COMMON sense prevailed at the meeting of the Cyprus Airways (CY) air stewards union (SYPKKA), with 95 per cent of members voting against the staging of the 12-hour work stoppage, scheduled for yesterday. Members had adopted the union leadership’s proposal to postpone any action and give the new board time to present its proposals for the future of the airline.
The whole episode seemed rather absurd, considering that it was the union bosses who had initially threatened to go on strike. Why, after all the fuss, did they tell their members that it would be advisable to give the board some time to put together its proposals? Had they forgotten that the airline was fighting for survival and decided to revert to the old ways when they responded to anything they didn’t like with a strike threat? Perhaps this was just muscle-flexing, to remind the new board, which was drafting a new action plan, that stewards would never accept the abolition of the overnight stopover.
The union had taken exception to the airline’s decision to run three scheduled routes (Birmingham, Manchester and Amsterdam via Paphos) with one cabin crew instead of two, as had been previous practice. In the past, one cabin crew would take the plane, stay at the destination overnight and a second crew would bring the plane back. It is a costly work practice, which the board has decided to scrap as part of its drive to cut costs. CY’s charter subsidiary Eurocypria has always used one cabin crew for flights, which is why it is in a much better condition financially.
While the decision was correct, the new board may have made a mistake in announcing the abolition of the stopover at this stage. It should avoid announcing its rescue plan in stages, which was what the previous chairman had done, just before he was forced to resign, because this prompts angry reactions by the unions and undermines staff morale. The staff cannot be expected to raise productivity and efficiency if they are working with the uncertainty of more jobs being axed at any time.
The new board should stop unveiling cost-cutting measures in instalments. It should prepare its rescue plan – decide how many more jobs it will axe, what costly staff practices it will abolish, the new work conditions – and present it to the unions on a take-it-or-leave-it basis and enforce it. If there is opposition to provisions, the unions should be given 48 hours to come up with alternative cost-cutting measures and if they do not, the plan should be put in force. The airline cannot afford to wait for unions to call AGMs to discuss the measures, make counter-proposals and so forth.
Once the action plan is finalised, the board, management and staff could work to save the airline. This is the only way forward, but the board has an obligation to provide leadership at this most difficult time.
