The sabotaging acts by Ahmad Jauhari, Zahrah Zaid and Azhari Dahlan – Part 1

Malaysia Airlines (MAS) which bear the brunt MH370 tragedy now facing serious internal problems when nearly 1000 cabin crew‘s resignation have caused a massive loss of RM100 million over the next two years in terms of training costs.

Overwork stress and burned out factors;  other than ‘caught’ in between the other airlines – AirAsia and AirAsiaX prompted about 120 aircraft technicians; engineers (40); cabin crew (300) and 30 pilots completed their service in the company have left MAS for AirAsia and AirAsiaX. This proves that MAS has now become the National Aviation Training Centre for AirAsia and AirAsiaX under the leadership of Ahmad Jauhari, Zahrah Zaid and Azhari Dahlan and their proxies collaborators –  Izham; Hayati Ali and bunch of MAS Senile Executives.

Each resignation took place upon the lacking of welfare for employees in the last three years especially the Technicians, Engineers, Pilots and Cabin Crew were under this trio’s brutalities; whose collaboration with the middle management – Senile Non-Performer is to sabotaging the company’s operations by the power of Flight Operation Director – Izham; Inflight Services Senile Woman-In-Charge – Hayati Ali; working hand in gloves with the Senile Non-Performing executives.

These bunch of executives are known as FAN-NERDS and apple polishers. They are out to design a structure to kill the airline by collaborating with NUFAM feeding the yellow union turns EMPLOYEES’ killer all the insight information so to increase the pressure forcing MAS Cabin Crew to resign whilst providing a higher workload with shortage of manpower; finding ways looking to reduce the allowances and benefits that the employees are entitled to. 

In shortest explanation; MAS Flight Operation Director Izham, MAS Human Relics Director Zahrah Zaid together with Senile Women in charge – Hayati Ali are at best proposing unsound structure for MAS Cabin Crew with only USD 0.60 cents increased per hour for MAS Cabin Crew and non-stop 23 working days for the Pilots so to pressure them leaving the company and destroy the operation once and for all. They stole the surplus from the Cabin Crew’s expenditure to pay the increased and kept the remaining RM1 million for their own secret bonus before Prime Minister of Malaysia announces the new take-over.

Cheers to the TRIOs of this thread for successfully musketeered the work for Tony Fat Pariah Fernandez by collaborating with MAS middle management.

Zahrah Zaid and Hayati Ali authorised for every completion of the training funded by the company; there must be a massive pulling out of these new trainees by her collaborators – a bunch of senile Fan-nerd executives using highest pressures and purportedly discriminatory work pattern with the help of the whispering campaigns from Tony the FAT ASS’s syndicate so to force them out of MAS and into AirAsiaX. This is done by also promoting AirAsiaX to the newly recruited MAS Cabin Crew via badmouthing the company’s situations.

Sources informedfor several years not only the company failed to give bonuses and benefits for employees getting vacation with the family that also ceases whilst coping with a tremendous increased in workload during this shortage of staff in so much a way to abuse them and pressuring them to leave the airlines for AirAsia and AirAsiaX.

Various factors including an increasing employees’ eagerness to continue working with the company is now totally lost via this collaboration framework between MAS and AirAsia (which is still in existence despite the dodgy “share-swap” deal with AirAsia was cancelled by the Prime Minister of Malaysia).

Almost now and then the employee concerned after having completed their training will always find another attractive job offer from another airline with a higher rate of pay. It seems there are AirAsia’s syndicates who‘s watching MAS and wait for the right time to ‘fishing’ MAS new caliber staff.

Here is one example of the newest syndicate who joined MAS to recruit its quality Cabin Crew so to join AirAsiaX…this ugly Pondan is a member of NUFAM.

We saw this gay asshole who keeps fanning Dato Kamarudin in one the parties we were invited.

First this gay prostitute joined MAS…

And he reported frequently to Dato Kamarudin Meranun and AirAsia Chief Operating Officer Bo Lingam; is now promoted to AirAsiaX after he (this gay prostitute) successfully influenced MAS new recruit to join AirAsiaX.

