Alitalia - How long before the life support is switched off?

In my many years in Aviation I have watched a number of truly Great Airlines with a proud and long history die.

Some have declined slowly like your favourite Grandparent, who when facing problems large and small, which in days past they would have shrugged off, now just hasten the terminal decline. But although you expected it, still when they go, it is a shock - Pan Am springs to mind.

In other cases they are first weakened whilst they adapt to changing marketplace and then attacked from inside as if by a virus caused by owners asset stripping without
caring for the future.

Despite this they struggle to recover, only to be taken over because they are now under capitalised and have no strength to resist - TWA is a classic case.

Then there is the new generation Management Board taking the family fortune and investing it unwisely. Swissair.

Then there was Sabena - Heavily Unionised and worse still the Unions not only extremely powerful, but unable to see the new realities.
Staffing rules both National and Union which made the ability to operate efficiently desperately difficult, both on the Ground as well as in the Air.

This coupled with internal warring between Management Factions, some who desperately wanted to push through the changes they saw as vital and those who really saw no need to change and wanted to continue operating in some hypothetical golden past.

Sabena was a National Airline living in the 1960's despite the approach of a new millennium.

The fact that Swissair chose to invest so much of its fortune in Sabena was amazing at the time and remains a source of wonder to me now.

Of course it managed to survive to 2001, but the writing was on the wall a decade before and whilst some in Sabena did read it and tried their best to implement change, they were up against powerful forces not just Unions who it appeared were determined to stop any change, but even some Senior Managment who refused to see the realities.

Now there is Alitalia. There are differences with Sabena, but there are far too many similarities.

Heavy Unionised with the Unions having the same myopic view.
Some powerful Managers who want change as long as of course their division is exempt.
Others who see change as not just vital but long overdue, but are stymied by not just Union Power, Collegue Oppostiion, and even more importantly Political and Government Interference/Intervention, which makes the Beligian Governments relationship with Sabena appear as a very 'light touch' indeed.

When Air France-KLM bid for Alitalia was successful, I saw a direct correlation with Swissair - Sabena. When the plan was scuppered by a change in Italian Government, I believe Air France-KLM had had a very lucky escape.

Alitalia as currently constituted is NOT VIABLE. Without a massive downsizing both terms of routes, fleet, bases and therefore staff. A renegotiation of Ground and Aircrew contracts of the remaining staff, to bring these in line with commercial reality, not custom and practise, is also required, otherwise Alitalia will be forced to cease operations.

But the Italian Government and the Unions want Altialia to change and yet be the same This is a dream which even those smoking opium would have problems with.
As it is obvious Italy has not learned the lessons of Sabena, it is just a matter of time before the EU (European Union) steps in and stops more Italian Government financial aid and within a few months the money finally runs out and Aitalia is no more.

I have been saddened by the failure of all the airlines mentioned, Alitalia becoming an aviation historical footnote appears inevitable as the changes required cannot be implemented and even if there was sudden change of heart I believe it is already too late.

Too often in my career I have made a written prediction which I hoped was wrong, but believed was right and unfortunately I have in the vast majority of cases been proved correct. Alitalia please prove me wrong.

Other Posts on Alitalia in this blog:
13th January 2009:
Alitalia Reborn - But will it Survive?

06th October 2008:
Alitalia - Is the Opera entering its final act?

13th September 2008:
Alitalia - Have the Unions Killed the only hope?

29th August 2008:
Alitalia Files for Bankruptcy Protection

Which Role Model: Shami Chakrabarti or Amy Winehouse

Shami Chakrabarti
Director of Liberty the organisation that is dedicated to civil liberties and promoting Human Rights. Qualified Barrister, erudite very bright. I may not agree with her on some , indeed many issues and even where there are areas of agreement find her emphasis is different from mine.

But this is a woman with talent. ability, and fights her battles with reasoned debate. Who has by hard work whilst a wife and mother earned the respect of even those who disagree with her. Now there is a role model for the next generation

Amy Winehouse.
Has a god given singing talent, but is convicted drug user, has been arrested for violent behaviour!
Role Model, surely not, just another sad case of someone who was born with a talent and just could not handle it!


Unfortunately, it is an extremely sad reflection on our Media driven and Celebrity obsessed society that it is not Shami Chakrabarti, but Amy Winehouse and others of her ilk (some with no talent at all) who it appears are the role models for many young women!

Idle Thoughts on the NUT (National Union of Teachers)

Maybe I do have a masochistic streak (see previous post), as I have just spent some looking at the NUT (National Union of Teachers). Now most Unions whether I like it or not, do have to a greater, or lesser degree a political activist element, but since the 1970's I have often wondered if the NUT strays too far in politics and indeed too far into having agendas approved at conference that are against the Wishes of Parents, who after all want there children to be educated, not politicised.

I have come to some conclusions, which I accept may be unfair, or just plain wrong, so why not send me a comment.

