Sonia attacks BJP for "talking big"

New Delhi, Jul 18: National carrier Air India on Friday said that it is in a ‘very challenging financial’ situation and is taking recourse to several initiatives, with a view to ensuring the continuance of its operations.

The airline, in a statement, noted that it has introduced the partially voluntary 'Leave Without Pay' (LWP) scheme on July 14.

"The scheme primarily enables employees to avail the benefits of proceeding on leave without pay on a voluntary basis. The LWP scheme has been introduced for grant of leave without pay and allowances for permanent employees for a period of six months or two years, which is extendable upto 5 years," the statement said.

"Air India had brought out similar scheme earlier... Several hundred employees have, in the past, availed of the LWP Scheme."

As per the statement, in the wake of the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic, there may be employees who are unable to attend their office duties in person on account of personal reasons.

"The LWP scheme enables employees to take a break from their office responsibility for a defined period of time with the approval of the management, while retaining their employment with the company," the statement said.

"They will continue to avail facilities such as passage, medical and housing at specified rates."

Accordingly, the LWP scheme provides the opportunity to employees to take up alternative employment with the approval of the management during the period of the said leave, the airline said.

"The LWP scheme is a win-win situation for both the management as well as employees as it provides flexibility to employees and simultaneously reduces the wage bill for the company," the statement said.

"It is important to note here that the Covid-19 outbreak has very seriously impacted the airline sector and currently, the airline operations of the company are a small fraction of the prior Covid level operations."

The airline said that employees are encouraged to apply for availing the benefit of the scheme, in the prescribed format, by August 15.

"The only addition in this scheme as compared to the earlier LWP scheme is that the management can pass an order requiring the employees to go on leave for a period of six months or two years (extendable upto 5 years) compulsorily taking into consideration 'Suitability, Efficiency, Competence, Quality of performance, Health, Non-availability of employee and Redundancy'," the statement said.

Furthermore, the airline said that this provision has been introduced for use, "very sparingly", with a view to ensuring that the overall efficiency of the organisation, improves and the management will ensure that this will be implemented with complete fairness and transparency as per prescribed procedure.

Consequent to the announcement of the scheme, Air India unions are discussing their strategy against the move which might involve legal recourse.

An Air India union leader on Friday told IANS: "This is going to affect the livelihood of many. Why not every employee of AI take LWP a few days every month. This way the burden can be shared."

"The motive of the top management is to save their money by snatching money from lower employees."

According to Air India PIM document, as on November 1, 2019, the airline, on a standalone basis (without subsidiaries), had around 14,000 employees, including fixed term contract staff.

The development comes as the Centre has re-initiated the airline's divestment plan with new norms.

Interestingly, this time, it has sweetened the deal by substantially reducing the debt on the airline's account books and offered a 100 per cent stake in the loss-making airline.

The last date for bid submission to acquire Air India has also been extended to August 31.

New Delhi, Jan 24: The government's plan to sell national carrier Air India may face political and legal headwinds with senior BJP leader Subramanian Swamy raising the red flag against the decision.

Days before the launch of bidding process by inviting Expressions of Interest (EoI) from potential suitors, Swamy has warned against such move, saying the issue was currently being discussed by a Parliamentary panel.

"Right now, it (Air India disinvestment) is before the consultative committee and I am a member of that. I have been asked to give a note which will be discussed in the next meeting. They can't go ahead without that," Swamy told media.

"If they do, I will go to court. They know that too," he cautioned.

A vocal opponent of Air India privatisation, Swamy had earlier suggested to list 49 per cent of Air India shares on stock exchanges while government holds 51 per cent in the carrier, as an alternative to selling its entire stake to private companies.

It has been reliably learnt that the Rajya Sabha member had expressed reservations over privatisation of Air India at the meeting of a Parliamentary consultative committee earlier this month.

After its failed first attempt, the Modi government has shown great zeal this time to sell Air India. It is set to offer a sweetened deal to potential buyers this time around by removing a large chunk of the debt and liabilities from the airline’s books.

Aviation Minister Hardeep Singh Puri had earlier said that Air India will be shut down, in case the disinvestment exercise is not successful.

Sources told media that the preliminary information memorandum (PIM) inviting EoI has been tentatively scheduled to be unveiled on January 27.

Air India is proposed to be sold along with its subsidiary Air India Express and ground-handling joint venture company Air India Singapore Airport Terminal Services Ltd (AISATS) in which it has 50 per cent stake.

Air India on January 10 came out with a tender for engaging aircraft asset management companies for carrying out technical audit of its entire fleet.

A Ministerial panel on Air India chaired by Home Minister Amit Shah on January 7 approved the draft EoI and a share purchase agreement (SPA) for the airline's disinvestment.

New Delhi, Jun 4: CSIR Director-General Shekhar Mande said on Thursday that the World Health Organisation's (WHO) decision to halt hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) drug trial was taken in haste and the global body should have actually analysed the data before making the decision.

"I firmly believe that WHO decision was taken in haste it was a kind of knee jerk reaction they should have actually analyse the data on their own before temporarily suspend the trials that is my personal opinion," Mande said.

India's nodal government agency ICMR (Indian Council of Medical Research) overseeing the country's response to the coronavirus pandemic last month wrote to the WHO citing differences in dosage standards between Indian and international trials that could explain the efficacy issues of HCQ in treating COVID-19 patients.

In addition, Dr Sheela Godbole, National Coordinator of the WHO-India Solidarity Trial and Head of the Division of Epidemiology, ICMR-National AIDS Research Institute also wrote a letter via an email to Dr Soumya Swaminathan, Chief Scientist at World Health Organisation.

In a letter, Dr Godbole stated: "There was no reason to suspend the trial for safety concern," attributing it to the current RECOVERY data which differs significantly from the non-randomised assessment by Mehra et al, a scientific paper.

Referring to the letter, the CSIR head said, "We don't know what actually happened behind the scenes but the hypothesis is that because of the paper published in Lancet. It is a very well known journal and if Lancet has done due vigilance in publishing the paper. 

Therefore, the WHO thought the paper's findings are right that's why WHO hold based on what is published on Lancet. The WHO shouldn't have accepted it immediately this should have taken their own due vigilance to find out that study is right or not."

DG CSIR said because there is a global outcry it must have put pressure on both Lancet as well as WHO and both of them now retracted from their original position. "WHO has started a trial again and Lancet has put an expression of concern on their website both of these are very welcome development for science," he said.

"So I am pretty sure that Lancet would have published the reports only after seeing somewhere the drug failed to work," Mande said.