|
|
|
|
 |
 |
|
|
Editorial What
ails PIA? The
workers’ way “Privatisation
is not the smartest move to make” Carrier
moves
In June this year,
we did a Special Report on what the newly elected government might decide
about the loss-making public sector enterprises. Pakistan International
Airlines fell in the list of top four, along with Pakistan Steel Mills,
Pakistan Railways and Pepco. The government had by then
indicated its resolve to do something about these PSEs which were a huge
burden on the national exchequer. It did not state in clear terms it wanted
to privatise them necessarily. In an interview with TNS for that Special
Report, leading economist S Akbar Zaidi debunked the myth “that
state-owned enterprises will always be loss-making and a burden on the
exchequer, and that the private sector is viable, efficient, profitable and
transparent”. Restructuring was the term
that floated around in June soon after the new government took over, perhaps
because Mian Nawaz Sharif’s privatisation ventures were considered hurried
and non-transparent in his earlier tenures. Therefore, the recent
announcement by the government to privatise 26 per cent shares of PIA is
being seen with a degree of scepticism, even when everyone seems convinced
that with a monthly loss to the tune of RS3.3 billion, the present state of
affairs is unsustainable for any government. The reasons of PIA’s
privatisation as told to the prime minister include “ever-declining
service standard, lack of reliability and punctuality, pilferages, poor
quality of manpower, training and job rotation, ageing fleet, overstaffing
and high loans at exorbitant financial cost.” This more or less sums it
up, though each report that has appeared in the press carries an additional
list of precise statistics, like the airline managing with mere 26
operational aircrafts, a staff of 16,600 regular and 2,700 contractual
employees, 742 employees per operational aircraft and so on. But turn to a finer
breakup of these statistics to understand the losses and you are shocked to
know that all of these look tiny in the face of one monstrous fuel import
bill. 26 per cent shares bring
us close to another country that is being touted as a model to be followed
— Kenya. That’s how Kenya began to privatise its national carrier —
with 26 per cent shares — and is today said to be a profit making
enterprise. What is not being counted in the Kenyan example is that it was
assisted in its privatisation by International Finance Corporation (IFC) a
sister organisation of World Bank. Pakistan too is said to
have suddenly undertaken this privatisation project at the behest of IMF.
Will the IMF follow IFC’s example and see it through its profitable end
remains to be seen. Meanwhile, there are some immediate hitches the
government may have to face — like the unions and the courts, and the new
entrant after the eighteenth amendment, the Council of Common Interests.
Only time will tell if this privatisation exercise sustains or is proved to
be a flight of fancy.
Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif directed the ministry of privatisation and civil aviation
division to initiate the process of privatisation of 26 per cent shares of
the national flag carrier on September 12, 2013. Sharif argued the
government was not in a position to bear the monthly loss of Rs3.3 billion.
The only way to put the PIA on the right track, he said, was to involve the
private sector in its affairs. He asked the airline to
improve its balance sheet for the task ahead which would not be easy for an
airline that has suffered losses worth Rs 119.84 billion in the last ten
years. Around 35 per cent of
PIA’s flights were delayed or cancelled during the last year. Only 26
aircrafts (with an average age of 16 years) of PIA out of a fleet of 34 are
currently operating with a staff of 16,600 regular and 2,800 contractual
employees. This makes 746 employees per operational aircraft (the
employee-to-aircraft ratio of PIA stands 570 compared to the global average
of 120.) PIA operates 24 domestic
destinations and 34 international destinations. The overall market share of
PIA — both in and out of Pakistan — is 48 per cent. Experts believe PIA has
been in trouble for years. Lack of professional management, poor planning,
and interference by the respective government have all contributed to the
present situation. The airline lost its business over the year but its fuel
bills, labour force and their wage bills continued to swell. In 2003, the PIA employees
were consuming 19.3 per cent of revenues (Rs9.172 billion) while fuel
accounted for 24.2 per cent (Rs17.9 billion). In 2012, the wage bill
according to PIA figures has reached 22 per cent but in absolute terms it
makes Rs 27.5 billion while fuel consumed 54 per cent (around Rs68 billion)
of revenues. It would not be easy to privatise PIA in its current shape. Air
Blue, a Pakistani private airline, spends around 45 per cent of its revenue
on fuel. It was in 2004 when PIA
