Race slurs in SAA pilot row
‘RACE CARD’: ‘GREEDY’ SAA CREWS HIT BACK AT SCATHING OPINION PIECE
The row between striking SAA pilots and government descends into insults and the race card being played as the department of public enterprises director-general claims their agreement with the airline is anti-democracy and ‘worse than any job reservation Act of the apartheid era’.
Agreement signed by previous management does not promote whites’ self-interest, says association.
The ongoing row between striking pilots at South African Airways and the government has degenerated into racial slurs, with department of public enterprises director-general Kgathatso Tlhakudi claiming an agreement between them was “worse than any job reservation Act of the apartheid era” and it “completely violates a democratic order”.
In a scathing attack on the South African Airways Pilots Association (Saapa) in an opinion piece on News24, Tlhakudi said the association’s defence of the “evergreen” agreement, called the regulating agreement, promoted white pilots’ self-interests.
Saapa members are engaged in an ongoing dispute with SAA, the business rescue practitioners and the department of public enterprises over several pay issues and retrenchment conditions. They went on strike, demanding to be retrenched.
The regulating agreement, which The Citizen has seen, was ratified by SAA chief executive Monwabisi Kalawe and the chair at that time, Dudu Myeni, in 2014 – and nowhere in the document does it refer to race, background or colour.
Saapa’s Grant Back said in a statement: “Apartheid was a vicious and inhumane system. The director-general’s claims that the pilots of SAA seek to perpetuate any form or benefit from this stain on our country’s past is rejected with contempt.
“Having been caught in a misleading statement by IATA [International Air Transport Association] previously about SAA’s pilots’ terms and conditions, which are, according to IATA, average for pilots around the world, the director-general has embarked on a contrived attempt to paint our regulating agreement as a relic of this horrific period.
“This is also transparently an attempt to distract from the failings of the department of public enterprises under the oversight of Mr Tlhakudi himself.”
In December, IATA issued a statement distancing itself from the “false assertion” by the department that it had compared SAA pilots’ remuneration with those of other airlines.
The department had claimed SAA pilots were among the highest paid in the world.
Later IATA softened it statement, saying there had been a “misinterpretation” of its data.
In his piece, Tlhakudi listed some of the controversial benefits agreed to by the SAA management, including accommodation in hotels with a minimum fourstar rating, limited liability on damage to assets, such as tablets used in flight operations and “excessive assistance in moving expenditure”.
The opinion piece does not drill into details but notes the agreement is binding across management changes, mergers, acquisitions and any other corporate activity.
Tlhakudi said the current stalemate between the parties was a pursuit of self-enrichment by the pilot body with “their only concern being privileged packages to the exclusion of others, particularly black pilots, thus spitting in the face of transformation and a democratic society”.
He went on to list the “greedy” pilot’s demands.
Saapa represents 89% of the SAA pilot body.
Back said: “Saapa challenges the director-general to publish any part of the regulating agreement that grants any privilege or benefit based on race or gender, or even any part that is different to the many other collective agreements that govern the working conditions of pilots from major airlines...” In its notice of strike, the pilot body demanded retrenchment for all its members and the ending of the regulating agreement amongst others.
“The retrenchment must be fair, it must be lawful, and SAA must pay what it owes by law to its pilot employees,” said Back.
Reject that pilots seek to perpetuate apartheid