Concurrently he also recruits MAS Cabin Crew via his facebook. So guys and gals do you see what we have discovered from Tony Fat Pariah Fernandez’s strategy to slowly killing MAS via the collaboration framework? His next promotion is Manager of Cabin Crew for AirAsiaX after he managed to fan Azran Osman.  It looks AirAsiaX is recruiting lots of gay prostitutes to fulfill the market supply possibly for the BABI too – Brother Anwar Bin Ibrahim.

Good advice for all airliners in the world; stay away from doing business with Tony Fernandez the Pariah low caste airline and do not hire his men or his staff such as Ahmad Jauhari; Zahrah Zaid and Azhari Dahlan.

To all world airliners – DO NOT TAKE AIR ASIA’S STAFF BECAUSE THEY ARE TRAINED TO BE CORPORATE ESPIONAGE WORLDWIDE.

Information obtained indicates MAS large amount of funds is allocated for staff training programs of which RM200,000 is for each MAS pilots who must undergo two years of training and RM190,000 is the cost of training the flight engineer over the next period of five years.

In addition; the cost of two years of training for each technician is about RM75,000 and the four months training period for a steward and stewardess  a stewardess involves expenditure of RM50,000 each.

The source said “Who wants to work with MAS if there are companies that offer a salary of RM30,000 per month for experienced engineers from seven to 10 years and some technicians also are offered RM8,000 a month, compared to RM3, 000 in MAS.” 

This is how MAS bleeds to death with such losses in trainings; and human assets.

Asked whether the tragedy MH370 affect employees of the company; the source said added it certainly indemnify the company RM1.7 billion otherwise would have been in worse situations.

“If it was not for MH370 MAS staff morale has weakened over the last three years,” he said. Another word; MH370 fosters closer ties internally.

The source said, the roster for Pilot and Cabin Crew force them to work for long hours shuffling between international and non-international flights and at worst quick turning around the flights to save cost so for fattening the salaries of Ahmad Jauhari; Zahrah Zaid and Azhari Dahlan whose salaries grew over 200% increment in these three years whilst the staff working beneath them sufferred heart attack; burned out over the high workload and lowering paid for those who have been committed to the National Carrier their entire life.

“This situation has resulted in staff suffering pressures; physically and mentally forcing them broken up with their family with no time spent for family when working with MAS” the source said.

The situation got even worse when MAS flight into Bangalore turned back due to emergency landing and another flight into Inch-eon; Korea turned emergency landing into Hong Kong have frightened both the Pilots and Cabin Crew to the highest degrees forcing them to contemplating a quick resignation with MAS. All these emergency landings were orchestrated by Azhari Dahlan with the help from AirAsia’s Engineering who planted something foreign during the logging of AirAsia’s aircraft parked next to MAS and Firefly aircrafts inside MAS MRO. The firefly is next on target by Tony the Pariah Fernandez.

Sources have revealed Ahmad Jauhari and Zahrah Zaid have stolen the available budget approved by ex-MAS CEO/MD Tengku Azmil for MAS Cabin Crew where they could have been paid USD15 an hour (RM45) but the available budget is used and injected into his salary for his own personal gain. AJ shared his remaining budget with Zahrah Zaid; Izham; Azhari Dahlan; Salleh Tabrani and other directors and shot up the directors’ salaries to 250% to keep them quiet about the accidental surplus of the available budget for staff below the management level.

The end result the trio have delivered successfully – Skytrax awardes best Cabin Crew 2014 is Garuda Air. MAS used to be best Cabin Crew in the world now dropped to number five whilst AirAsia and AirAsiaX maintained Number 1 & 2 low caste airline in the world.

Congrats to Khazanah the blind ladies who never saw this coming! We have information there are a bunch of conmen now eying at AJ’s position. We hope the Prime Minister of Malaysia will make the best decision not to let these bunch of conmen bring him down again.

