The Human Relations Nightmare in Indian Civil Aviation

HR Leadership in Aviation: An analysis of the Pilot issue

This is the third in a series of articles on HR issues related to aviation leadership and the analysis of the pilots issue.

In the previous article, we touched upon the history of the CAR and the reasons for the government that existed at the time such a CAR was issued, as the Government of India was the owner and operator of National Airlines. Those no longer hold sway and thus should have been challenged successfully, but there are many vested interests stalling the legal process.

We delve into the moral standpoint, international practises, the legal aspects, and the airline’s views. This issue has been a pain point for pilots for almost two decades. We have refrained from going into the depths of the Hon. DHC orders in this matter, which we respectfully disagree with, and if the pilots get their act together, the same will be subject to an appeal.

The Moral Standpoint

A pilot is a licenced professional, like a doctor, an engineer, a lawyer, or many other professionals operating in India. Doctors in India who undertake subsidised education at government-aided medical institutions in India are required to undertake a compulsory service period at government hospitals before they move to any job they want. Unlike all the other licenced professionals, the pilots have a restriction on the type of job, a protracted period of notice to tie them down, and a threat of cancellation of their licence if the same is not complied with.

Even scientists and defence technologists do not face the harsh and oppressive bond conditions that pilots face in India; to be fair, they also do not earn as much as pilots. It might be surprising to note that even nuclear scientists at Bhabha Atomic Research Centre (BARC) can leave the service after finishing their training for a year. After paying off the early bond amount of Rs. 30,000/-, they are not forced to stay perpetually and then give notices of 6–12 months. The rider is required to obtain permission from the ministry if they desire to take up jobs in foreign agencies; otherwise, there are no restrictions in India. In fact, between 2012 and 2016, 85 scientists left the BARC, and another 70+ committed suicide (1995–2016) because of what was perceived to be an “unhealthy working environment”, A detailed petition by BARC nuclear scientists to PM Modi has prompted a change in their working conditions.

Remember, your pilot flies a $100 million aircraft with more than 100 passengers on board under his command. Do you really want him to serve you as unhappy bonded labour? Think about those 70+ BARC scientists between 1995 and 2016.

The argument that it takes 6–9 months to train a pilot is a facetious one. Since it takes 4 years to become a lawyer, 4 years plus to become an engineer, and more than 5 years to become a doctor, the nuclear scientist takes even longer, yet he can be released instantly and without any fetter. Importantly, all the rest have been held to be essential service at some point or another; pilots and aviation are no longer part of ESMA, as there are plenty of private enterprise

So, what is so special about a pilot that he or she is not permitted to resign and move onto a job that offers them better perks, respectability, and a greater sense of ownership?

This brings us to the aspect of the legality surrounding this CAR, the bond, and the restrictive conditions in contracts that bind pilots to their jobs in detriment to their fundamental rights in what can only be called a restraint of trade and occupation.

The Essential Services Maintenance Act, which at one time was used against aviation, no longer applies to it. In days past, striking pilots, cabin crew and engineers of the National Carriers were threatened with ESMA and arrest to break strikes, One remembers all too well the 2003 Pilots strike on the SARS issue, as the author was also involved in it as a Trade Union leader, and the 1974 IPG strike that led to an Air India lockout, where ESMA was invoked and the Air Force was brought in.

The Government of India and states have more recently imposed ESMA on airport employees who threatened indefinite strikes and ATC employees, both of whom were employed by the government of India or in companies that had partial shareholding by state-run organisations.

Admittedly, the government will not bring in ESMA or use the Air Force pilots in case pilots of private airlines like Go Air, Indigo, Spice Jet, or even Air India go on strike anymore. If the Minister is already on record to state that “government should not be in the business of aviation” and has exited the National Carrier, then why should the safety regulator be the employment regulator as well?

International Standpoint

From an international standpoint, a casual study was made of the national regulations in a few neighbouring countries and also of the aviation regulators in these nations, such as Australia, Singapore, Pakistan, Hong Kong, and the USA.

It is clear that none of these nations possess any restrictive regulations governing pilots leaving airlines or restrictions on their licences, as in India.

The employment laws of each country have their own clauses that are applicable to all employees in those countries. While Australia and Singapore have specific laws to protect employees, none of them force employees to serve under these kinds of onerous conditions.

