SAA says it can't survive current strike

yebocan said:
change of regulations?
Click to expand...

That would be required but then they may as well sell it as it would be majority private owned. I believe it should be sold, we do not need to keep propping it up. The excuse of we need it so we must keep paying is too thin, we can't afford it.
 
Kosmik said:
Can't. Regulations are 75% local control.
Click to expand...

+1

Never mind the CAA has a rule that an AOC is not transferable.... It doesn't follow the usual laws of a business.

Typically this means when a change in ownership occurs, the AOC becomes void, and a new one must be applied for

I suspect with an airline as large as SAA they will apply some special treatment to time this well
 
If the "SAA" brand is licenced to a Private Consortium: Yes, it can survive on. The "good" employees will be retained or rehired by the new Private company. All the useless dead wood will be fired and not rehired.

That is the only viable option.

It has been done countless times in other countries with their national airlines, when they inevitably went bankrupt. Government cannot ever run a profitable company. By it's very nature, a Government organisation provides services at a loss to tax payers.
 
Gaz{M} said:
If the "SAA" brand is licenced to a Private Consortium: Yes, it can survive on. The "good" employees will be retained or rehired by the new Private company. All the useless dead wood will be fired and not rehired.

That is the only viable option.

It has been done countless times in other countries with their national airlines, when they inevitably went bankrupt. Government cannot ever run a profitable company. By it's very nature, a Government organisation provides services at a loss to tax payers.
Click to expand...
IMHO Government should NOT OWN any companies. Their sole existence is to be a service to the tax payer and to ensure we live comfortable and safe lives. Business is private and should stay that way.

Its also why I think no President or MP should have ANY business dealings or shares. Their decisions must be made solely for the benefit of the people they serve. Having any business interest can taint their decision-making.
 
I lov
neoprema said:
IMHO Government should NOT OWN any companies. Their sole existence is to be a service to the tax payer and to ensure we live comfortable and safe lives. Business is private and should stay that way.

Its also why I think no President or MP should have ANY business dealings or shares. Their decisions must be made solely for the benefit of the people they serve. Having any business interest can taint their decision-making.
Click to expand...

I loved the one concept in a book I read. Whoever was president, had everything they owned valued and locked away for their term. Everything else was provided. The value was put into government investment which made returns on the progress of the country ( no fake increase returns by increasing taxes either! ). After their term, they would receive everything back with either interest or a loss calculation which they were liable for :D

Reference - David Eddings The Tamuli series.
 
In 2008 I tried to do business with them.
It was (then) a new and revolutionary product. The recording of the marketing manager (Ormy) told me how great he was. That's all.
Though I flew up to see him, it never happened.

Ormy was doing me a favour then, but he (and I) did not appreciate it then.
No sympathy!
 
Kosmik said:
I lov


I loved the one concept in a book I read. Whoever was president, had everything they owned valued and locked away for their term. Everything else was provided. The value was put into government investment which made returns on the progress of the country ( no fake increase returns by increasing taxes either! ). After their term, they would receive everything back with either interest or a loss calculation which they were liable for :D

Reference - David Eddings The Tamuli series.
Click to expand...
my primary high school means of escapism - gods, I loved his and his imagination for creating a world of politics and magic.
I am with Plato ... old boring philosopher kings, should rule us all
 
FlashSA said:
I'm afraid you don't get sympathy for being a loyal employee. If you feel you're getting f##ked over, then why not apply for a replacement job in the private sector - you seem to have a great list of employable skills?

Or, is it because you won't match your current package moving to the private sector. And if this IS the reason, we're right back at the beginning of why SOE's have huge debts. It's fact that public sector employees are horribly overpaid compared to like for like private sector employees. But again, I'm not accusing you of anything. But if I was in your shoes, the only reason I would have stuck it out so long was money.
Click to expand...
I apologize for my rant. I was feeling a bit butt hurt and sorry for myself but I do not expect any sympathy.
Your assumption re. salary cannot be further from the truth through, but there are other personal issues at play that I do not wish to discuss on the open forum, which makes it difficult to just move on.

@FlashSA _ I sent you a PM to try to explain.
 
Moereloos said:
I apologize for my rant. I was feeling a bit butt hurt and sorry for myself but I do not expect any sympathy.
Your assumption re. salary cannot be further from the truth through, but there are other personal issues at play that I do not wish to discuss on the open forum, which makes it difficult to just move on.

@FlashSA _ I sent you a PM to try to explain.
Click to expand...
One can only imagine what it must be like to be a non striking employee at SAA currently. I genuinely do wish you the best outcome possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X