The issue that I am traveling to analyze is the two wage dissensions between Cathay Pacific Airways and Cathay’s pilots and flight attenders. The Court of Final Appeal ruled that under the employment Ordinance. Cathy must include certain allowances and a committee in add-on to the basic wage when ciphering its cabin crew’s wage during statutory vacations and one-year leave ( Chiu. 2012. parity. 3 ) . Another judgement is the Court of Final Appeal ordered Cathay to pay HK $ 850. 000 in amendss to each of the 18 pilots it sacked over their 2001 industrial action ( Chiu. 2012. parity. 11 ) .
From the first judgement. it indicated the dynamic human resource direction environment. The three flight attenders who filed the case are from the Cathay Pacific Airways Flight Attendants Union ( CPAFAU ) . which is the trade brotherhood of the cabin crew employed by Cathay Pacific Airways Limited. The case shows that the brotherhoods become a 3rd party to cover jointly with their employer. In my sentiment. a brotherhood is an effectual manner to cover with the employer. This is because the more the employees joined in the brotherhood. the larger the bargaining power to the employer.
From the instance. the three flight attenders used about four old ages to cover with the case and it started from the claims lodged with the Labour Tribunal. The CPAFAU service as an of import function to lend in the case since it pay for the cost of legal audience. Cathay Pacific Airways besides have a staff called Manager of Personnel Strategy & A ; Relations to get by with the human resource direction of the company. such as covering with the brotherhood to keep employee and labor dealingss ( Apple Daily. 2009 ) .
Besides. legal consideration is besides one of the factors in the environment of Human Resources Management. The companies in Hong Kong should follow the local statute law. such as the Employment Ordinances and Minimum Wage Ordinance in Hong Kong. Harmonizing to the case between Cathay Pacific Airways and the three flight attenders. the Employment Ordinance ruled that Cathay should include committee on duty-free gross revenues and allowances for line responsibility and land responsibility when ciphering its cabin crew’s wage during statutory vacations and one-year leave ( Chiu. 2012. parity. 4 ) . It shows that the statute law will impact the human resources direction. for illustration the compensation.
From my point of position. the statute law can protect the right of the employees. Harmonizing to the Employment Ordinance Chapter 11 Protection against Anti-union Discrimination. every employee shall hold the rights to take portion in the activities of the trade brotherhood at any appropriate clip. if the employee is a member or an officer of a trade brotherhood. An employer shall non disregard. penalise or discriminate against an employee for exerting the above rights. In the case between Cathay and the 18 pilots. the Court of Final Appeal ordered Cathay to pay HK $ 850. 000 in amendss to each of the 18 pilots. including HK $ 150. 000 each for disregarding them on evidences that they took portion in work-to-rule brotherhood activities. It shows that the Employment Ordinance protect the employees to take portion in brotherhood activities like industrial action ( Chiu. 2012. parity. 12 ) .
I suggested that the Cathay Pacific Airways should follow the judgement of the Court of Final Appeal. This is because the case is known by the Hong Kong people. particularly those of the possible employees. It may damage the perceptual experience of the possible employees over the company. They may believe that Cathay Pacific Airways do non value their employees. Therefore. the possible employees may non see Cathay as a good employer and it may impact the enlisting of the company. Furthermore. the bing staff may lose the morale to work and it may impact the service quality indirectly. To reason. the environment of human resource direction is dynamic and it is affected by many factors like legal consideration and brotherhoods.