Air India?s board is likely to approve the airline?s turnaround plan in mid-March but the team that is supposed to effect the turnaround is in the process of being dismantled. While the COO of the low-cost Air India Express was asked to leave a few days ago, chief training officer Stefan Sukumar has put in his papers ? his resignation is yet to be accepted.
Air India COO Gustav Baldauf, who was appointed by Praful Patel after a search committee recommended his name, is also in trouble. Angered by not being given a free hand, and his appointments being challenged, Baldauf has given interviews saying there was a lot of politics going on. The aviation ministry has asked Air India for a written explanation for the media interviews. Baldauf has told colleagues about the various job offers he has, clearly signalling he is fed up.
Meanwhile, aviation minister Vyalar Ravi is likely to set up a committee to help ensure Air India and Indian Airlines? HR issues are resolved at the earliest. The committee is likely to be headed by a former chief justice of either the high court or the Supreme Court.
Vyalar Ravi is believed to have taken a sympathetic view of the airline?s demand for fresh funds. In a presentation to the minister earlier this month, the airline chairman and managing director Arvind Jadhav is believed to have pegged the cash requirement to about R17,000 crore.
The government has so far approved an equity infusion of R2,000 crore to help the carrier tide over the crisis. The aviation ministry has asked for further fund allocation of same amount in the upcoming Union Budget. As per the Directorate General of Civil aviation (DGCA) data, the airline?s share in the domestic market slipped to 15.8% in January as against 17.6% in the corresponding month last year.
Air India is struggling to implement a 3-year turnaround plan prepared by SBI Caps and Deloitte. Last year the airline had hired Baldauf to undertake an operational turnaround of the company who later selected and appointed Sukumar and Arora to assist him in doing the job. But soon after the two appointments, the independent directors alleged that they were kept in dark by the management not presenting complete background of the executives at the time of approval in the board meeting.