Post-Strike Impasses Loom Ahead

Post-Strike Impasses Loom Ahead 
United Daily News Editorial (Taipei, Taiwan, ROC) 
A Translation 
June 27, 2016

Executive Summary: Ho Nuan-hsuan, the new chairman of China Airlines has caved in. China Airlines flight attendants have announced an end to their strike, which grounded hundreds of flights and canceled tens of thousands of trips. The flight attendants strike was a roaring success. Ho Nuan-hsuan made substantial concessions, but even more importantly, union solidarity and a successful strategy contributed to their victory. Will the CAL strike become a model for other collective bargaining by workers in other public enterprises? That will be something worth observing. Workers at Mandarin Airlines have already threatened to follow suit.

Full Text Below:

Ho Nuan-hsuan, the new chairman of China Airlines has caved in. China Airlines flight attendants have announced an end to their strike, which grounded hundreds of flights and canceled tens of thousands of trips. The flight attendants strike was a roaring success. Ho Nuan-hsuan made substantial concessions, but even more importantly, union solidarity and a successful strategy contributed to their victory. Will the CAL strike become a model for other collective bargaining by workers in other public enterprises? That will be something worth observing. Workers at Mandarin Airlines have already threatened to follow suit.

The strike was not a "win-win" proposition. First, Ho Nuan-Hsuan yielded to all of the union's demands. All he asked for was an early end to the strike. He was not a particularly skillful negotiator. He gave the union more than it demanded. He showed nothing bu good will. Second, after the flight attendants announced the end of the strike, why didn't they immediately start work the next day? Why did they give themselves another day off, and leave tens of thousands of passengers stranded for one more day? They got what they wanted, then forgot all about the passengers. That hardly seems responsible. Third, the strike not only sacrificed the interests of the passengers, it redirected passenger frustration toward the ground crew, who found themselves on the receiving end of passenger anger. The flight attendants won big. But their colleagues paid the price. The flight attendants need to acknowledge this, and not treat the matter lightly.

In short, this flight attendants strike gained widespread public support because ruling party change involved management level appointments, therefore the strikers readily secured preferential terms. That is something worth celebrating. But flight attendants must now win passengers' respect during their daily routine. They must embody the spirit of customer service. Otherwise, the flight attendants' strike victory will not make China Airlines more competitive. What will happen to them if passengers lose confidence in China Airlines due to the strike, and cease booking flights? Employees must be prudent. They cannot assume that such problems affect only employers.

A re-examination of the recent strike and its causes reveals several important structural problems that must be addressed. The first problem is China Airlines' inept crisis management. Airline strikes affect travel plans for tens of thousands of people, as well as confidence in the airline's flight schedules. Therefore if a strike or other factor leads to changes in the flight schedule, the airline must inform passengers as soon as possible. It must offer alternative flight options, and emergency contacts. If it cannot offer alternatives, it must provide compensation. But China Airlines management response was slow. Many passengers reported that China Airlines provided a mere 100 USD in compensation, and failed to offer a clear explanation of what happened. This may have been because both the chairman and general manager were replaced at the same time. But if the airline's system was sound, the results would not have been so haphazard. This is a management defect that must be addressed.

The second problem that must be addressed is the government's inept personnel appointments. The flight attendants strike was described as a "labor dispute". That is inaccurate. Flight attendants may be labor, but not the CAL board of directors and general manager are not “management”. They are "officials". Personnel appointments and company policy for quasi-public enterprises are determined by government officials. These officials must defer to their superiors, but not to investors, consumers, or lenders. The decision to replace the chairman and general manager was made by Premier Lin Chuan. The "Company Law" expressly provides that "the board of directors choose the general manager". But this provision was totally ignored. This sort of administrative indifference to the rules is one of the reasons why public companies are inefficient, and their crisis management clueless.

The third problem that must be addressed is one of politics vs. professionalism. Personnel appointments for China Airlines, as well as for other publicly-owned or state-owned enterprises, have long been matters of political patronage. Professionalism is often the victim. Take Ho Nuan-hsuan, for example. He is qualified in transportation. But his expertise is in road transport rather than aviation. His emergency appointment as chairman drew largely on his experience in dealing with the Taiwan Railway Administration and the ROC Post Office workers protest, rather than any expertise in aviation. In other words, when faced with a unexpected labor strike and long-term aviation industry management reorganization, the new government chose to address the short-term crisis, and ignored the problem of long-term management and airline market positioning. No wonder Ho Nuan-hsuan immediately yielded to the flight attendants' seven demands. But this was mere politics. Will Ho Nuan-hsuan be as professional when dealing with China Airlines long-term operational efficiency and market competitiveness?