earned profit of Rs1billion when it had 48 operational carriers. The airline
succeeded in making this profit after the government pumped in a hefty grant
of Rs 32 billion. “There are serious issues in PIA but they do not justify
privatisation at all,” says Shaukat Jamshed, president of the Society of
Aircraft Engineers. “It is true that our
employee-to-aircraft ratio is very high but still the wage bill accounts for
less than 22 per cent of the total revenues while most of the airlines have
been spending between 25-35 per cent on salaries of their employees,”
Shaukat adds. “It was the
management’s job to bring new airplanes and not employees,” he says,
adding, “The induction of 10 new medium-sized aircraft will generate
annual revenue of over Rs35 billion. The move would not need to hire even a
single new employee.” A senior official of PIA
says on the condition of anonymity that the management has made up its mind
for privatisation. “If some drastic steps are not taken, PIA would suffer
an irreversible damage in a few months. It’s true that some percentage of
PIA employees would lose their jobs in case of privatisation but if the
management does not go for it, I fear everybody would lose their jobs like
what happened to Punjab Urban Transport Corporation (PUTC),” he says. Big aircrafts, like 777,
are being used on short routes because the airline does not have small
planes for domestic routes which increases fuel consumption and operational
cost manifold. “Every month, PIA pays around Rs1.5 billion of interest of
its local and international loans. At present, the airline’s total
liabilities are around Rs250 billion while its assets are worth trillions of
rupees,” he informs. The employee-to-aircraft
ratio of the airline would drop in the next couple of years as at least
4,000 workers of PIA retire by 2015. The fuel bill can also be reduced with
the induction of new planes. The official believes there are several
examples of successful privatisation of airlines. “The government has been
planning to follow the Kenyan airline’s model of privatisation. The Kenyan
government also sold 26 per cent shares to a strategic partner. In less than
10 years after privatisation in 2003, Kenya Airways doubled the number of
passengers and cargo. It is a profitable airline today, which proves that a
national flag carrier can be privatised successfully. Still, most shares in
Kenya Airways are held by Kenya’s government,” he says. In Pakistan, we do have
successful examples of privatisation like Al-Ghazi Tractor in 1991 and
Millat Tractor in 1992. The two companies were producing around 5000 units
per year and hardly making profits when they were privatised. Today, both
the companies produce around 50,000 units of international standards every
year. Similarly, we have some
examples in the banking sector. The Muslim Commercial Bank (MCB), according
to reports, paid only Rs150 million income tax in 1991 when it was
privatised. It paid Rs11.01 billion income tax in 2012. In the same way, the
UBL paid only Rs1.39 billion as income tax in 2002 before it was privatised,
while it paid Rs7.10 billion in 2012. We also need to be
cautious about privatisation of PIA. Pakistan has privatised 167 industrial
units from 1991 to 2010 and most of them have been successful. No labour
leaders (employees which are owner of 12 per cent shares of the organisation)
were invited by the government in any decision-making process with respect
to PIA’s privatisation. The government has been
planning to split the airline into two companies to make it a feasible
organisation for privatisation. “In the next couple of months, PIA would
be restructured as PIA-I and PIA-II,” informs Miftah Ismail, newly
appointed member of Board of Directors of PIA and a member of the economic
team of Mian Nawaz Sharif. According to Ismail, PIA-I
will retain airline business, routes, assets and around 6,000 employees to
run the affairs of the national flag carrier. PIA-I will continue
contracting leases on more efficient airplanes and rationalise its routes in
order to attain efficiencies. PIA-II will have all the debt, it will grant a
voluntary ‘handshake’ plan for the excess workforce and then liquidate
it by June 2014. “We hope that by
disposing of the two hotels in New York and Paris owned by the PIA we will
be able to pay for all liabilities of PIA,” he says, adding that
privatisation of PIA would not be possible in its current shape. “PIA has
very significant assets. It has seven landing rights on the Heathrow
airport. It also has dedicated customers.” He says the government has
no problem if the PIA union wants to buy the 26 per cent shares. “It would
be an open bidding and everybody would be welcomed there.” Ismail agrees that
political inductions and inefficiency are major issues with PIA.
“Theoretically, PIA has bankrupted several times in the past. That was the
reason different governments announced several relief packages for it and
pumped billions of rupees into it. We have decided to make it a profitable
entity,” he says.
