Days after a public row between Air India and civil aviation minister Praful Patel over the latter’s “Perform or perish” advice to the national carrier, the minister has once again said that the airline needs to get its act together if it wants to survive. His statement comes on the back of the merged Air India-Indian having reported losses of well over Rs 2,100 crore in the last fiscal.
Reviewing the working of the National Aviation Company of India Limited (NACIL) in Mumbai on Saturday, the minister said, “A tough stand will be required for the successful turnaround of the airlines.” Patel stressed that the merged entity would have to fine-tune its working and innovate on various issues challenging the combine, adding that “a hard decision will need to be taken in view of the challenging times being faced by not only Air India but all airlines, globally.”
Secretary of civil aviation, Ashok Chawla and chairman and managing director of NACIL, Raghu Menon were present at on Saturday’s meeting. Another review meet is expected to be held within a fortnight.
Patel’s remarks come at a time when the load factors of Indian are falling sharply and have been the lowest among all domestic carriers this year. The combined airline’s mounting losses had prompted the minister to talk tough, saying that the airline would have to ‘perform or perish’ in a market where international competition was right at the doorstep.
Taking exception to the criticism, Air India’s unions had then hit back at the minister, accusing him of misbehaving on a New York-London flight. A war of words followed, with Patel writing an open letter to all Air Indians, saying, “We have seen public companies compete with private enterprises and have seen many successful PSUs emerging in spite of the competition. This sector, as you, know was opened up 15 years ago.”
On a more sarcastic note, the minister added, “But it seems you have heard only the two words ‘perform or perish’ of my total interview and have chosen to react. Well, my understanding of the English language may not be as perfect as that of some of the signatories to the letter, who probably come from an English speaking background, unlike mine.”