In fact, the Fair Work Commission in Australia regulates notice periods and redundancies and tilts them heavily in favour of the employees. Similarly, in Singapore, the situation is based on the employment contract, but employers cannot act indiscriminately.

The Civil Aviation authorities of Australia and Singapore do not have any CARs that place such a burden on the pilots, and in fact, Civil Aviation Pakistan has been forced by industrial tribunals to protect pilots, crew, and employees from any deterioration of working conditions.

During COVID, the management of PIA and PCAA decided to reduce the salaries and emoluments of PIA pilots and crew. The National Industrial Relations Commission prohibited airlines (PIA) and PCAA from reducing wages even during COVID and ordered their reinstatement.

For those who remember, the Australian Pilots Unions had a nationwide strike that crippled aviation in that country for months, leading to a declaration of a national emergency by PM Bob Hawke, yet despite that, they did not impose such conditions on pilots in service.

Yet the world’s largest democracy imposed such draconian rules that defy logic and even slashed pilots, cabin crew, and other staff salaries during COVID! Contrast that with Pakistan.

In Australia and the USA, companies were encouraged to pay their employees during that period and not retrench or lay off aviation professionals. It might appear that the world’s largest democracy is not so democratic or socialist after all, despite having the only constitution that uses these words in its preamble.

It is established that a logic that existed between the 1990s and 2005, when these rules were framed, does not exist anymore. It is beyond doubt that the rules don’t exist in the Australasian region, either in law or regulatory agencies.

Our Legal Viewpoint

1. Reliance on Sandhu and Bamraj SC precedents is misplaced; those cases are distinguished

2. The CAR is in violation of the law; it infringes on Fundamental rights and violates the essence of the Contract Act

3. The CAR violates the very Act of Parliament that gave DGCA the teeth to issue such regulations

4. The DGCAs own pleadings both in 2018 and in 2023 admit it does not have the power to do what the Airline is seeking

5. The CAR imposes a restraint on trade and professions which is voidable

6. The interim order has the effect of modifying and nullifying the interim relief in the original writ petitions without fully hearing the merits and arguments of the entire writ. In effect, it grants final relief to the petitioners at the interim stage.

7. In our respectful submission, the appropriate step should have been to make all the airline(s) first become parties before the main writ and let them argue this matter there, rather than diluting earlier orders. The regulator had already clarified that there was no threat of closure and that it did not have the right to intervene.

The Cockpit View

It is a story of fractious, broken strategies amongst the groups of pilots that have plagued the community for years. The multiplicity of leadership, the multiple organisations, the hesitation to come together, and the hesitation in fighting a tough, hard fight to protect the rights of all 8–10k pilots currently in India There is no denying that their case is Titanium strong, but management has over the decades relied on the fractious nature of the tenacious peace that exists amongst them. It needs a revolution to bring them together for this and other fights that are coming.

The Airlines Viewpoint:

An airline is a highly cost-intensive operation that involves millions of dollars to set up and takes years to break even. Pilots form a valuable resource that determines whether the airline is successful or not on so many levels, be it operationally, logistically, financially, or in terms of safety and reliability.

There is no doubt that airline management has a right to be protected and even insulated from such vagaries, and it’s not pilots alone who are at fault here for shifting from one setup to another; it is the environment, money, self-respect, and the other airline. Look back 6 months to see how another private Indian carrier was crushed with 250–300 pilots and 600 cabin crew bailing out. I recall then advising someone to get their brand of biscuits out and have a cup of coffee with the employees; egos were high, especially in the operations department. It has struggled to emerge from bankruptcy, having lost faith and trust in its employees. No amount of money can make it whole again.

If pilots and crew are such a critical and essential resource, then corporations must make the effort to go beyond the pale of normal human relations to understand their psyche, their pain points, and their needs to retain such talent. Like I have stated previously, it’s not always about money; it’s about self-respect, dignity, pride, and human working conditions. I have spent almost 4 decades on both sides, winning and losing; I know the feeling.

Go have that cup of coffee with him or her. Institutionalise the coffee club in your airline or workplace if you want to retain your best talent. They could be pilots, cabin crew, engineers, accountants, network professionals, trainers, or software specialists. Get your coffee club going today.