The dismissals were challenged in a number of legal proceedings, but none were reinstated. The airline later offered the 49 pilots it terminated in 2001 the chance to reapply for pilot positions with its cargo division, guaranteeing such applicants first interviews, subject to passing psychometric testing. Nineteen former employees applied and twelve were offered jobs.

On 11 November 2009, 18 of the 49ers succeeded in the Hong Kong Court of First Instance concerning their joint claims for breach of contract, breach of the Employment Ordinance, and defamation.

Judge Anselmo Reyes ruled that the airline had contravened the Employment Ordinance by dismissing the pilots without a valid reason, adding that they had been sacked primarily because of union activities. He also held that remarks by then-chief operating officer Philip Chen Nanlok and current chief executive Tony Tyler after the sackings were defamatory. The judge handed the pilots a victory in their long-running legal battle, with individual awards of HK$3.3&nbsp;million for defamation together with a month's pay and HK$150,000 for the sackings.

On 24 December 2010, judges [[Frank Stock]], [[Susan Kwan]] and [[Johnson Lam]] of the [[Court of Appeal (Hong Kong)|Court of Appeal]] overturned the judgment of the lower court to the extent that the claim for wrongful termination of the contract was dismissed. The finding that Cathay Pacific wrongly sacked the 18 pilots for their union activities was upheld. The court upheld the defamation claim but reduced the damages for the defamatory comments made by Cathay Pacific management. The judges also modified the judgment awarding payment of legal costs to the pilots and instead said that they should now pay some of Cathay's costs.<ref>{{Cite web |title=In the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Court of Appeal – No. 268 of 2009 |url=http://www.cathaypilotsunion.org/proceedings/CACV000268_2009.pdf |access-date=29 August 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111002215236/http://www.cathaypilotsunion.org/proceedings/CACV000268_2009.pdf |archive-date=2 October 2011 |url-status=usurped}}</ref>

The leader of the 49er Plaintiffs, Captain John Warham, launched a book titled ''The 49ers – The True Story'' on 25 March 2011.<ref>{{cite book|author=John Warham|title=The 49ers: The True Story|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=R09YYgEACAAJ |year=2011 |publisher=Book Guild Publishing, Limited|isbn=978-1-84624-587-9|access-date=23 September 2019|archive-date=8 March 2023 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230308152302/https://books.google.com/books?id=R09YYgEACAAJ|url-status=live}}</ref>

The pilots were awarded leave on 26 October 2011 to take their case to the Court of Final Appeal. The matter was heard before Hon. Mr. Justices Bokhary, Chan and Ribeiro who are all Permanent Judges of the Court of Final Appeal. The matters to be decided upon by the Court concerned wrongful termination of contract and the level of damages for defamation. The case was heard by the Court of Final Appeal on 27 August 2012.

On 26 September 2012, 11 years after they were sacked, the 49ers were finally judged<ref>{{cite web|title=FACV No. 13 of 2011|url=http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=83622&currpage=T|page=35|date=26 September 2012|access-date=9 September 2013|archive-date=4 September 2015|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904132754/http://legalref.judiciary.gov.hk/lrs/common/ju/ju_frame.jsp?DIS=83622&currpage=T|url-status=live}}</ref> to have won the 3 prime issues of their legal case: breach of contract, breach of the Employment Ordinance, and defamation. The Court of Final Appeal agreed with the Court of Appeal's methodology for reducing the defamation damages. However, it reinstated one month's salary for each of the 49ers.

Regarding breach of contract,<ref>{{cite journal|first1=Jennifer|last1=van Dale|first2=Rashi|last2=Narayan|title=Court of Final Appeal Issues Important Judgment about Annual Leave|journal=American Bar Association, International Labor & Employment Law Committee Newsletter|date=October 2012|url=http://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/groups/labor_law/int_newsletter/ilel_news20121/oct2012/1210_ilelc_hk.html|editor1-first=Tim|editor1-last=Darby|publisher=Baker & McKenzie, Hong Kong|access-date=9 September 2013|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131003031831/http://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/groups/labor_law/int_newsletter/ilel_news20121/oct2012/1210_ilelc_hk.html|archive-date=3 October 2013|url-status=dead}}</ref> the overall picture leading to dismissal and events immediately after were analysed by the courts, not just the dismissal letter. Regarding the Employment Ordinance, an important aspect was that the judge defined the scope of "union activities" and its protection for workers in Hong Kong. The Court concluded: "Accordingly, most (possibly all) union-sponsored action is potentially protected by s 21B(1)(b), but if the action is not carried out "at [an] appropriate time", it is excluded from the provision". There was no challenge by Cathay Pacific to the Court of Appeal's decision to uphold the original Judge's conclusion that the statements made by Cathay Executives were defamatory of the plaintiffs.

