legolas quoted me thus:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"is it bad
PR [for companies] to talk about union breaking or something?"
CORMACSHAW,
friend with all due respect, and a little sarcasm, you are kidding aren't you???
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I apparently did not make myself clear. I was wondering whether it was bad
PR for IMPACT / IALPA, not the comapany (obviously
), to point out what AL, as part of the One World Alliance are really up to - union busting as opposed to 'airline saving'.
I (a joe public in this issue) sympathise completely with the pilots view on the safety grounds alone but you guys are being hammered in the media who have generally appeared to have been following the airline management's agenda (the constantly repeated "pilots not co-operating with the airline's survival plan" line referred to by other posters is just one example) and are generally ignorant of the most basic of facts - the one time I did hear an interviewee mention "One World Alliance", the news reporter didn't know what he was talking about, by her follow-up question, obviously assumed that "One World" was some sort of international trade union forum. This actually happened! In another interview, a rep from the Irish Chambers of Commerce was allowed to dismiss "the safety issue" in his first sentence as "a red herring" without challenge. This is what you are up against and, to be honest, I don't think you are making a good job of fighting it.
One line that the union has trotted out about the 10hr min time-off is the effect it would have on family life - I've heard the "home late, up early, don't see the kids" storey a couple of times and, to be perfectly frank, I don't think that's going to win many hearts in a country where so many couples/families have both partners working and/or are commuting several hours a day. They'll sympathise but say 'Tough! Join the club!'.
What I haven't heard is a forcefully put safety angle along the lines of what happens six months down the line when Joe Pilot is confronted with a single-engine landing in a crosswind on five hours sleep. Or perhaps publish a list of fatal accidents where pilot fatigue was found to be a major contributer? Scare tactics? Over the top? Bad taste? Maybe, but if the other side is playing dirty pool...
If you want the public on your side (and public opinion WILL play a part in this), you'll have to push the line that you are doing this in their interest and not for your own greed, which is what most people are taking, rightly or wrongly, from the current press coverage. You also have to make your case that AL are taking their course of action for reasons other than 'surviving', as has been asserted on these forums.
In short, get your
PR sorted if you want to win.