The Prime Minister of Malaysia must also know the disintegration plan on MAS is to also share with some politicians from opposition side especially Anwar the Gay De Facto Leader who are out to gain profit from MAS selling its entities and a golden opportunity to own a lucrative long-term business because MAS despite the hurdles is still generating revenue for the country. The GAY De Facto Leader may not win the position from Selangor current Mayor so to prepare his next campaign for PRU14; the gay leader must own MAS by hook or by crook.

In short; AJ and gang is betraying Khazanah (Tan Sri Azman Mokthar will take the fall after all) and Khazanah the ladies in red is to be blamed for the fallout in the next PRU14.

MAS management could not be reached for comment and the public need to file for missing MAS spokenman for unable to comment on this sabotaging act by Ahmad Jauhari; Zahrah Zaid and Azhari Dahlan who work for Tony the Pariah Fernandez.

Stayed to our upcoming part 2 – INNER revelation ON AJ and Tony!

Punish the Management, but save the airline, MAS first CEO tells Putrajaya

Pouring scorn on calls to declare Malaysia Airlines (MAS) bankrupt, former chief executive officer Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman said the loss-making flag carrier should not be punished for mismanagement by government-appointed teams, but instead, Putrajaya should bail it out once again.

Abdul Aziz said MAS was in a deplorable state now as those who manage it are “not doing their jobs very well” and have not been able to adapt to the competitive airline industry.

“The problem started in 1994 when the government decided to give up its shares and sold it to a private group. It all went downhill from there,” he told The Malaysian Insider.

“By 1998, the government had to step in and redo the whole thing to salvage it. Since then, the government has bailed out and changed its management teams many times but until today, the problem has not been fixed.”

In 1994, Tan Sri Tajudin Ramli bought a 32% equity in MAS and was the airline’s chief executive officer from then until 2001, after which he sold back the shares to the government at RM8 a unit, when the market price was only half of that.

Since then, Tajudin has been entangled in a complicated series of expensive suits, counter-suits and appeals with various parties due to failure to service a billion ringgit loan he took to purchase the major stake in the national airline.

He has claimed that his purchase was forced “national service”, disguised as an arm’s length commercial deal, because the government wanted to appease the investment community and the public.

Abdul Aziz said until the late 1990s, MAS operated in a closed domestic market but then found that it could not compete with other emerging airlines, including budget ones which had rapidly taken over its market share.

“I can appreciate the people’s feelings. Because after helping so much, nothing has changed. If I were in their position, I would do the same. But, we have to think this way… that this is the national carrier. It can still be revived.” – Tan Sri Abdul Aziz Abdul Rahman, former CEO of MAS.

“There was rapid economic development in the world and people got very ambitious. They began to have more airlines in all parts of the world and here also, we have AirAsia, AirAsia X and others. These provided competition internally and externally.”

“It became very competitive but MAS management could not adapt themselves to the sudden competitive environment because those who are managing it are not doing their jobs very well,” he added.

Abdul Aziz, who chaired MAS from 1982 until his retirement 10 years later, stressed that he was against any suggestion for MAS to file for bankruptcy following its continuous dismal showing in profits, adding that it was not too late to save it.

“MAS is not an ordinary company that is selling rice, or sundry goods. It is an established organisation catering for the whole world.”

“This (filing for bankruptcy) is the easy way out for people who don’t like to apply their minds but I will always stress this point. It was so difficult to establish it in the first place, back in the early 70s, when we were lacking in so many things and we had no money,” he said.

Despite the challenges and limited resources in the early days, he said MAS built itself up, made profits and became the pride and joy of the nation.

“Why? Because of the pride of Malaysia. Because it carries our flag. I will say that a national carrier is the representative of the people of the country globally in the skies and on the ground. The logo has been there for more than 48 years and it must not disappear just like that.”

In a recent interview with the The Wall Street Journal, Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak said that bankruptcy could be among several options as a way to restructure MAS, after years of losses and bitter conflicts with its labour unions.

This followed MAS recording a net loss of RM443.4 million in the first quarter of this year, up from a net loss of RM278.8 million in the same period last year.