John Warham, referring to the effect the fight has had on pilots' families, said: "In terms of human life, three people are dead because of what Cathay Pacific did to us. That's on their conscience, I hope they can live with that."<ref>{{cite news|last=Benitez|first=Mary Ann|title=Twin legal blows for Cathay spell joy for workers|url=http://cathaypilotsunion.org/inthenews/COFATS27Sep12.pdf|newspaper=The Standard|date=27 September 2012|access-date=8 April 2017|archive-date=31 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201031094011/https://cathaypilotsunion.org/inthenews/COFATS27Sep12.pdf|url-status=usurped}}</ref>

====Acquisition and downsizing of Dragonair====
[[File:B-HYF - Dragonair - Airbus A330-342 - PEK (16484020506).jpg|thumb|A Dragonair Airbus A330-300.]]

On 28 September 2006, the airline underwent a shareholding realignment under which Dragonair became a wholly owned subsidiary but continued to operate under its brand. Acquiring Dragonair meant gaining more access to the restricted, yet rapidly growing, mainland China market and more opportunities for sharing of resources. [[China National Aviation Holding|CNAC]], and its subsidiary, Air China, acquired a 17.5 percent stake in Cathay Pacific, and the airline doubled its shareholding in Air China to 17.5 percent. [[CITIC Pacific]] reduced its shareholding to 17.5 percent and [[Swire Group]] reduced its shareholding to 40 percent.<ref>{{cite web|title=Fact Sheet – Major Subsidiaries and Associates|url=https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_HK/about-us/press-room/fact-sheet.html|publisher=Cathay Pacific|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161209132322/http://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_HK/about-us/press-room/fact-sheet.html|archive-date=9 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|title=History – Into the New Millennium|url=https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_HK/about-us/about-our-airline/history.html|publisher=Cathay Pacific|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-date=1 March 2021|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210301080006/https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_HK/about-us/about-our-airline/history.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref name=KAmerge>{{cite web|title=Cathay, Air China Deal Enables Dragonair Purchase|url=http://www.businesstravelnews.com/Business-Globalization/Cathay-Air-China-Deal-Enables-Dragonair-Purchase|date=17 July 2006|publisher=Business Travel News|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-date=23 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161223134634/http://www.businesstravelnews.com/Business-Globalization/Cathay-Air-China-Deal-Enables-Dragonair-Purchase|url-status=live}}</ref>

Dragonair had originally planned significant international expansion. It was already operating services to [[Bangkok]] and Tokyo, and was to have a dedicated cargo fleet of nine [[Boeing 747-400]]BCF aircraft by 2009 operating to New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, San Francisco and [[Columbus, Ohio|Columbus]].<ref>{{cite press release|url=http://www.dragonair.com/da/en_INTL/aboutus/pressroomdetails?refID=66cc5b81f2510110VgnVCM22000022d21c39____|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110909163324/http://www.dragonair.com/da/en_INTL/aboutus/pressroomdetails?refID=66cc5b81f2510110VgnVCM22000022d21c39____|archive-date=9 September 2011|title=Dragonair to more than double size of cargo fleet by end-2008|publisher=Dragonair|date=6 May 2004|access-date=23 December 2016}}</ref> It had also acquired three [[Airbus A330-300]] aircraft to commence services to Sydney and [[Seoul]].<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.travelweekly.com.au/articles/14/0c01f914.asp |title=Dragonair gets green light for Sydney/Hong Kong services |publisher=[[Reed Business Information]] |work=Travel Weekly |date=19 April 2004 |access-date=4 July 2009 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081228003018/http://www.travelweekly.com.au/articles/14/0c01f914.asp |archive-date=28 December 2008 }}</ref>

