Jitender Bhargava, a former executive director of Air India, blames the pilots for the beating the airline has taken because of their strikes. In this interview with Sridhar Kumaraswami, Mr Bhargava holds out little hope for the airline if the management structure stays the same.
Why have so many pilot strikes taken place in Air India lately? Has the management been insensitive to pilots’ concerns, forcing them into unreasonable behaviour? In the present case, what should the management do to appear reasonable in dealing with the pilots whose strike was declared illegal by the judiciary?
Though AI has been reeling under heavy losses, there have been three strikes by pilots in the last three years. No demand, no matter how genuine, can justify a strike in today’s situation.
Successive managements have also been insensitive to issues raised by the unions. This is because of a weak HR setup, lack of structured policies and their inconsistent application. The management has taken decisions under duress, appeasing one section of employees at the expense of others.
Should an airline tolerate overpaid pilots taking medical leave en masse on false pretexts and leave passengers — who pay through their nose — in the lurch? Some of the pilots’ demands, such as they should decide who should be allowed to train on the new generation aircraft, sound absurd.
While pilots should follow the industrial laws applicable for strikes, they earn salaries that appear huge to a common man but are largely in tune with global standards. If there is a case of overpaying the pilots, the management personnel who have signed such obnoxious agreements should be held guilty and accountable. As regards training of erstwhile Indian Airlines pilots on B787s, a decision ought to have been taken guided solely by the interests of the airline.
Should fat-salaried pilots be deemed to be workmen and allowed to go into trade union action?
Well-paid pilots certainly don’t deserve to be deemed “workmen”, but the description has legal validity. AI had for years drawn the attention of the authorities to this anomaly, but to no effect.
The root cause of much of the strife in AI seems to be the 2007 merger (of Indian Airlines and Air India) that led to the formation of a unified carrier. Can the two sets of employees think of themselves as one unit?
Merger is undoubtedly at the root of the current problems. Although HR issues were cited as problems before it was decided to merge, these were not addressed. The civil aviation ministry, which was to guide the merged entity in resolving parity and other issues, appointed the Justice Dharmadhikari Committee for the purpose only in May 2011, three years and eight months after the merger. Who is accountable for this lapse? Or, did the ministry wish to let the merged Air India embroil itself in problems?
Will the implementation of the Dharmadhikari report cure the HR-related ills of AI? Will wage cuts work?
It is unlikely that implementing Dharmadhikari committee’s recommendations will help address the HR concerns. AI may, in fact, witness the sinking of employees’ morale even further. This was an important committee but its report does not raise any expectations.
It was said that implementing the report will result in a saving of Rs 250 crore in the wage bill, but this seems unlikely as the cost neutrality principle has been violated in many of the recommendations. The report is neither just nor sound from the point of view of managing the airline productively and efficiently.
In view of the massive bailout package for Air India from the taxpayers’ money, do you think that the Turnaround Plan (TAP) for the airline —monitored by the government — will succeed?
As long as the inherent weaknesses of the management structure (board of directors, chief executive, senior management), and of the work culture, are not addressed, no TAP can succeed. Mere infusion of funds is unlikely to help as the management structure responsible for AI’s decline in recent years (through faulty policies) has been given the job of turning the airline around. This is ironical.
The reason why the airline has been consistently losing market share and figuring way down in terms of on-time performance and load factor amongst all airlines should have been studied for remedial action if the TAP were to have any chance of success.
A total of 111 aircraft for the erstwhile Air India and Indian Airlines were purchased not long ago. Was this justified? Now the government has proposed a sale and lease-back model for the acquisition of the Boeing 787 Dreamliners. Did AI need these modern aircraft to compete globally?
Acquiring more planes than AI could afford or gainfully employ explains much of its current financial travails. It is a pity that no lessons have been learnt and the government wants to thrust more aircraft on AI. When the need is to consolidate, the airline is planning to induct 27 B787s.
The B787s are fuel efficient, but operating costs will have to be recovered through revenues. Unless the airline can improve its on-time performance, enhance loads, attract premium class passengers, just getting modern planes won’t help.
Is it time to sell the national carrier? Will there be takers?
Air India can be salvaged if structural changes in management can be made and professionals are allowed to run it on commercial terms. There is no hope as long as civil servants manage it with constant interference from the ministry. With its current level of losses and debt, AI cannot be a good business proposition for a potential buyer.
Was AI short-changed by private airlines? Were the interests of the national carrier adequately protected when it was running up big losses?
Several decisions have been taken by the government in recent years to disadvantage AI. There is merit in the widespread speculation that many policy decisions were taken at the behest of private airlines. AI has been unfortunate to have been harmed by its owner to a large extent.
No comments:
Post a Comment