Once a pride of
Pakistan, PIA is in a bad shape. The announcement of its privatisation has
started a debate among its employees, leading to an open resistance. Passengers of PIA recall
the time when PIA was a successful airline. Today, PIA is notorious for poor
service, unnecessarily long delays and sudden flight cancellations. It has an ageing fleet of
some 32 planes, more than 16,000 employees, a reputation of negligence and
mismanagement and the burden of multiplying loans. People associated with PIA
blame inconsistent policies and political interventions at different levels
for the gradual decline — from purchase of various items to awarding of
different contracts. The absence of new planes
leads to high maintenance and fuel consumption cost. The airline also bears
the consequences of kickbacks and compromised deals of planes at ‘the
higher levels’. Returning of loans with high interest rate and
depreciation of rupee further adds to the burden on the airline. Airlines around the world
follow certain standards regarding aircrafts. But with PIA, the case is
different. PIA officials, asking not to be named, say their aircrafts are
aged, which is why flights are often delayed and cancelled. A fleet of used Boeing 777
was last purchased during Pervez Musharraf’s regime. Payment of these
planes is being made in installments. However, since then not a single plane
has been added to the fleet. PIA showed profit in
2003-2004 last, when Ahmad Saeed was the chairman. Because of rupee
depreciation, loans and foreign payments have multiplied. In 2007, when the
dollar-rupee ratio increased the foreign loan increased to a significant
level. The average age of the
fleet is 22 years and many of the PIA planes are not fuel-efficient. Of the
total expenditures incurred by PIA, 54 per cent is spent on fuel whereas a
standard airline consumes around 35 per cent of the total budget on fuel.
PIA officials attribute this high cost of fuel to old planes. PIA’s senior officials
point the finger at the government for making political appointments. The
last PPP government, they say, put extra burden on the airline by inducting
around 4,000 employees despite severe financial and operational constraints.
It was in 1955, eight
years after the creation of Pakistan, when the country decided to have its
own national flag-bearer. In 58 years, the airline has seen 32 chairmen of
which five were reappointed. “Not a single chairman
followed the policies of his successor because of various political
considerations,” says a senior PIA official asking not to be named. High-level corruption
takes place in PIA when purchasing planes, spare parts and awarding
contracts. Low-level corruption is rampant in PIA cargo. “For earning profits,
PIA needs at least eight to 10 new narrow-bodied (medium range) planes that
can improve business efficiency of the airline as large planes are not
required because of the average number of passengers is low,” the official
adds. vaqargillani@gmail.com
The
workers’ way Senior officials
of the airline and the union leaders have a difference of opinion on the
privatisation of the airline and working of the unions. A senior official of the
PIA says that issues like poor turnaround time, fiscal leakages, etc., are
partly because of the culture the unions have created over the years.
Unions, they believe, are used as a tool for political interferences. On the other hand,
according to Suhail Baloch, president Pakistan Airline Pilots Association (PALPA),
the unions are the backbone of an institution and collaborate with each
other depending on the intensity of the issues. As far as their connection
with the PIA management is concerned, only the elected collective bargaining
agent (CBA) is in a position to bargain with the management. However, all
other bodies can enjoy different rights (in line with legal procedures and
policies of the airline) with the consent of management through mutual
understanding. ‘Go-slow’ policy has
been adopted two times in the past. First, it was resorted to in the 1980s
over salary issues and, second, it was adopted in 2010 on the issue of
‘working agreement’ and safety rules. These unions, sans the CBA, proved
their might in 2011 when the managing director of PIA, Ejaz Haroon,
succumbed to the pressure and resigned. Unions and associations,
except CBA, were part of the protest. “The unions have their own plans and
play their own games,” says Tariq Kirmani, former managing director of PIA.
Talking about the proposed
privatisation of 26 per cent of PIA shares, Kirmani believes it was the only
way for the airline to survive. “The status quo cannot be maintained for
long, the decision had to be taken,” he says, adding, the joint action
committee (JACPIAE) should be taken on board and convinced that offloading
shares would be beneficial for the airline as well as the employees —
“Go-slow policy is not the solution to any problem and it has caused heavy
losses to the airline in the past.” Salary of the staff
constitutes only around 21 per cent of revenue. However, big decisions like
buying 747-200 in 1980s, 747-300 in 1998, fuel hedging in 2008-09, etc, were
all taken by the top management. Elected associations of
the airline include: Pakistan Airlines’ Pilots’ Association (PALPA),
Society of Aircraft Engineers (SAEP), PIA Senior Staff Association (PIASSA),
Aircraft Technologist Association (ATAP), and Flight Engineers Association (FENA). Non-elected panels of
officers association (from Pay Group V to IX) include: Alliance of Friends,
Pakistan Cabin Crew Association (PACCA), (they are having their elections in
coming days), and Progressive (Elected as PIASSA and in office nowadays). The elected staff union (CBA)
(from Pay Group of I to IV) is Peoples Unity of PIA employees. The CBA is
elected through referendum according to Industrial Relation Ordinance 1969
under the supervision of NIRC. Airleage of PIA employees
and PIA employees Union (PIACEU) are two non-elected NIRC registered unions
that can take part in the referendum to become CBA.