MAS had earlier said the tragic MH370 incident had a “dramatic impact” on the traditionally weak first quarter performance, adding that the airliner experienced high numbers of cancellations and a decline in long-haul travel after flight MH370 went missing on March 8.

MAS had lost money for the last three years, beset by high costs and stiff competition, and this was the carrier’s worst quarterly loss since October-December 2011.

However, Abdul Aziz acknowledged that MAS has not seen a turnaround despite the multiple government bailouts, which has caused taxpayers to be against yet another one.

“I can appreciate the people’s feelings. Because after helping so much, nothing has changed. If I were in their position, I would do the same,” he said.

“But, we have to think this way… that this is the national carrier. It can still be revived. Put the right people there.”

“And maybe, you catch hold of those who made these blunders and hang them. Maybe the people would like to see that. It will give confidence to the people that you are serious about solving the problem.”

Calling MAS his “baby”, Abdul Aziz said said he was “deeply engraved” in MAS, having helped with its start up after splitting from the Malaysia-Singapore Airlines in the early 70s.

He was also among those who had been roped in to draft both the Civil Aviation Act 1974 and the Civil Aviation Regulation 1996

“That is why I feel strongly about certain things pertaining to MAS,” the practising lawyer said.

“In the early days, when we started the airline, we did it from scratch. So everybody who joined the airline worked very hard to make sure it was successful. Because it was a challenge to us and for the sake of the nation.”

“And everyone was united on this. I think that is the reason why we were so proud of it. We put all our effort into it.

“Although there were some employee-employer problems, we ironed it all out amicably. Why? Because we were proud of the establishment. Everyone worked hard. We were inspired to make it work.”

Now, said Abdul Aziz, in order to save itself, MAS needs to “quickly adjust” to the competition and make sure they are still “vicious” in the fray.

“MAS does not seem to have the right formula to challenge the competition. The economic environment and the aviation industry have changed. It is now a more liberal market, open skies policy. They have to adjust themselves. If you are slow in adjusting, you will be in trouble.”

“Others are running and you are walking. How do you challenge them? If they are running, you should also run. In fact, you must run faster,” he added.

MAS should also take its employees into consideration as they are prepared to “work hard to make sure it survives,” he added.

“So MAS has the right foundation. It has the employees – the main asset – who are prepared to work hard to make sure we survive. We have the facilities now too, the expertise and the image.”

“If you as a leader or employer don’t pay attention to the union and your staff, then they, likewise, will also forget about you,” he said. – May 31, 2014.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies salute Tan Sri Abdul Aziz for his patriotism and loyalty toward MAS.

To save MAS, the thick-skinned monkeys who keep clinging to the wreckage of MAS airplanes should leave MAS in urgency.

For MAS and its loss making trend under Ahmad Jauhari, Azahari Dahlan and Zahrah Zaid still staying put thinking they were the heros (?).  It is true they are heroes but the heroes with monkey faces and tails who carelessly caused huge losses to the national airline.

They should be arrested and investigated for the crime they organized against the national airline.  While they are not aware their asses are on the hot plate burning to the 1st degree; they should prepare to parachute out of MAS taking with them the stockholm Syndrome disease they employ on the middle management.

The Khazanah ladies in red too must be eradicated for the conspiracy they offer to Tony Fernandez to save AirAsia and destroy MAS tarnished the GLC status.

In a brief encounter, whenever the public read our posting against Tony Fernandez; the public will also be enjoying a hammering post from Tony’s baby – The NUFAM crooked gang on MAS. That is because Tony Pariah pays NUFAM to disrupt MAS from the outside simultaneously paying the TRIO bastards to destroy MAS from the inside.

Then the tax payers get MAS going down the drain and AirAsia going up the hill.

Not only that with MAS down and AirAsia up; here comes the hidden heroes who have been organizing to take over Putrajaya but failed; the Daredevil And Party of the desperado instigated by foreign forces to destroy the unity of its own country. Bearing the name of treason-ship Daredevil And Party are now taking MAS too with their magic hands swinging behind Putrajaya waiting in line to contract out MAS into pieces. The short story is You take One AJ&Gang take Two Tony Takes All.