• The NUT has single handedly managed to reduce the Public's Respect for Teachers to just above Estate Agents.
• The Speeches and Policies made at NUT Conferences have greatly influenced many Parents to make sacrifices to move their children from state to Private Education, or if this is just not possible to faith Schools.
  
• The NUT has too many members who's political agenda is at variance with there professional duties.
• The NUT's antipathy towards Faith Schools, which in general 'punch far above their weight' in terms of providing children with a good education, is fuelled by the fact that these schools employ only competent staff, rather than some anti-religious stance. Especially as at last conference time was spent on faith teaching in schools
  
• NUT spends more time whinging about what should be and spends far too little ensuring Pupils get the education required.
• Class sizes. I was taught in what the NUT would consider far too large classes (40+ down to mid 30s). There were NO teaching Assistants and each Teacher had different ways of maintaining interest, discipline and spotting those who were struggling and those who were rushing ahead. Now I accept that Social Changes have made Teachers lives more difficult, but good Teachers should still be able to run a 30+ class. I think the image projected by the NUT has frightened away many who would have been good teachers!
• The NUT has NO interest in Teaching Standards, only in keeping its members employed, regardless of ability, suitability, or ethics
  

Having lit the touch paper, I shall stand well back:

I enjoyed the Glasgow East By-election

For someone who believes in the United Kingdom and therefore is a unionist (without any party affiliation), the fact that I enjoyed an SNP victory would indicate a masochistic streak. Actually if I had been an elector in Glasgow East, I would have probably cast my vote for the SNP as they were the only party likely to give the Governemt the 'shock' it needed!

I stayed up to watch the result and when after a recount the SNP won, I did go to bed with a wry grin on my face.

It appears every analyst, political commentator and 'man in the pub' has a view on why the SNP Won. so I don't see why I shoudn't add my 'two pennyworth':

• This was the 'Mother' of all protest votes. Traditionally a Labour Stronghold, people had just had enough and wanted to give the Government a 'good kicking' and remind them that East Glasgow has problems that need to be tackled and despite some progress, not significant when spread over the 11 years of Labour Government
• The SNP ran an excellent Campaign (admittedly by bringing in activists from outside), whilst the Labour Party didn't. Labour was permanently on the back foot.
• Whilst the Conservatives were an extremely poor third, they did win some respect for bringing David Cameron to the constituency. As for the Lib Dems well perhaps they viewed this one as a lost cause and didn't try too hard.

What will happen next?

• Received wisdom is that come the next General Election Labour will win the seat back. Actually I think that whilst this is probable, a lot will depend on the new SNP MP John Mason. If he can hold his Nationalist rhetoric in check and put all his engeries in to being a constituency MP he may win sufficient hearts and minds to scrape in.
• Will this topple Grodon Brown. No! Tony Blair handed Gordon a chalice in which there was a quite a lot of of hemlock. Due to a myriad of factors this has turned into a cocktail of poisons, so much in fact that the Chalice is overflowing. However much Labour MPs plot and plan (which it appears is about all they do when at Westminster), and however much Gordon Brown's personal ratings fall, he is the only Labour Politician capable of being Prime Minister, which is a sad reflection as much on British Politics in general as the Labour Party in particular.
• Will there be an early General Election? I suspect this would be one of David Cameron's nightmares, as if one was called soon he might win. This would mean he would inherit some extremely serious problems that would require making very unpopular decisions. Gordon Brown believes he can weather the current problems and still have enough time to insert enough 'feel good' factors before he has to call an election. The problem for Gordon and Labour is even if they do 'turn things round' David still might win.
• Staying with the Conservatives, whilst the campaign in Glasgow East didn't produce anything of significance in the ballot box, it did win some respect. Maybe this is the time to start a Hearts and Minds push into Scottish constituencies. It took a generation for the Conservative vote in Scotland to collapse, now is the time to start the slow process of winning it back,
• The Lib Dems. I was disappointed in the campaign they ran and prior to the start of the hustings I assumed they would make third with a slight increase in votes. They didn't and I think they should be very concerned about this
  

Winner and Main Loser:

John Mason:
Whilst I am virulently against his Scottish Nationalist agenda, I am beginning to respect the man. Firstly because he has had a real world career outside of politics. He has not played up, or down the fact he is a practising Christian and a Protestant to boot. Whilst I do not agree with many of his views on matters outside the Nationalist Agenda, I do respect that these are sincerely held and that so far he has shown himself to be a man of integrity.I really hope he puts his energies into serving the people of Glasgow East, because what they really need is a constituency MP who will work tirelessly for them, not someone who see them as a stepping stone to furthering their political Career.

Margaret Curran - Labour Candidate:
Whilst she has done Community Work, Margaret Curran is a Career Politician. Enough said!