[[File:B-HYQ@PEK (20180528165850).jpg|thumb|left|A Cathay Dragon Airbus A330-300.]]
Following the acquisition by Cathay Pacific, Dragonair's proposed expansion plans underwent a comprehensive route compatibility analysis with the Cathay network to reduce duplication. Dragonair services to Bangkok and Tokyo were terminated, and new services launched to Sendai, Phuket, Manila, and Kathmandu. With the merging of similar departments at the two previously separate airlines, some Dragonair staff have had their employment contracts transferred to Cathay Pacific, except Dragonair Pilots and Cabin Crew and others made redundant due to the efficiencies gained in the merger. This resulted in an approximately 37 percent decrease in the amount of staff contractually employed by Dragonair.{{citation needed|date=December 2016}}

In January 2016, Cathay Pacific announced it was rebranding Dragonair as [[Cathay Dragon]].<ref>{{cite press release |title=Cathay Pacific group enters new era with rebranding of Dragonair as Cathay Dragon |url=https://www.dragonair.com/ka/en_HK/about-us/media-centre/press-release/2016/Cathay-Pacific-group-enters-new-era-with-rebranding-of-Dragonair-as-Cathay-Dragon.html |publisher=Cathay Pacific Group |date=28 January 2016 |access-date=23 December 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161223201109/https://www.dragonair.com/ka/en_HK/about-us/media-centre/press-release/2016/Cathay-Pacific-group-enters-new-era-with-rebranding-of-Dragonair-as-Cathay-Dragon.html |archive-date=23 December 2016 |url-status=dead}}</ref>

On 21 October 2020, Cathay Pacific announced that it would shut down all operations of Cathay Dragon and merge it with its parent company due to the lack of customers and heavy economic problems brought by the [[COVID-19 pandemic]]. This merger marked the end for the subsidiary carrier after 35 years of operation.<ref>{{cite news |author1=Danny Lee |author2=Kathleen Magramo |title=Cathay axes record 6,000 Hong Kong jobs and closes regional airline in HK$2.2 billion survival plan |url=https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3106365/cathay-pacific-eliminate-8500-job-posts-hk22-billion |access-date=21 October 2020 |agency=South China Morning Post |archive-date=15 February 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210215120420/https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/politics/article/3106365/cathay-pacific-eliminate-8500-job-posts-hk22-billion |url-status=live }}</ref> Cathay Pacific and its wholly owned subsidiary, [[HK Express]], would take over Cathay Dragon's existing routes.<ref>{{cite news |title=香港國泰航空裁員8500人 旗下港龍航空結業成新冠疫情犧牲品 |url=https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/business-54626151 |access-date=21 October 2020 |agency=BBC |language=zh |archive-date=2 November 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201102023454/https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/trad/business-54626151 |url-status=live }}</ref>

====Economic challenges====
[[File:Cathay Pacific Boeing 777-300ER (B-KQC) arrives London Heathrow 7Jun2015 arp.jpg|thumb|A Cathay Pacific [[Boeing 777-300ER]] arrives at [[London Heathrow Airport]].]]
To celebrate the airline's 60th anniversary in 2006, a year of roadshows named the "Cathay Pacific 60th Anniversary Skyshow" was held where the public could see the developments of the airline, play games, meet some of the airline staff, and view vintage uniforms. Cathay Pacific also introduced anniversary merchandise and [[airline meal|in-flight meals]] served by restaurants in Hong Kong in collaboration with the celebrations.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Cathay Pacific takes 60th Anniversary Skyshow on the road|url=https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/es_ES/about-us/press-room/press-release/2006/en_HK_pressrelease_79.html|publisher=Cathay Pacific|date=20 May 2006|access-date=23 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161223133038/https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/es_ES/about-us/press-room/press-release/2006/en_HK_pressrelease_79.html|archive-date=23 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In June 2008, Cathay Pacific entered into a [[plea bargain]] with the [[United States Department of Justice]] in respect of antitrust investigations over air cargo price-fixing agreements. It was fined US$60&nbsp;million. The airline has subsequently set up an internal Competition Compliance Office, reporting to chief operating officer [[John Slosar]], to ensure that the Group complies with all relevant competition and antitrust laws in the jurisdiction in which it operates. The breaches for which Cathay Pacific Cargo were being investigated in the US were not illegal under Hong Kong competition law.<ref>{{cite press release|title=Major International Airlines Agree to Plead Guilty and Pay Criminal Fines Totaling More Than $500&nbsp;Million for Fixing Prices on Air Cargo Rates|url=http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/June/08-at-570.html|publisher=[[United States Department of Justice]]|date=26 June 2008|access-date=4 July 2009|archive-date=30 May 2009|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090530145351/http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/June/08-at-570.html|url-status=live}}</ref><ref>{{cite press release|title=Announcement Plea Agreement with United States Department of Justice|url=http://downloads.cathaypacific.com/cx/investor/20080626CX_Announcement%28B%29_en.pdf|publisher=Cathay Pacific|date=26 June 2008|access-date=4 September 2009|archive-date=8 July 2011|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110708124115/http://downloads.cathaypacific.com/cx/investor/20080626CX_Announcement(B)_en.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>

