Editing Cathay Pacific (section)

====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>