The News on
Sunday: What is the stance of PIA employees on the proposed offloading of 26
per cent shares of the airline? Suhail Baloch: PIA
employees are completely against it. The government must realise that
privatisation or downsizing or retrenchment is not an option for PIA at the
time when domestic, regional and international competitors keep expanding in
all directions. On the one hand, the government doles out landing rights to
foreign carriers and, on the other, demands from us to be ‘feasible’,
what a contrast. TNS: There’s a
perception that PIA is over-staffed and its employees are inefficient. What
do you say? SB: It is, no doubt,
over-staffed, keeping in mind the present fleet of airplanes, the answer to
this question is that instead of putting the blame on over-staffing we
should plan to expand and add more airplanes in our fleet. Let me tell you
what PIA’s ex-boss Rafiq Sahgal did after 1971 war. His vision was to
expand and that no employee of PIA should lose his job. He became the best
ever chairman of PIA. Saying that employees are inefficient is not
completely true. We know cronyism and
nepotism are rampant in PIA. All previous governments considered PIA as
their personal property by appointing their friends and relatives for
political gains. In the past, democratic and military governments interfered
in PIA affairs, causing unbearable losses. Political appointments of lower
staff may be termed as finding jobs for inefficient people but since they
don’t have any kind of involvement in decision-making process they are not
a big harm to the airline. TNS: Lately, you have been
asking for a serious attempt at reviving the airline. Do you have any
suggestions in this regard? SB: The government should
first explain the plan which it has for PIA. Only then rumours will die
down. Besides, the government should also implement orders of the Supreme
Court by appointing honest and capable full-time chairman and managing
director on merit. Then there is a need to constitute a judicial commission
under a serving judge of the Supreme Court to investigate the airline’s
downfall and take the corrupt officials to task. All grounded fleet should
be made airworthy as soon as possible to meet the airline schedule and
proposals submitted by JACPIAE on cost-cutting measures should be
implemented. Accountability should be across the board. TNS: You have just
mentioned cost-cutting measures submitted by JACPIAE. What are they? SB: PIA chairman, Muhammad
Ali Gardezi, had constituted a Way Forward Committee, which was tasked to
implement the cost-cutting measures suggested by various unions and
associations as part of “Fly Smart” programme. The suggestions were put
forward from almost all the key departments for cutting costs on different
fronts following global trends in aviation. Our suggestions included: fuel
saving through different initiatives, including operational and planning
scheduling, reduction of turnaround time to increase aircraft availability
for maintenance as well as operations, training and procedural instructions
for one engine taxi after landing for fuel conservation, minimum use of APU
(aircraft’s back-up power generating systems), smart alternate airport
selection and persuading Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to install
Instrument Landing Systems (ILS) etc. TNS: Do you agree the
airline has suffered due to poor services provided by its crew and ground
staff? SB: No doubt, the issues
PIA is facing are deep-rooted and things can be set right only through
serious and well-intended measures. To blame only the crew and ground staff
is unjust as there are a lot of issues responsible for the downfall of the
airline. These include political appointments, corruption, inefficient
technicians, out-dated engineering base, maintenance issues, depleting
routes, non-airworthy aircraft, imprudent contracts, declining service
standards, lack of reliability and punctuality, pilferage and theft, lack of
quality manpower and training and job rotation, ageing fleet, overstaffing
and high loans resulting in high financial cost, etc. TNS: There are reports PIA
employees are also offering to buy its shares. Is there a possibility of
this? SB: If the government is
not willing to revive the airline it should be handed over to the employees
with management control. Since employees and their families’ future is
dependent on revamping the airline they will never betray and will leave no
stone unturned to achieve this goal. We are ready to buy these shares as we,
the employees, have an emotional attachment with the airline and cannot see
this national asset being wasted due to nepotism and favouritism. TNS: PIA staff is
increasingly involved in violations like smuggling, operating the aircraft
after consuming alcohol, etc. Doesn’t it harm the repute of the airline? SB: The word
‘increasingly’ is used with bias here. Any kind of violations harm the
reputation of the airline but there are very rare examples where some
‘individuals’ were found involved in the said violations. However, they
were tried under legal procedures for their acts. You cannot generalise rare
incidents for the staff of the airline.
