South African Airways employees have been on strike for much of the past week. Management and unions have just reached an agreement, though if you ask me it's not much of an agreement at all... South African Airways has been in a terrible financial situation for years, with seemingly no end in sight to their…
Continue reading: South African Airways & Unions Reach (Unrealistic) Agreement
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Trying to make sense. The Airline is at the verge of going out of business. Revenue / cost ration is below 1 aka profit as negative. They have a Task Team to see how they can save money. Great. Here is the confusing part for me - , Should the Task Team be able to realize savings, a percentage of the after-tax savings may be ring-fenced and paid to employees. - So save money, but give that savings (even if just part of it) to outside of business aka into employees pocket.
Should it be; -- if the Task Team be able to realize savings, and these saving produce profitability, give a percentage of profit to employees?
Should I book my RT JNB-CPT flights on SAA for April 2019 or hold out for now?
Well this happens if you do identity politics for special groups and hunt out all the competent people...
@Lou
Given that that flight would be in the past, you should be safe lol.
For April 2020, I think a domestic flight would be fine. You wouldn't really be out that much even if they did cancel, but I think they'll make it to then. I really don't think they would've made this agreement if they knew that they wouldn't be able to even pay up in April, even if they won't survive much longer beyond that.
Does SAA really need to be on a path to profitability? South Africa is a relatively wealthy country with among the worst inequality in the world. Around a tenth of employment is in tourism-related industries, so maintaining SAA is arguably important for the economy as a tourism driver. The unions clearly realize they have the upper hand here. You’ve made the comparison to Alitalia before, Ben.
@Lou probably better off to book Comair (British Airways) it’s a better product in my opinion.
I long for the day when workers can be fired for going on strike. Dismissing an employee for refusing to do their job should be an expected and natural outcome.
@james N, and replace them with who? Train a whole new workforce?
How long would that take.
These aren't some meanigless corporate/sales jobs that anyone can do.
@James N, and CEOs and owners of companies that don't pay or treat their employees properly should go to jail.
Ah the good old days of child labor and 6 day work weeks.
This raise has to be looked at in the context of a high inflation environment. Inflation in South Africa a has averages above 5% for most of the past ten years. So a raise of 5.9% doesn't provide the staff with any more purchasing power. It allows them to keep living where they do and buy the same basket of good.
The point is that, given its operational needs, SAA has many more employees than other airlines with similar numbers of aircraft and routes. If you can't touch job numbers, then you'd have to expand operations in order to gain more efficiency. But how do you do that profitably, or at least without bleeding so much money? They don't have a viable business plan, so it's either big subsidies from the government, or go out of business. It's too bad - the several times I've flown the airline I've had positive impressions.
This is a state owned enterprise. Just like Alitalia, it will never cease operations.
Unions are why the developed world has a weekend, 40-50 hour work weeks, minimum wage, paid leave; in other words, a - if not in many cases the - driving catalyst for most employment and labour law protections in the developed world.
But yeah, fire 'em all.
"Well now they're out of control and not doing any good any more!" = A mighty convenient way of saying you're happy to benefit from the efforts of organised labour while then turning around and denouncing them.
More on topic, quite a few armchair experts not just on SAA or the industry in South Africa, but the nation itself.
Yes, layoffs need to ultimately happen to bring the size of the workforce more in line with competitive industry standards.
No, a 5.9% is not impressive when inflation is consistently at or above that number and most South Africans in professional jobs receive more than that.
James doesn't really present any arguments or backing for his claim, although I'm sure he has his reason.
But his original post is just a sort of vague appeal to some bygone era and a throwaway sentiment about "doing your job". It's a pretty sh** argument to actually convince someone about his POV and sort of laughable he calls the responses emotional and straw men.
"James doesn’t really present any arguments or backing for his claim..."
Newsflash, I didn't make a "claim". I basically stated that workers should face the prospect of being fired for not doing their job. Also, there's nothing "vague" about my point. If you choose to not do your job, your employer should be able to fire you. Is that clear enough for you?
Finally, the original responses to my post are clearly nothing more than emotional replys and the obvious straw man argument of, "Train a whole new workforce? How long would that take."
Where exactly did I suggest every employee be fired? You would be well-served, along with others, if you actually addressed my comment.
You don't seem to believe Industrial work stoppages. Most people replying here do since the power imbalance between a large corporation and a single employee is immense and a lot of societal benefits we all enjoy in the western world (and South Africa is quasi-western) have been achieved that way. This is not simply employees refusing to "do their job" or come to work. I've spent several years working in countries in East and Southern Africa and have done a lot of work for my employer with terminating staff members.
Virtually all of the labor statutes in these countries allow terminations for individuals who refuse to their job. You're conflating an industrial action with just not showing up is disingenuous or just don't believe in the value of industrial actions, which I guess is like your opinion man, but one I don't think is particularly admirable or really a societal benefit.
" You’re conflating an industrial action with just not showing up is disingenuous..."
I'm not conflating anything and whether it's an "industrial action" or simply not "showing up" the result is the same. The employee is refusing to do their job and should suffer the consequences.
What's disingenuous is you suggesting that changing the label of a particular act, not doing your job, someone changes the situation.
JamesN: "I long for the day when workers can be fired for going on strike."
That was your original comment. This strike was legal, as in, authorised by South African labour laws. So either you don't believe in those laws, or you misunderstand the difference between a legal and illegal strike. I'll assume you do understand the difference, so that means it's the former. Thus my original reply stands: you appear to be someone who is happy to eat the fruits of industrialised labour action while at the same time criticising the actions of industrialised labour that don't benefit you.
It's this innate human selfishness that reminds us why industrialised labour exists in the first place.
Happy Monday mate - hope you enjoyed your weekend; you can thank unions for it.
"This strike was legal,..."
Irrelevant and does nothing to change my point. What's so difficult about understanding that a worker isn't doing their job?
"...you appear to be someone who is happy to eat the fruits of industrialised labour action..."
This is a myth promulgated by those who support unions and the governments that empower them. The bulk of the monetary and benefit gains that have occurred over the past decades are unrelated to actions from unions. . In fact, there's substantial evidence to suggest that unions have actually retarded growth.
"...hope you enjoyed your weekend; you can thank unions for it."
A statement so nonsensical, one has to wonder if it was typed with a straight face.
@james N
do you also support private civil and criminal liability for shareholders and leader at corporations?