The Air Malta saga has been ongoing for the past 12 years as its accumulated losses posed a serious threat to its economic viability. Over these years, efforts were made to make it economically viable and an asset to the Maltese economy.
One of these efforts was the 2004 memorandum of understanding between the airline management and the four trade unions representing the employees. The austerity measures introduced in this MOU and the reduction of the workforce by default rather than design were envisaged as being concrete steps in helping the company regain economic viability.
However, this goal proved to be elusive, because in the 2009 financial year, Air Malta posted a €31 million loss. As part of a rescue plan, the government proposed an injection of €100 million in the shareholding of the company. This was not approved by the European Commission.
Subsequently, the government asked the Commission to authorise a €52 million loan to enable the company overcome its cash-flow problem. Brussels approved the rescue aid on the condition that the government would submit the first draft of a restructuring plan by the first week of January 2011 and present a final plan within six months.
A steering committee was set up to oversee the restructuring process, composed of representatives from the government, the Opposition, the Air Malta management and trade unions representing its employees.
We are now in the third quarter of 2016, and Air Malta has still not been given a clean bill of health. The government plan to seek a strategic partner to turn it into an asset rather than a liability seems to have encountered a number of obstacles.
The forces at Air Malta that have overshot their goal have now to accept and adapt to painful arrangements
The trade unions have been very explicit in expressing their concerns about the plight and future employment of their members. The turbulence caused by the threat of industrial action by the pilots and the partial industrial action taken by the cabin crew could be interpreted as messages that the unions do not intend to take things lying down.
Naturally, the unions have to voice the plight of their members. They are their constituents, and defending their interests is the raison d’être of the unions.
They have to be careful, however, not to appear to be part of the destructive forces that can derail the path to a viable solution.
In the ongoing debates and negotiations between the social partners, I can imagine President Emeritus George Abela striving to restrain these forces and, at the same time, seeking a modicum of consensus that would enable the social actors to agree on the necessary compromises to reach an amicable solution.
The strategic partner – being sought by the government to inject the necessary capital in the enterprise – does not seem to be keen on taking on a company beset with logistical problems. The prevalent situation at Air Malta dictates that the changes that have to be made be not only in form but mainly in substance.
The change in the substance and the transformation of Air Malta, necessitated by this reality, have triggered a traumatic feeling among the actors involved in the enterprise. The mere anticipation of the inevitable must have been a shock to many of the employees.
Unfortunately, reality goes by the law of reason and is not committed to the dream language of the heart. The vulnerability of the enterprise to changing forces and wholesale competitiveness, its precarious financial state and the pressure from the European Commission have sent clear signals to the Air Malta management that the time has come to make some painful changes.
If these changes can promise greater security to the employees and greater success to the company, reconciliation between the social partners can be achieved.
Former prime minister Lawrence Gonzi, while he was in office, was quoted saying that, in retrospect, his government should have been more aggressive in its dealing with the Air Malta issue.
The new teeth, which tend to be more permanent, have long been pressing the milk teeth to fall.
The forces at Air Malta that have overshot their goal have now to accept and adapt to painful arrangements.
Of course, different explanations can be given for the chain of events that unfolded over these past years. But the time for bickering is over, and the social partners have to be conscious of the fact that the Air Malta saga has reached its final chapter.
This means that, rather than editing and revising the text, a new script, contextualised in the prevailing situation, has to be written. This new script should take into account the peripheral status of Malta, which makes the operations of this airline particularly vital to the tourist industry, one of the mainstays of the Maltese economy.
Saviour Rizzo is a former director of the Centre for Labour Studies, University of Malta.