It is extremely disappointing to see that Hogg "resigned" as CEO of Cathay Pacific. CX now goes from Boss Hogg to Emperor Augustus.

Hogg stated that "...it is right that Paul and I take responsibility as leaders of the company" ; by responsibility he really means blame.

It would be understandable if Hogg were pushed out due to CX financial performance (this year CX is among 10 worst-performing carriers on the Bloomberg World Airlines Index, per Skift), but that wasn't it. It would be understandable if Hogg were sacked due to ethics violations. No ethics violations were cited.

Although I have not been a fan of the cost cuts and deterioration of CX service levels under Hogg, I don't appreciate the reason for his departure. It isn't good to see Beijing meddling with a Hong Kong enterprise.

It will be interesting to hear from Augustus, about what he plans to do differently as CEO of Cathay Pacific, and what changes the airline may make.

If you do, please try to make sure there is no one eavesdropping, so to make sure that the FA will not be reported...

And more messages from the motherland:
 

I would argue that it's to maintain their share of the profits now that the fuel hedge fiasco is over, and also to try to make sure they get a decent price when they do finally sell up to Air China and leave.

Feel bad for Hogg to go down this way, he was a lifer at Cathay for over 30 plus years, someone that truly loves the airline.

This actually make me feeling less safe in the future if I ever had to fly with Cathay, because it shows Cathay is bending over itself to appease the Chinese regime. And one is naive if one believes the Chinese regime's demand of Cathay will stop right here. In the future the Chinese regime will probably demand Cathay to buy parts and services from China as much as possible, meaning less quality parts, less qualified services, meaning less safer Cathay as we know it.

Well, I guess I will stop my attend to renew Gold this year, I had planned to buy a few I fare tickets with them, but now those money will go elsewhere. For Cathay to fire their pilots, and other personnel, and now CEO and another upper management had to stepped down because Beijing said so, well, they can sell their souls to Beijing, I won't be part of it.

Terrible news

Why does the BBC article say "quit" when Hogg didn't quit? It isn't just misleading but it is wrong.

I don't think the employees in question used work for a political message. Do you have any evidence of that?

There were multiple social media posts saying that some pilots were trying to drum up support for the protests when making announcements in flight, etc..No actual recordings or video... so who knows... but if true, would be rather unprofessional IMHO to do that...

I thought it was targeting protestors, as in the people actually on the ground who were protesting. Because that is what the memo to CX about new requirements to fly over China's airspace was about.
Not sure that pilots saying that is "illegal".

Yes, I do understand that CX cut back on its service quality and that many of hits FFs have expressed their fury here at FT. And yes, I do understand that China Southern and Hainan can provide excellent service on some routes. However, other mainland carriers have had it in for Cathay for some time. I offer that it is naive to not account for the strategic intent of PLA/CPC controlled entities. They are a juggernaut, intent on dominance, much as the railroad companies of industrial North America sought to control and dominate their market. CX is a symbol of quality, and provides decent employment opportunities to which the mainland carriers are compared. Curtail the global reach and standing of the firm and the regional quality of mainland carriers isn't so bad.

I draw your attention to the depressing news last week of mainland controlled mega companies initiated directives to boycott Cathay. For example, Huarong International and CRC are reported to have implemented such a directive. I also draw your attention to the effective strategy Air China applied to establish dominance on its Canadian routes, despite the presence of a JV with Air Canada. On the surface, there should be no need to negatively impact a JV partner, and yet it is IMO ongoing.

"Cathay pilot telling passengers about extradition bill protests on July 26" (can't find full quote)

https://www.scmp.com/news/hong-kong/...eased-security

So this isn't related?
https://www.scmp.com/news/china/poli...box=1565352804
I thought this kicked it off. It is about participating in the protests. If you read the article, the pilot who was fired was because he participated in the protests. Not cause of anything done on-board. They seem to be two separate issues which some are trying to conflate.
At least that is how I understand it, not being there.

I have seen nothing to indicate that the pilot make the announcement on July 26 has been fired. He very carefully didn't state a political point. He advised all passengers about the protests and asked all HKers (in Cantonese) to "take care and stay strong".

One was fired for being accused of rioting (what happened to innocent until proved guilty?) and the other for posting a pic in LIHKG (a Reddit-like forum) of a message on a screen in the cockpit. Details (including the picture) here: https://www.hongkongfp.com/2019/08/1...ssure-beijing/