fakecd

cx has all leverage here. hk employment law allows easy firing unlike other nations. pilots know it (remember back then those 20 odd pilots who lost their job during industrial action) i recall hk public had little sympathy

ermen

were housing packages retrospectively taken away in banking / finance? I certainly know that it is unlikely for a new hire to get a package (though some still do) - but i haven't heard of a case where it was suddenly taken away with a unilateral revision to an existing contract. indeed when it was written into my contract before at a previous employer - i never saw any clause that said it could be removed at will.

Arbeysix

I think the point here is that there are different ways of going about this. My (Asian based) organisation went through a similar exercise of cutting expat housing benefits about 5 years ago. New joining staff were offered the new package and could take it or leave it in terms of their decision whether or not to join. Existing staff (who had joined based on given set of contractual terms including the legacy housing package) were given incentives to move to the new scheme but if elected not to do so were grandfathered (ie could keep the existing package for a long transition period). Giving staff a few months notice that one of their key compensation components will be axed IMO is not what the company needs, particularly in light of its history with the management/cockpit and cabin crew relationship. Add to the mix the current shortage of pilots, re-fleeting and training needs, staff perceptions that they are being forced to pay for incompetent fuel hedging decisions and questions being asked by high-value FFs around cuts to service quality and it seems a poorly timed/executed move IMO. The company needs a period of stability and the support of its frontline staff seems critical for this.

Pickles

It's not very difficult. They can come to you and ask you to renegotiate this perk. If you refuse, they could just fire you. It's as simple as that. In finance, it's employment at will, and if your employer wants to backtrack on some perk, they can ask you to agree to it or they'll just fire you.

ermen

So has this happened? Everyone talks of it but I personally have not known of any cases where a housing allowance is unilaterally stripped away. Existing plans are grandfathered.

Employer can't just fire you without cause, and especially if you did not want to renegotiate a contract.
Employer would be open to a suit of unfair dismissal.

Pickles

Sure it's happened. Not to me (I never had a housing allowance) but I know of people to whom this happened. And as for firing, of course you can be fired without cause. In at-will employment (which covers pretty much all of HK's finance professionals), you can be fired for no reason at all. They can always claim cost-cutting.

As a matter of fact, if you're going to get fired, it's best to be fired without cause. Being fired with cause means you'll likely get no severance, your record will be tarnished (whatever the cause), and you'll also probably lose any unvested deferred compensation. Being fired without cause (e.g. cost cutting, or an office shutting down) is not a black mark.

As for suing for unfair dismissal because you refused to renegotiate a housing allowance, you're welcome to explore it, but given employment laws, it's going to be a long slog and you're unlikely to win. And employers know this.

peasant

LOL. Yes, in HK a firm can dismiss you without cause - employment contracts are 'at will'. Yes, unfair dismissal exists. In HK, you can go to court & win. But the most a court can award you is your contractual notice period (1 month or 3 months normally) IF you hadn't been paid it (i.e. company dismissed you with no notice payment) And, of course, if you lose, then not only do you not get a payoff, but it is now a matter of public record just why you were fired for cause, with lots of dirty laundry. Oops

So, firing you with no explanation required, but with payment of your contractual notice period, is legal. And yes, it has/ did happen to a number of acquaintances/ colleagues (and as explained above, is preferable for the empoyee, as it can be waved off as redundancy, not being fired)

peasant

Yep, this is how such a conversation would go:

Them: Hello, we want to vary your contract to reduce your housing allowance. Do you agree? (Y/N)

You: No

Them: Fair enough. Here's your notice letter, we will pay you in lieu. Please clear your desk.

You go to employment lawyer

Employment lawyer: (if she is honest, and not wanting to rack up fees on your gullibility of HK contract/ labour law) Don't bother fighting it, everything was done legally.

As an aside, contracts in HK are pretty much sacrosanct. An employee can't change the contract with you without your approval, and vice versa. But if you don't agree, then the contract can be ended, as per what the contract says. If you want to be safe, then negotiate (at the start) a much longer notice period or early termination clause & fee - but likely this will be two way, so most people won't want to.

sxc

Let’s keep this on the topic of the dispute between the pilots and Cathay Pacific.

Thanks
sxc
Cathay Pacific Moderator

Pickles

Question is whether CX pilots are under the same "at will" employment model, even with an union and contracts. In other words, if CX wants to renegotiate the housing allowance, can they just tell the pilots to take it or be fired (with notice and severance, and all the legal bits).

sxc

Agreed. Just don’t want the thread to diverge into discussions about general HK employment law for all occupations.

sxc
Cathay Pacific Moderator.

peasant

My understanding is that it is a bit more complex than that.

Are CX pilots in HK "at will" employees? Yes. The jdugements following the firings in 2001 established that.

However, there are multiple contracts for pilots. New pilots (well, for past few years) have been on set housing allowance of xx per month. Cathay isn't changing these

What it wants to change is the older contracts, which say something like 'suitable housing will be provided'. Up to now, that has meant CX paying LL directly, or re-imbursing pilots rents/ mortgages. CX has given notice that it intends to change this, don't know what to, but presumably same xx that new pilots get. CX position will probably be that this isn't a change in contract, as this will still allow for suitable housing, and so doesn't need individual's agreement. Union's position will probably be that this is a change in contract, and so need mutual agreement.

Note collective bargaining doesn't exist in HK. Union can only advise, individuals still have to agree/ not agree contract changes on one to one basis with company.

MSPeconomist

Does the CX pilot union vote in any way on what the advice from the union should be? Or do union lawyers advise these pilots?

Kachjc

to be fair
What options do these pilots have?
There is no job security in HX/UO or any mainland airline
EK/ME3 are not expanding as fast as before.

sad.
CX- one thing everyone knows about CX- their pilots are the best. Even during delays/emergencies, no one compares .
It is the best thing about CX- hope it does not go away.

CX real issue was allowing competitors to take slots in HKG, - what was management in 2009 thinking, anyone knew that HKG was going to become crowded, they could have prevented HX from stealing customers by slot hogging....

peasant

MSP - yes. Last year there was negotiations union/ airline, that the members voted against approving in the end. So Cathay didn't put forward the contract change. So 'as if' collective bargaining

Kachjc. Eh? in 2009 HKIA was at 2/3 capacity, of which CX had half. For CX to have hogged the slots, they would have had to double in size in a very short period of time. Which almost certainly wasn't economically or operationally possible.

And, if you knew after the GFA in 2008 that HKG was going to become crowded that fast, well, I hope you also went all in with buying HK property on margin!