Saj Ahmad (SA): To
be honest, PIA should have been privatised nearly 25-30 years ago when the
price of oil was cheap. Then the finance market was liquid and airplanes
were easier to purchase — meaning new jets could have been delivered
faster to PIA to assist their growth and cost performance. Privatisation now for PIA
comes amidst a backdrop of high fuel costs and huge airplane backlogs at
Airbus and Boeing. Today, delivery of 787 or A350 may take as long as a
decade and may increase the financial cost for a weak airline like PIA. Besides, there doesn’t
seem to be any key investors rushing to invest in PIA. Privatisation is not
a smartest move, especially when investors can see how much capital is
required to overhaul PIA. TNS: Would some serious
buyer be willing to invest in PIA? SA: An investor will
consider pouring good money into PIA only if the government reorganises the
airline from top-to-bottom — that it is able to downsize the staff and
identify and discontinue loss-making routes. One needs to look at Air
India to learn some essential lessons. TNS: What can PIA
management do to attract buyers? SA: PIA’s biggest
challenge is convincing investors that the airline has the mettle to allow a
wide-ranging restructuring of its operations — which inevitably means
culling jobs, waste, and driving greater efficiencies into its business. So far, PIA has not given
any positive signal that it is willing to change drastically to whet
investor appetite. PIA simply has too many
people working for it. Like Air India, it is a de facto state jobs programme.
But as costs balloon, the government has to think for how long it will carry
the financial burden of the airline. PIA could well do with
shutting down completely and giving the reins to someone who could restart
the airline. But that’s not going to happen. PIA has to address issues
before it can ever hope to break even, let alone make a profit. Until such
time, the airline will remain a government arm providing jobs (like Air
India) and the national carrier with no commercial success. TNS: Who could be the
potential buyer? SA: Possibly Emirates,
especially since PIA assisted Emirates start its operations back in early
1980s. But Emirates has not followed other Arab airlines in buying stakes.
Therefore, it may well be that Etihad Airways, which has its fingers in many
airline pies, invests in PIA, just as it has done in India with Jet Airways. Qatar Airways has had its
fingers badly burned by the Cargolux affair, and it’s clear they will want
to avoid PIA. They are happy to focus on the oneworld alliance with better
quality airlines that saddle themselves with the bureaucratic and political
corruption that PIA seems to wallow in. TNS: People in Pakistan
have been quoting example of successful privatisation of Kenya Airways. Do
you think that model of privatisation can be followed for PIA? SA: You can’t compare
Kenya Airways to PIA. PIA has way too many staff per airplane, over 600.
Kenya Airways has less than half of that and is a much better run entity
that has invested heavily in new airplanes and routes. PIA has done none of
that, except grow fatter with debt. For PIA to emulate Kenya
Airways, or any other airline, it needs to slash jobs and routes; order new
jets; lease new jets in the interim; forge alliances with Middle Eastern
powerhouse airlines like Emirates — to drive up traffic and phase out its
management and ageing airplanes and bring in non-Pakistani managers to run
the airline efficiently. We see Tim Clark at Emirates, James Hogan at Etihad.