The CAL strike has ended. The flight attendants won a major victory. But they must not forget how many innocent people had to suffer, and how many impasses lie ahead in the dark.

聯合／罷工光鮮落幕後 更多死角浮現
2016-06-27 03:00 聯合報 聯合報社論

分享在華航新董事長何煖軒全盤讓步下，華航空服員宣布結束罷工，讓這場影響上百航班、數萬旅次的停飛危機宣告落幕。空服員罷工成功，除了歸因何煖軒讓步得徹底，主要還在工會團結及戰略成功等主客觀因素；而「華航模式」會不會變成其他公民營事業勞工群起效法對象，值得觀察，至少目前華信已揚言跟進。

要說這次罷工危機的化解是一個「雙贏」之局，恐不盡然。第一，何煖軒對工會的要求照單全收，只在尋求早日結束罷工，並未見他的談判手腕有何高明。他送出的大禮比工會要求的多，也顯示其一味示好。第二，空服員在達到目的後宣布結束罷工，為何不次日立即上工，卻還要給自己「補假」一天，讓上萬旅客多受一天折磨？要到糖果就忘了旅客，似難謂負責的表現？第三，這次罷工不僅以旅客權益為犧牲，更將全部壓力轉移到地勤人員身上，讓他們在機場直接承受旅客的叫罵。空服員贏得漂亮，卻讓同僚付出代價；這點，空服員應知輕重，不能認為理所當然。

簡言之，這次罷工因空服員「顏值」極高而深獲民眾支持，又因政權交替牽動主管異動而輕易爭取到各種優惠條件，值得慶賀。但是，我們要提醒的是，如果空服員不能在日常的工作現場贏得旅客尊重，並落實「以客為尊」的服務精神，空服員罷工的勝利即無法轉換為華航競爭力強大的動力。甚至，旅客可能因這次罷工失去對華航的信任，而不再搭乘華航班機；這點，員工也要有所警惕，不能以為這只是資方需要苦惱的問題。

重新檢視這次罷工的成因和解決經過，有幾項重要的結構問題必須正視。首先，是華航的危機處理。航空公司罷工動輒影響成千上萬人的旅行規畫，以及對航線安排的信心，因此航空公司對於因為罷工或其他因素造成的航班變動，最基本的危機處理，就是要通知近日內訂位旅客其因應方案，包括替代航班的選項、延誤的緊急聯繫、無法替代時的補償等。但華航管理階層對此因應遲緩，許多旅客除了從報導得知賠償一百美元之外，公司連個清楚的說明稿都沒有。這或許與董事長和總經理同時遭到撤換有關，但如果制度明確，應不致如此漫無章法，此一治理漏洞必須補強。

第二，政府處理華航人事的妥適性。把空服員罷工描述為「勞資爭議」其實並不準確，空服員固是勞方，但華航董事會、總經理所代表的並非「資方」，而是「官方」；準公營事業的人事與政策概由政府決定，他們看主管官員的臉色，卻不必看股民、消費者、貸款銀行的臉色。這次撤換董事長和總經理的決定，即來自行政院長林全，《公司法》明文規定「董事會決定總經理」，在此事件中卻可以跳過不管。這種行政處理彈性，與公營事業的無效率、危機處理顢頇，其實正是一體的兩面，相成相因。

第三，政治性與專業性的取捨。包括華航在內的公營或國營事業人事，一直被執政者當成政治酬庸職位運用，往往難以兼顧其專業角色。以何煖軒為例，雖然有交通方面的資歷，但其專長是在道路運輸，而非航空領域。而這次他臨危受命出任董事長，主要是借重他處理台鐵和中華郵政勞工抗爭之經驗，而非航空專長。換言之，在處理突發性的罷工事件，與進行航空事業的長期管理整頓之間，新政府似乎更強調短期事件的解決，而未思及華航長期的管理定位。這也難怪，何煖軒一上桌，就對空服員的七大訴求全盤讓步，以示任務「達陣」；但這只是政治處理，當何煖軒要面對華航長期的營運競爭問題時，他能表現相對的專業嗎？

華航罷工光鮮落幕，空服員贏得亮麗，但切莫忘了多少人因此無辜遭殃，還有暗處死角多少陳年問題積灰深重。