The Cheshire Cat:
As those of you you follow this blog (and there are a few, a very few), will know I am not only against his Nationalist Agenda, but I dislike Alex Salmond the man.
As the Campaign for Glasgow East built up, the Smug expression, Alex often displays on Camera became more and more pronounced, until it reached the point where like the Cheshire Cats smile, only the Smug Expression remained. Unfortunately the man behind the expression will re-materialise.

Eutelsat drops NTDTV - Technical Problem provides Excuse for a Political Act

On the the Night of the 16/17 June 2008 Eutelsat Satellite W5 suffered a serious technical problem with the power generation sub-system. This required that 4 out of the 24 of the Satellites Transponders were switched off. Obviously the decision to select which transponders were to be taken off line had to be made very quickly and I assumed this used contingency procedures which for the commercial elements were based on Service Level Agreements (SLA) which form part of Contractual Obligations. If these did not provide an answer, then an Operational Manager should have had the authority to make the immediate decision, which could be changed once the situation was fully assessed.

One of the tranpsonders switched off was that supplying the feed for NTDTV (New Tang Dynasty Television) and therefore immediately terminating its broadcasts to China!

This decision was not it appears based an SLA, or an Operations Managers Decision, but was taken by the CEO of Eutelsat and is alleged not to have been based on any Technical, or Contractual requirements, but was a Politically Motivated Decision.

According to RSF (Reporters Without Borders - Reporters Sans Frontieres) the decision to select NTDTV for terminating broadcasts was made by Giuliano Berretta Chairman and CEO of Eutelsat to curry favour with the PRC regime, which has steadfastly sought to shut out all media beyond its censorship control.

The Following is Sourced from RSF and Space Daily
Quote:

According to RSF, a Eutelsat representative in Beijing stated in a recorded conversation:

"It was our company's CEO in France who decided to stop NTDTV's signal.
(...)We could have turned off any of the transponders. (...) It was because we got repeated complaints and reminder from the Chinese government. (...) Two years ago, the State Administration of Radio, Film and Television kept saying the same thing over and over: 'Stop that TV station before we begin to talk."

Since the inception of its broadcast on W5 in 2004, NTDTV has become indispensable to a vast number of Chinese viewers. For matters that concern Chinese people's lives, for what actually happened around them and in the outside world, NTDTV has always been among the first to report the events.

Its timely coverage on current events were vital to the Chinese people, such as reporting on the SARS epidemic three weeks before Beijing owned up to the
problem.

It also focused in on government abuses shielded from the Chinese public view, such as the disproportionate number of school children deaths due to the collapse of shoddily constructed school buildings in the Sichuan earthquake, and the truth about the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre.

With the Beijing Olympics mere weeks away, Chinese people's need for uncensored news has never been greater.

Yet at this critical juncture, Mr. Berretta's decision closed the only window of free information to millions of Chinese people. What the PRC regime has not been able to accomplish for years, Mr. Berretta has delivered by the flip of a switch.

In 2005, when Mr. Berretta attempted to cut off NTDTV's broadcast into China,
Wall Street Journal revealed that he sought to use NTDTV as a pawn to establish
a business relationship with the PRC regime.

International outcry and an outpouring of support for information freedom helped reverse that decision. Today Mr. Berretta is again exposed for repeating his attempt with a more subtle excuse.

The European Union's charter that created Eutelsat required the practice of
non-discrimination, equal access, and respect for media pluralism. Eutelsat's
own corporate description states: "For millions of homes, the Group's satellites
are synonymous with openness and exchange." Mr. Berretta's action has put its
international and European commitments in jeopardy.

A regime that fears the freedom of speech is a weak regime. Any corporation
seeking favour from such a regime is sacrificing long-term benefits for short-term gains.

Unquote
So what gains does Giuliano Berretta expect to get from the success of his second attempt to stop NTDTV broadcasting to its audience in China?

Well: Eutelsat and Thales, the French company that made the satellite, are doing more and more business in China. It was Thales that manufactured Zhongxing-9, the satellite that was put in orbit last month to guarantee good coverage of the Olympic Games. Eutelsat has signed a contract with China to use its Long March rocket to launch Eutelsat satellites.

The Wall Street Journal wrote in April: “Eutelsat for years has been trying to find a way to penetrate the Chinese market, and launch contracts are widely seen as one way to help reach that goal.”

Although obliged to respect the principles of equality of access, pluralism and non-discrimination enshrined in article 3 of a convention governing the operations of satellite companies, Eutelsat appears decided it can ignore the convention and operate as censor all in the name of kowtowing to the PRC for commercial gain!

Eutelsat-IGO (currently with a membership of 47 States) and the European Commission (which could for once do something useful) need to be investigating Mr Berretta's handling of this situation!

In the meantime there needs to be a repeat of the international outcry that reversed Mr Berretta's first attempt to censor NTDTV.

As for W5, although the failure occurred in mid-June, the Technical Investigation and attempts to regain full operation of the W5 Satellite have only just been completed. The conclusion us that there is no hope of returning it to full service and that only 20 Transponders will be available for the rest of the satellites life.