Expat Captains in SIA..!!

[linksys]

some reasons.

30 April 2009
Dear Colleagues,

NEWSLETTER

“You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time.” - Abraham Lincoln (attributed) 16th president of US (1809 - 1865)

SHORTER WORK MONTH
The Company has stated on numerous occasions that this Shorter Work Month (SWM) scheme is not about cutting costs. In fact, the company has made it possible for Managers and Admin Officers to take either one-day CNPL or one day annual leave. If the objective is not cost cutting, then it does not gel with asking anyone to take one day of CNPL, let alone 3 and 4 days of CNPL. Doesn’t the company understand that CNPL means NO-PAY? If the company is really not interested in the money saved by NOT PAYING us then WHO, is the beneficiary of the money saved by NOT PAYING us.
Well, at least one member of management, in the form of EVP HRP, was honest enough to state that the company “did not want to bear the burden of the cost of the excess pilots”. At the MOM, when this was stated, the EVP proudly stated how the pilot numbers have grown over the years, at a higher rate than that of other staff. The Association had to remind him that the growth in pilot numbers was deliberately planned by management in anticipation of airline growth.

Hindsight is perfect and no one, including the Association, is blaming the Management for the downturn and the resultant excess situation. But really, is this the way to show “Concern for Staff”, by expecting the staff to bear the cost of excess resources. Instead of asking all staff to stand united and bite the bullet together, in this downturn, the company has resorted to dividing the staff and apportioning responsibility for the consequences of this downturn.
The Association’s position has been simple. We will gladly participate in the SWM scheme offered to Managers and Admin Officers on the very SAME terms. We are willing to do this, to show solidarity, because it is important in this downturn to demonstrate unity. If however the
company needs any particular group of employees to chip in more than the other staff, then the company must be willing to make restitution, should the company remain profitable(after accounting for the monies saved through the excess CNPL). For some strange reason, this world class management is unable to see the fairness of that proposal, instead insisting on 3 days and 4 days of CNPL for the pilots. The Company has REFUSED to negotiate on this.


HOW MUCH?
How much does the company save by imposing 3 days and 4 days of CNPL? Based on figures and information provided by the company, there are 914 Captains and 942 First Officers. At the MOM meeting on 23 April 09, the Company stated that there was an excess of 75 Captains and 127 First Officers. Using an average salary of $13297 for Captains and $6882 for First Officers, the 3 days and 4 days CNPL will translate to a savings of $13,368,804 for Captains and $9,508,171 for First Officers. This results in a total of savings of $22,876,975 in the financial year 09/10. Yes, that’s almost 23 MILLION.

What is the carrying cost of the excess crew? Using the same average salary, mentioned above, for the full financial year 09/10, it would result in a cost of $12,964,575 for the 75 Captains and $11,362,182 for the 127 First Officers. So while it would cost the company $24,326,757 to carry this excess crew, the company is now expecting the pilots to support $22,876,975 of this cost by taking 3 days and 4 days CNPL.
Is this fair? What next? Are they going to now ask the Planners who did the fuel hedging at higher prices to bear the losses? Are they going to ask the managers who ran unprofitable stations to pay for the losses incurred? Are they going to ask the Cargo pilots to make up for the losses incurred in their cargo operations? Is this is how Management has chosen to “reward” staff who have faithfully done their bidding?
We are all one Company. Despite many attempts to divide and rule by creating separate legal entities, the fact remains that we are all, in reality, one Company. Each member of this family, fairly motivated to play his part, is essential for the success of the company, and especially so to pull the company through this downturn. Instead, this enlightened management has resorted to sowing the seeds of discord, division and mistrust.