Stay united MAS if you want to save the airline. Continue hammering the red devil if you want to survive. God Bless MAS and Malaysia!

The Con Jobs by AirAsia’s Tony Fernandez to steal MAS MRO!

AirAsia is not going to stop cheating its new customers because it has been the Low Cost Carrier’s policy aiming at cheating for surviving from the pugnacious competitions.  As times goes by; the policy became the concept for its natural survivability.

To survive in this challenging yet pugnacious transport industry; Tony Fernandez has resorted to stealing companies for expanding into his collapsing empires before his life ends after he contracted incurable diseases. For the public’s record; Tony’s life has been dependable on Ketamine pills and other supporting drugs to prolonging his livelihood.

Now that Everyone Knows Tony is dying with his empires being left without a caliber person managing it; who do we think the best suited candidate that will take over him? Ahhhh…perhaps Lim Guan Eng would do the honor!

Among all the politicians in Malaysia; only one stood up for Tony of AirAsia pushing the Government to sell MAS to AirAsia and here is the link of the clue – Seek help from AirAsia on saving MAS Dap tells Putrajaya.

Now we all know how did the share swap between MAS and AirAsia take place exactly on time in 2011 which was prepping for the lost of Bee End Party in PRU13. Unfortunately, the people of Malaysia ain’t that dumber than Lim Wants End.

So exactly how did Tony steal the company that is strengthening MAS in the past decades? For a start; he pays off the clueless CEO a lump sum of cash to recruit the CEO and his gang. The job function of that paid clueless CEO by AirAsia is to find way to get MAS MRO landed into AirAsia’s listing property before MAS CEO contract ends.

In the morning of 28th May 2012 as is in scheduled; the paid clueless CEO of MAS will propose to MAS board of directors to sell off its main core Engineering division to increase the profit for restructuring MAS from its recent first quarter losses. The CEO will make the recommendation and propose to the board to sell MAS MRO and the current CEO of MRO Azhari Dahlan as in package to a company that Tony Fernandez has 35% shares in it.

Before the board of directors make any further decisions; they should know that despite contract between MAS and AirAsia ended in February 2014; Azhari Dahlan has secretly allocated a hangar for discreetly repairing AirAsia’s aircrafts without billing AirAsia a cent.

During the secret repair of AirAsia’s aircrafts at MAS MRO area; these events were highlighted by the famous blogger “Sir” Wee Choo Keong which he wrote Mysterious Fire in MAS MRO workshop;  BMH192 turned back caused by Carbon Brakes and Firefly turned back.

For the public record; Carbon brakes offer a significant weight savings compared to steel brakes. This translates into a lighter airplane, which directly contributes to decreased fuel consumption and associated reductions in engine emissions.

These cost considerations often resulted in the use of steel brakes on smaller, short-haul commercial airplanes (B737-800) and carbon brakes on larger, long-haul (B777-200) commercial airplanes. In the past, the higher cost of carbon brakes could more easily be justified for larger airplanes because of the cost savings associated with reduced weight and longer service life.

So who asked Azhari Dahlan to change the steel brakes with carbon brakes suitable for a smaller short-haul aircraft that had caused the air turned back of MH192?

Is this not crystal clear of the surfacing evidence that sabotaging act carried out by Azhari Dahlan or AirAsia have become eminent?

A special message for MAS board of director; in the afternoon of 28th May 2014 or early; the clueless CEO will endorse officially and handle over MAS MRO to Tony Fernandez’s proxy as the buyer! If this transfer of ownership is validated; MAS will lose out in billion of revenues and cost for maintaining and repairing MAS aircraft will hike up instantly.

In planning a restructure for the National Carrier; there shall be a change of new Top Management urgently to eradicate the presence of sabotaging acts internally and removing the moles of AirAsia vizly Azahari Dahlan the average qualified CEO whose records showed lacks of aviation knowledge and imminent saboteurs complement AND most importantly that Zahrah Zaid the Tobacco Evil Madam who claims she is untouchable because she is protected by someone from the Ministry of Human Resource as the most certifiable Human Cruelty Director of the century”.

