Gajalakshmi
Paramasivam – 31 March 2016
Sri Lankan Airlines’ Heritage
Sri Lankan Airlines has been highlighted one way or
the other in the immediate past. As someone who shares common heritage with the
National Carrier of Sri Lanka – I feel strongly about this institution which
also helped me become stronger Common Sri Lankan.
I responded in detail to the current
government’s report on the airline’s downward pull - through my article ‘Captain Ranatunga or
MP Ranatunga?’ – at
If I did not carry my heritage when migrating
to Australia, I would be merely observing as an ‘outsider’. Our values are
carried at three levels: Money, People and Ownership.
Ownership is carried as Corporate Wisdom and/or motivating Energy. When we are no longer seen as part of the
current dynamics to make a difference to outcomes – and yet we feel happy or sad
about a person or institution – the person and/or the institution is of
heritage value – confirming that our own contribution went deeper than for money and status
benefits. Such investments form natural structures even though the custodians
of power do not see it. I feel this for
Airlanka / Sri Lankan Airlines as well as for Sri Lanka itself.
As I was saying during a recent family sharing – I often considered as my
family mentor - my paternal grandmother living independently in the village of Araly in Northern Sri Lanka –
even though she was a mother of 10 children. No nursing home for her nor did
she expect her children to take care of her. Now, I have inherited the family
temple from her and when I live there – I feel like I am an extension of her
life. That is the value of heritage. Likewise even after leaving Air Lanka – I mentally
take a managing-owner position to identify with the Truth and support the
airline through my natural Energy.
Air Lanka itself was formed by restructuring
Air Ceylon – using Singapore International Airlines for management. The current government’s plans in using
Singapore as its model often brings to mind Air Lanka itself. The conflict
often is between political custody of ownership powers and money business itself. Under the
circumstances there needs to be firm decision-making as to whether the National carrier is to be of
heritage value – as a ‘lesson learnt’ - or of business value. If latter – then there
needs to be clear separation from the previous profits and losses – so that the
current team would be free of the sins of the past that ordinary staff would not
have had influence over.
In business Status is often the opposition
of money.
As per the Daily News report on this:
"SriLankan Airlines currently does not have
any strategic plan or restructuring plan to deal with the losses, the COPE (The
Committee on Public Enterprise )inquiry highlighted. Sri Lankan was advised by
COPE to evaluate their route options, draw up a new route schedule at least to
cover the key destinations in the Asian region, and come up with sound market
strategy to deal with the loss. The company is on a minus equity footing right
now, they should at least try to break even," Handunnetti said…………………………..
"SriLankan Airlines currently does not have any
strategic plan or restructuring plan to deal with the losses, the COPE inquiry
highlighted. Sri Lankan was advised by COPE to evaluate their route options,
draw up a new route schedule at least to cover the key destinations in the
Asian region, and come up with sound market strategy to deal with the loss. The
company is on a minus equity footing right now, they should at least try to
break even," Handunnetti said.
Taking Sri Lanka’s foreign relations as the
Airline, would COPE be able to believe that a similar recommendation would work
for the current Sri Lankan Government – with Prime Minister Ranil Wicremesinghe
as the CEO and President Sirisena as the
Governor? Does COPE know whether they are making a profit or a loss in their
foreign operations? Should they not know – now that the Sri Lankan Government
has moved towards zero base budgeting? When the past becomes heavy baggage one
needs to move towards ‘Project’ structure. Has this happened ? If so – should not
the employees be afforded the opportunity to work under such a structure and be
facilitated to prove themselves – in an environment ‘free’ of political
interference and baggage? Have the employees been facilitated to develop
Objectively measurable targets to achieve ? so they become self-employed – as owners
of the National Carrier?
As per published reports Captain Suren Ratwatte is the CEO of Sri Lankan Airlines after the politically driven
restructure last year. If the current government profited from the Board of
Inquiry into Sri Lankan Airlines – then did the Government itself not contribute to the demotivation of staff as
Air Ceylon staff would have been if most
of them had remained within the restructured form – Air Lanka?
The influence of Emirates is clear to me as
follows:
Wikipedia – on the Emirate influence:
[Air Lanka, which was state-owned, was partially
privatized in 1998, with investment by Dubai-based Emirates Group, when Emirates and the Sri Lankan
government signed an agreement for a ten-year strategic partnership. This
agreement included exclusive rights for all aircraft ground handling and
airline catering at Colombo-Bandaranaike airport for a ten-year period.
Emirates bought a 40% stake worth US$70 million (which it later increased to
43.6%) in Air Lanka, and sought to refurbish the airline's image and fleet. The
government retained a majority stake in the airline, but gave full control to
Emirates for investment and management decisions. In 1998, the Air Lanka re-branded
to SriLankan Airlines. ]
Lanka News – on 07 October 2015:
‘Captain Suren Ratwatte who was living in Dubai has
been appointed as the new Chief Executive Officer of Sri Lankan Airlines.Suren
Ratwatte who is currently employed by Emirates Airline is due to commence
operations in his new role from October 2015.’
Colombo Telegraph –
on 26 March 2016:
[The sad and shocking state of the country’s national
carrier, SriLankan
airlines was revealed recently by Deputy Minister Eran
Wickramaratne, who disclosed that the airline which recorded a profit of
Rs. 4.4 billion in 2008, took an appalling nosedive having recorded a whopping
loss amounting to Rs. 107 billion, since then.
Wickramaratne, the Deputy Minister of Public Enterprise
Development speaking in parliament underscored that the decision by the former
administration led by Mahinda Rajapaksa to cancel the deal with Emirates, just
because they refused to permit a large entourage of Rajapaksa onboard was a
‘huge mistake.’
He further noted that the cancelling of the deal with
Emirates has led to the current shocking financial situation the carrier is
embroiled in.]
Emirates’ investment in Air Lanka was the
parallel of Economic migration to Australia. Such migrants do not have a
heritage to bring with them or to share when they leave.
The Sri Lankan Airlines problem started
back then in 1998 when I also experience ownership related problems at the
University of NSW. The problems did not start in when 2008 when Emirates left. They may have been
more visible to ‘outsiders’ in 2008. When we have more money than we have
earned through our own efforts and/or through inheritance through true shared
ownership – we tend to not realize our Sovereignty and tend to live off handouts.
There was no real ownership bonding between Emirates and Sri Lankan Airlines
and yet the former had controlling interest. The Rajapaksa Government’s own
parallel of this kind of force - was against the Tamils – for which they went
to the UN using LTTE but without feeling ownership in UN through investment in global
standards to protect law and order. If Sri Lankan Airlines staff are to be
retrenched – then it must be on current performance basis for business purposes
– using global standards. The CEO who is from Emirates - must be the first one
to be tested – not staff who carry heritage by having stayed on for better or
for worse.
No comments:
Post a Comment