In September 2008, three of Cathay Pacific's top ten global accounts, Lehmann Brothers, AIG and Merrill Lynch, hit financial trouble.<ref>{{cite web|title=Chairman speaks on Overcoming Adversity at Aerospace Forum Asia luncheon (Jun 10, 2009)|url=https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_DK/about-us/press-room/press-release/2009/en_HK_pressrelease_19.html|publisher=Cathay Pacific|access-date=22 December 2016|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20161223063556/https://www.cathaypacific.com/cx/en_DK/about-us/press-room/press-release/2009/en_HK_pressrelease_19.html|archive-date=23 December 2016|url-status=dead}}</ref>

[[File:Cathay Pacific, Boeing 747-400, SIN.jpg|thumb|left|A Cathay Pacific Boeing 747–400 at [[Singapore Changi Airport]].]]

In March 2009, the airline reported a record full-year loss of [[HK$]]8.56&nbsp;billion for 2008, which was also the carrier's first since the [[1997 Asian Financial Crisis]]. The record loss included [[Fuel hedging|fuel-hedging]] losses of HK$7.6&nbsp;billion and a HK$468&nbsp;million charge for a price-fixing fine in the US It had to scrap its final dividend. The hedging losses were a result of locking in fuel prices at higher than the prevailing market price. As of the end of 2008, Cathay Pacific has hedged about half of its fuel needs until the end of 2011. The airline at the time estimated that it would face no further cash costs from the hedges if the average market price stood at US$75, enabling it to recoup provisions it made in 2008.<ref name=2008loss>{{cite news|last=Leung|first=Wendy|title=Cathay Pacific to delay planes, review routes on loss|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aCGfshxczTzM|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025150125/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aCGfshxczTzM|archive-date=25 October 2012|publisher=[[Bloomberg L.P.]]|date=11 March 2009|access-date=23 December 2016}}</ref>

The flattening out of fuel prices resulted in Cathay Pacific recording a paper fuel hedging gain for its half-year reports for 2009. However, as a result of the global economic situation, the Group reported an operating loss. Given the current economic climate, and in line with the steps being taken by other major airlines around the world, the airline has undertaken a comprehensive review of all its routes and operations. This has resulted in frequencies being reduced to certain destinations, ad hoc cancellations on other routes, deferred capital expenditure, parked aircraft and introduced a Special Leave Scheme for staff to conserve money.<ref>{{cite news|last=Chan|first=Sue Ling|title=Cathay, Singapore Face Tough Decisions|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aVooYceFNyjc|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025150135/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aVooYceFNyjc|archive-date=25 October 2012|publisher=Bloomberg L. P.|date=15 April 2009|access-date=23 December 2016}}</ref> According to CEO Tony Tyler, the yield from passengers was "hugely down" and the airline had lost "a lot of premium traffic". He noted that it could take 20 passengers in [[Economy class|economy]] to make up for the lost revenue of one fewer [[First class (aviation)|first class]] passenger flying to New York from Hong Kong.<ref>{{cite news|last1=Akkermans|first1=Joost|last2=Leung|first2=Wendy|title=Cathay Pacific's Tyler doesn't expect recovery soon|url=https://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aX0f0iiNtAJs|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025150255/http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aX0f0iiNtAJs|archive-date=25 October 2012|publisher=Bloomberg L. P.|date=17 March 2009|access-date=23 December 2016}}</ref>