Dear members of the public, It is most regrettable that the industrial strike was not terminated before the Lunar New Year despite our utmost endeavour to reach an amicable settlement with the CPA management. We think we should explain to you why we have no alternative but to maintain the strike and hope you will understand our position. What caused the strike: Understaffing, dismissals, and low salary adjustments 1. Due to the shortage of crew strength, crew members have often been required to over-work and operate out of position (i.e. acting up or down positions). The problem has become acute since August 1992. The FAU has in the past repeatedly reflected to the management that this problem would not only affect crew morale but also create safety problems for passengers. 2. In November 1992, the FAU pronounced that if the CPA management did not agree to improve understaffing, FAU members would start limited industrial action by working only within their position as from December 1, 1992. The FAU later deferred the action until December 7, 1992, to give more time for management to consider our proposal. There being no positive response from the management, the FAU started limited in What caused the breakdown of negotiations: Management insistence on victimisation 5. During the initial period of the strike, the CPA management refused to hold any negotiations unless the FAU called off the strike. On January 20, 1993, when the Lunar New Year drew near, in the interest of the travelling public, the FAU agreed to call off the strike immediately if the management agreed to reinstate the three crew members and continue to negotiate on the salary package and review the understaffing problem, even without management commitment on the latter two items. 6. At this late stage,the CPA management unreasonably declared and insisted that they must take disciplinary action, including possible termination of service, towards active members in the industrial action. They repeated their stand in the media.
Why must we continue to strike: To defend our job security and right to collective action 1. It is blatantly unfair and unreasonable on the part of the management to lay all the blame on the FAU and make scapegoats of some of our members. We find it an insult to the dignity of the FAU and all our members if we agree to be disciplined, or sacked, owing to our participation in industrial action.
2. If the FAU allows the CPA management to sack or penalise members who have been actively involved in the strike, it would mean accepting the denial of the union's right to collective bargaining and to strike within the permission of the law. This right,we understand, is enshrined both in the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and the International Labour Convention. 3. To protect our basic labour rights and for the survival of the FAU, we have no alternative but to continue the strike until the CPA management agrees that there shall be no intimidation and victimisation on both sides, and no disciplinary action will be taken against anyone who participated in the strike.
What can you do: Sign this letter to the Cathay management A. Members of the public - As th FLIGHT ATTENDANTS' UNION, CATHAY PACIFIC AIRWAYS, JANUARY 26, 1993