This is the sort of financial clout that PIA needs to help it develop. The
longer the corrupt Pakistani government has a hand in PIA’s running, its
fortunes will remain mired in failure. — By Aoun Sahi
Carrier moves Pakistan
International Airlines (PIA) kept generating profits till 1998 when its
downturn became more visible. What followed is everyone’s knowledge. Barring a few years (from
2002-2004) when it bounced back to reasonable profits during the tenure of
Ahmed Saeed, the losses have kept building at an alarming pace. Today, these
accumulated losses of the airline stand at around Rs 170 billion and there
is no respite in sight. This situation calls for a
historic analysis of the airlines’ performance during different eras and
efforts made at reforming it. The roots of the airline
can be traced back to the pre-partition era. It was in 1946 that Muhammad
Ali Jinnah felt the need for an airline for the country in the making. He
sought help of an industrialist, Mirzah Ahmad Ispahani, to develop a
national flag carrier. It was during the same year that an airline named
Orient Airways was registered in Calcutta, which later on set up its base in
Karachi. On March 11, 1955, Orient Airways merged with the government’s
proposed airline, becoming PIA as we know it today. In March 1960, PIA became
the first Asian airline to use jet aircraft when it leased a Boeing 707 from
Pan American Airlines. This was called the golden era under the leadership
of Air Marshal Noor Khan. The 1970s was the era of transatlantic flights and
new destinations, which further expanded PIA’s fleet with the introduction
of Boeing 747s. The management’s focus
was on quality — a proof of which is that it introduced new uniforms for
air-hostesses. These uniforms were chosen through an open competition and
the winning entry was a design by the same designer who used to serve Queen
Elizabeth II. The 1980s is known for
certain irrational decisions taken by PIA management. It was in 1985-86,
that PIA, under Air Marshal Viqar Azeem, exchanged its four DC-10-30
aircraft with four Boeing 747-200B, a decision criticised by aviation
experts. The criticism against the deal was that new aircrafts had been
exchanged with old Boeing 747-200 with an almost expired hull life. The early 1990s saw the
advent of open skies policy, which allowed foreign airlines to pick
passengers from Pakistani airports. Critics believe this policy had a
drastic impact on PIA’s sales as the government of Pakistan had not
ensured similar incentives for the national airline in other countries. This
was in contrast to the policy of pre-1990s when Pakistani passengers were
allowed extremely limited travel (sometimes once in a year) on international
airlines and had to mostly fly PIA. Even the foreign exchange
was controlled by the state and passengers had to be content with however
meager the amount allowed to them. “Another blow to the PIA
was the purchase of the wide-bodied Boeing 747-300 in 1998 when Shahid
Khaqan Abbasi was chairman and CEO of the airlines. These aircrafts consumed
high amounts of fuel. In contrast, Shahid bought narrow-bodied and
fuel-efficient aircraft when he set up his own airline,” says an aviation
expert who does not want to be named. He believes such deals should be
probed to find out whether they were made for kickbacks at the cost of
airline’s health. It was the same year when
PIA employees were offered a golden handshake. Aviation industry
stakeholders are of the view that skilled and experienced staff of PIA
availed the offer and joined emerging airlines in the region. They helped
those airlines grow and give a tough time to PIA. The years 2003-2004 were
the last time when PIA earned profits. It was mainly due to Musharraf’s
patronisation of the airline under its chairman, Ahmed Saeed, and purchase
of new aircrafts that it recorded profits. This period of excellence
did not last long. The unprecedented increase in oil prices and devaluation
of rupee in 2008 caused an accumulated loss of Rs 39.5 billion to PIA. This
shock made many realise how bad it was for PIA to have wide-bodied and fuel
inefficient aircraft. The PPP government could
not go for privatisation of PIA which, under the control of Captain Ejaz
Haroon, mulled code-sharing with Turkish Airlines. The plan was strongly
resisted by employees and the MD had to resign under pressure. Their
objection was that Ejaz Haroon’s proposed plan could not be called
code-sharing as he was thinking about suspending flights to foreign
destinations and allowing international carriers to pick passengers from
Pakistan to those destinations. One can sum up PIA’s
performance on the basis of an analysis of its strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities, and threats, also called SWOT analysis carried out on
different occasions. Its strengths are leading market position, brand
recognition, advance maintenance facilities, network presence, hub airport
at Karachi and weaknesses are debt burden, frequent changes in management,
government influence and reliance on oil prices. There are some generic
problems which have plagued it throughout its history. For example, it has
always remained under the thumb of the government and was never run on the
pattern of a corporation. Red-tapism, strict adherence to procurement rules
prescribed for state entities, and lack of independent decision-making
powers have kept the PIA at a disadvantage when compared to growing and
thriving airlines. Being under the wings of
the government, PIA cannot take bold decisions like commercial airlines. It
would be a difficult decision to lay off excess staff and discontinue
loss-making routes, which its competitors would do without wasting a moment.
Unfortunately, with few international locations to make sales and pick
passengers, PIA is at a loss in this respect as well. — By Shahzada Irfan
Ahmed
|
|