MONEY NO ENOUGH!!!
The Company has already saved money by denying the pilots the SI for 2009. This was despite the fact that proposals for the 2009 SI were made to Management, before any other union. No doubt the Association’s proposal was rejected, but when management was repeatedly pressed for a counter proposal, all management could respond to was that it was working on it. Yes, management was working on it alright.
Despite numerous reminders, no counter-proposal from the company was forth-coming, until, when pressed again at the Union-Management meeting on 17 Feb 09, Management’s lame reply was that it was too late – the proverbial horse had long bolted when it was decided more than a month before in mid-January that a wage freeze was to be implemented.
Behind our backs, while telling us to wait patiently, management went ahead, negotiated and concluded SI agreements with the other unions in the group in mid January 2009.

This is subterfuge by HR against a member of the SIA family. It makes a mockery of the Core Values, and the Team Spirit and all the other often heard clichés. Management’s intention has become crystal clear – Divide and Rule. How can employees have confidence and trust in a Management that resorts to such underhanded measures. Where is the Integrity? Where is the Honour?

By the way, even if we assume a lower SI for 2009 than 2008, the money that the company has deprived us is not just one year’s SI. Rather, it is that quantum per month compounded for the entire length of your career in the Company.

Just to give you a flavour of the amount, assume for example that the SI for 2009 for Captains was $300. Then, one Captain would have lost $3900 per year. If the Captain only had 10 years left to work, he would have lost a total of $39000(without considering compounding). Given that I have used a conservative SI, for the 914 Captains that we have, the SI lost for 10 years is $35,646,000. This is a very conservative computation and only for Captains. Hasn’t that saved the company enough to carry the cost of the excess Captains and First Officers? If you include the amount lost by First Officers, wouldn’t the total sum saved be enough to cover the excess crew and ensure that NO ONE NEEDS TO BE LET GO? WHY IS THIS MANAGEMENT OBLIVIOUS TO THIS FACT?

What about the money saved by not paying us our share of the bonus on the AVC in 2008? What about the money saved by not paying us 70 hours PPA, because of the downturn? What about the money saved by not paying LMA as a result of the reduction in services and layovers? Need we say more?
Management has let go of experienced crew, purely because their contract was up for renewal.
Yet, it was willing to retain new hires, simply because they were just hired and still had time in their contract. As management has admitted, when they recruited these new expatriates they didn’t expect the downturn. Well, quite honestly, except perhaps for those select bankers, halfway across the globe, nobody could envisage the tsunami that was coming. Yet, management, in not renewing pilot contracts in this manner, is not only disregarding international best practices, but is sending the wrong message to pilots worldwide.



WHAT ABOUT MVC?
Not too long ago, a wage cut was initiated with restitution provisions. This was then translated to MVC and AVC. Eventually, we were left with an MVC agreement incorporated in our CA.

If management is so bent on honouring contracts, then lets honour the MVC agreement that was painstakingly crafted after much angst in the shadow of SARS. Then, during SARS, we were told that the company was bleeding $6 million a day. Today, before the MVC agreement can be invoked, management is now talking about pre-emptive measures to remain profitable. There is nothing wrong with that, but then, why the reluctance to make restitution when we ARE profitable?



PILOTS PROPOSAL REJECTED
At the MOM on 23rd April 09, the company rejected the Association’s offer to join in solidarity and participate in the SWM on the same terms as the Managers and Administrative Officers. The ministry proposed, that the Association consider implementing one day of CNPL per month and continue negotiations on the other days demanded by the company. This had to be deliberated by the Executive Council.
The Executive Council met for an extra-ordinary session on 30th April 2009 and deliberated the Ministry’s proposal.



DECISION
While it was felt that it was grossly unfair of the Company to single out the pilots for such special discrimination, the Executive Council also feels the need to demonstrate solidarity in the
Company. The Executive Council has therefore decided to accept the Ministry’s proposal for one day of CNPL per month.
Even though this is not the same as the SWM offered to the Managers and the Admininstrative Officers, the Executive Council feels that this one day CNPL is the closest equivalent to the SWM offered to the other staff. Going forward, we are willing to explore with the company and exhaust all reasonable and fair means of dealing with the cost issues.


EXECUTIVE COUNCIL