Air Malta in tailspin

Can airlines go under? Definitely so. Several have done that, including prized ones like Swiss Air. God forbid and the saints save, but Air Malta can go that way as well. And possibly soon.

Should that happen the stench of acrimony will fill the air. Everybody will be blaming everybody else. But no matter how ferociously fingers are pointed, it may not be possible to put our proud airline together again. With each day that passes, confusion seems to become more confounded.

Last Thursday, The Times reported on an internal memorandum issued to all employees the previous day by the Air Malta CEO, under the pall of a harsh and determined decision by the Airline Pilots Association (ALPA) to strike for 24 hours between midnight of next Friday and Saturday, unless the company and the government moved towards their demands and position.

The CEO called the union’s decision a totally irresponsible action, joining others who are warning of the potential dire consequences of industrial action. He also called for dialogue and indicated the company had been moving some way towards ALPA’s position, such as by setting up a dedicated supplier contracts’ review and cargo as a profit centre, giving it the resources to operate effectively.

He also made what to me was an astonishing statement. The CEO was reported by The Times as saying talks had started with the airline’s four unions last week “to develop a comprehensive restructuring plan”.

Come again? Months ago, the government appointed a foreign firm of auditors and consultants to do just that. After weeks of secrecy, the plan was submitted to the government by the consultants, for which they received €3.3 million, give or take a few cents. That was quite a while ago, following which the government submitted a restructuring plan to the European Commission.

Does the CEO’s statement mean that Ernst and Young’s expensive plan was effectively scrapped, and that a new comprehensive one is to be developed afresh? I had heard the government was not impressed by Ernst and Young’s efforts, though it paid them their fees on the nail. But “not satisfied” did not imply “scrapped”.

Where, in reality, does the restructuring process stand? A draft of Ernst and Young’s plan was leaked to this newspaper in what I termed in The Times as a kite flying exercise. The company was quick to say that many of the details were not correct. What, exactly, is correct?

The mantra that Air Malta will not comment because it does not want to discuss internal matters in public, is rubbish. In a situation rife with speculation, better come clean and be transparent than allow studied leaks to fly about.

For some reason, the new management could not even give essential facts to the unions. The pilots’ union and management met on Tuesday but, ALPA’s president said, management would not clarify how many pilots would lose their job. That mysterious reluctance, long months after the company should have prepared to restructure, was confirmed by the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association.

While exhorting the pilots’ union to refrain from making industrial threats and taking them, the MHRA criticised the government for keeping most of the interested parties in the dark about the restructuring process.

Amid all this confusion, I fear that the pilots’ union, if they strike and even extend their action, as the union’s president said, in addition to harming their company and its prospects, will set themselves as scapegoats for a mess that has been long in the making through no fault of their own.

It happened, in fact, despite their cooperation in the 2004 memorandum of understanding.

As I write, the union is vulnerable to legal action if it definitely directs its members to take industrial action.

The union has not declared a trade dispute, which legalises industrial action.

It could well be, therefore, that it will be exposing itself and its members to damages liability. (The GWU has been cannier, and has declared a trade dispute, which is being challenged by the airline).

The pilots’ union wields the most industrial power within the company. It cannot use its weight by firing from the hip. Nor by giving the unintended impression that it wants to take over the management of the company.

Much of what the union is saying makes sense and deserves serious answers. At the same time, beating the drum of past failures by management and, more so, the government, will not resolve the present grave predicament or yield hope for the future.

If Air Malta is to be saved, it has to be restructured, with the involvement of the unions who should truly be treated as partners, and not ignored, given sops or dismissed as irresponsible.

Responsibility is a deep and wide word.

The meaning required right now is an all out united effort to determine what needs to be done, and doing it.

Recrimination is a separate matter to be handled at the political level, where the opposition will surely not let the government get away with its full share of the blame for Air Malta’s predicament, in so far as blame there is.

The pilots’ union will walk taller if it steps back from industrial action and threats thereof. It had to do that to be listened, now listened to it is. It should show its strength, knowledge and wisdom at the negotiating table. For the sake of Air Malta, yes, but also for the sake of its members and their fellow workers.

The pilots’ union – in fact, any union – should not become the stooge for the tailspin which Air Malta is in.