The Essential Services Act has been invoked by the PMLN federal government to put down the workers of PIA who are striking against the proposed privatization of the airline. Two PIA strikers have been killed in the standoff. Tens of thousands of passengers have been stranded. Billions are being lost in revenues every day by an airline drowning in debt. The government has agreed to push back its privatization plans by six months. But this has only irritated the IMF without appeasing the strikers. And so it goes on. What are the rights and wrong of the case?
First, the context. The right to strike is constitutionally embedded. But like all rights, it is subject to restraint when it conflicts with some other rights. Its legitimacy is also subject to the legitimacy of its demands when these are in conflict with other equally if not more legitimate requirements of law or public good. Nothing is absolute. Much the same logic applies to the use of force to resolve issues. The right to use force to uphold the law is a critical constitutional requirement of the modern state. But it is subject to degrees of restraint and can be challenged. It is also true that monopolistic enterprises are intrinsically against the public good because they tend to be inefficient, high-cost, corrupt and unaccountable, more so when they are a burden on the public exchequer.
Now, the issues. PIA is grossly overstaffed and inefficient because political parties and governments have, by turns, treated it as an employment agency for political patronage rather than as a public sector enterprise subject to corporate rules. That is why it has now become a huge burden on the treasury requiring constant financial bailouts. It gobbles up public money that can be better used on other public welfare projects. Internal reform is ruled out because public sector rules of service are over-protected by the courts. The only way forward is to bring in a strategic investor with full management rights to bring it in line with corporate best practices. This will entail downsizing as well as rightsizing and employee accountability. That is the rub. The PIA unions certainly have a right to know how this will be done and how their legitimate interests will be protected against avaricious or exploitative private sector investors. But they have no right to blackmail the government and harass the public. They cannot also continue with corrupt and inefficient practices and expect the public to foot the bill indefinitely.
The PPP government had thought of a reasonable strategic alliance between PIA and Turkish Airlines. It involved handing over Western destinations to the Turks while expanding Eastern operations. But the aggressive unions would have none of it. Now the PMLN government is talking to Etihad Airlines. This is the way forward. Airline alliances have been shown to be mutually profitable and in the public interest. If such privatization leads to significant expansion in service efficiency, routes, aircraft, etc., then there will be more rightsizing than downsizing. Golden handshakes, with Finance Ministry and World Bank support, should take care of unavoidable redundancies. Properly planned and executed, with transparent and equitable employee handling, the national interest would be well served.
It is unfortunate that the PMLN government tried to obfuscate the issue of privatization by pretending that employee interests would not be adversely affected. This provoked the unions to take an aggressive and uncompromising stance that, in turn, compelled the government to use force in order to break up the strike. By being reasonable, both sides could have avoided the violent impasse that followed. At the end of the day, the opposition was true to form and tried to exploit the situation to run the government down, regardless of the rights and wrongs in the national interest.
When lumbering public sector banks were privatized in the 1990s for much the same reasons, similar employee related issues cropped up and had to be dealt with. When an attempt was made by the last PPP government to sell off the Karachi Steel Mills because it remains a millstone around the neck of every government, the media and Supreme Court stopped it from happening because jobs were on the line and cheap short-term populism triumphed over the longer term national interest. At times like these, no one pauses to consider the price that the tens of millions of Pakistanis, as opposed to the few thousand employees at stake, have to pay for carrying the burden of the unnecessary staff employed for political patronage purposes.
It is good that there has been a belated settlement of sorts between the government and the PIA unions that has led to the resumption of PIA services. In Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, the doctors are striking and crippling health services, compelling the PTI government to clutch at the Essential Services Act too. Hopefully, the lessons of the PIA strike will not be lost on the protagonists in KPK.
First, the context. The right to strike is constitutionally embedded. But like all rights, it is subject to restraint when it conflicts with some other rights. Its legitimacy is also subject to the legitimacy of its demands when these are in conflict with other equally if not more legitimate requirements of law or public good. Nothing is absolute. Much the same logic applies to the use of force to resolve issues. The right to use force to uphold the law is a critical constitutional requirement of the modern state. But it is subject to degrees of restraint and can be challenged. It is also true that monopolistic enterprises are intrinsically against the public good because they tend to be inefficient, high-cost, corrupt and unaccountable, more so when they are a burden on the public exchequer.
Now, the issues. PIA is grossly overstaffed and inefficient because political parties and governments have, by turns, treated it as an employment agency for political patronage rather than as a public sector enterprise subject to corporate rules. That is why it has now become a huge burden on the treasury requiring constant financial bailouts. It gobbles up public money that can be better used on other public welfare projects. Internal reform is ruled out because public sector rules of service are over-protected by the courts. The only way forward is to bring in a strategic investor with full management rights to bring it in line with corporate best practices. This will entail downsizing as well as rightsizing and employee accountability. That is the rub. The PIA unions certainly have a right to know how this will be done and how their legitimate interests will be protected against avaricious or exploitative private sector investors. But they have no right to blackmail the government and harass the public. They cannot also continue with corrupt and inefficient practices and expect the public to foot the bill indefinitely.
The PPP government had thought of a reasonable strategic alliance between PIA and Turkish Airlines. It involved handing over Western destinations to the Turks while expanding Eastern operations. But the aggressive unions would have none of it. Now the PMLN government is talking to Etihad Airlines. This is the way forward. Airline alliances have been shown to be mutually profitable and in the public interest. If such privatization leads to significant expansion in service efficiency, routes, aircraft, etc., then there will be more rightsizing than downsizing. Golden handshakes, with Finance Ministry and World Bank support, should take care of unavoidable redundancies. Properly planned and executed, with transparent and equitable employee handling, the national interest would be well served.
It is unfortunate that the PMLN government tried to obfuscate the issue of privatization by pretending that employee interests would not be adversely affected. This provoked the unions to take an aggressive and uncompromising stance that, in turn, compelled the government to use force in order to break up the strike. By being reasonable, both sides could have avoided the violent impasse that followed. At the end of the day, the opposition was true to form and tried to exploit the situation to run the government down, regardless of the rights and wrongs in the national interest.
When lumbering public sector banks were privatized in the 1990s for much the same reasons, similar employee related issues cropped up and had to be dealt with. When an attempt was made by the last PPP government to sell off the Karachi Steel Mills because it remains a millstone around the neck of every government, the media and Supreme Court stopped it from happening because jobs were on the line and cheap short-term populism triumphed over the longer term national interest. At times like these, no one pauses to consider the price that the tens of millions of Pakistanis, as opposed to the few thousand employees at stake, have to pay for carrying the burden of the unnecessary staff employed for political patronage purposes.
It is good that there has been a belated settlement of sorts between the government and the PIA unions that has led to the resumption of PIA services. In Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, the doctors are striking and crippling health services, compelling the PTI government to clutch at the Essential Services Act too. Hopefully, the lessons of the PIA strike will not be lost on the protagonists in KPK.