Next episode; we shall cover on the topic on how the clueless CEO crashed MAS into loss-making airline of the year! Stay tuned for eliciting yet-unreported news!

AirAsia not only the big conjob also a big bully to his passengers

Ever since AirAsia is in operation from 1997; Tony boy never stops cheating his passengers from buying the so-called “lowest airfares” which actually is the most expensive airfares if you added up the whole package; to buying fraud travel insurance that does not cover a delay of less than 6 hours’ waiting time.

In Malaysia; only AirAsia can cheats its customers with its creative promotional scheme to trap those who never learn about AirAsia’s scheming packages.

A passenger of AirAsia revealed his traveling experience with AirAsia who thought he could save a few bucks and transited in Bangkok; re-checked out and checked in at Bangkok Airport just to find out his next travel to Kuala Lumpur from Bangkok was suddenly cancelled without further information.  To get the refund from AirAsia for the untraveled ticket would be additional hassle – if you don’t press AirAsia for the refund; they will conveniently be forgetful to refund you those untraveled tickets.

This gentleman who wanted to save a few bucks via traveling with AirAsia ended with purchasing a one-way ticket with Air Thai to Kuala Lumpur that cost him an additional RM1,900 for a two hours flight time.  Months later; he has been informed by AirAsia staff that AirAsia would never pay the refund unless you chased Tony Fernandez (the black babi) like a crow chasing a butterfly and if you ever lost the refund ticket from AirAsia; it means you can never get your refund…GET IT?

Whilst this gentleman made his comparison between his traveling experience with MAS and AirAsia; he never finds any fuss to get his refund from MAS but only with AirAsia.  So the clue is….?  AirAsia is cheating!!!

In refunding any untraveled tickets; it should be included the airport tax and insurance fee that were never utilized but for AirAsia; it’s a no refund for airport tax and insurance fee you purchased once you filled in the refund tickets.  So the second clue is…?  AirAsia is always finding ways to cheat his customers!!!

Now KLIA2 is in progress for an opening on 9 May 2014; why does AirAsia say about their transfer to KLIA2?  In the beginning; Aireen Omar the ugly bitch says AirAsia will not transfer because they are arrogant and a biggest bully ever!  And there was no free tax for transferring to KLIA2.  Perhaps; at KLIA2 it is not possible for AirAsia or Aireen Omar the haggard bitch and Tony the pariah to suck the airport tax from their passengers; or perhaps in KLIA2; there will be too many low cost airliners competing to improving its low cost services and provide the convenient of air ticket refund for travelers!  This is telling AirAsia straight in their face; You Can’t Cheat Anymore You AirAsia Bitch; Babi and Pariah!

On our recent encounter; another AirAsia passenger disclosed of the cheating games behind AirAsia’s check-in counter that is the tempering of weighing scale at every AirAsia’s counter.  If you have bought 15kgs for your luggage; you will get the guaranteed weight in measure of above 15kgs.  For e.g. your luggage should be 15kgs but AirAsia will weigh it at 16.8kg where you will be charged an additional of RM70.  That’s AirAsia’s nature in doing business for survivability!

So the clue is always bring your own weighing scale or call the authority to have all AirAsia check-in counter randomly checked for tempering the scale machine.

Another AirAsia’s passenger revealed his refined experience traveling with AirAsia.  He booked 5 tickets last November 2013 and during the Yolanda typhoon that struck Philippines; they cancelled the flight to Tacloban (Philippines) and filled in the refund tickets.  Guess what was happening?  AirAsia never refunded them at all!  So do you still want to travel with AirAsia the cheating airlines?

Check out this article – https://malaysiaairlinesfamilies.wordpress.com/saving-airasia-with-airasia-becoming-a-scam-airlines-causing-many-stranded-and-no-more-refunds/

Other comments : You will find a load more of such comments from the experience passengers who traveled with AirAsia on this site.

Stay tuned – we are about to expose more of AirAsia scheming packages and promotions.

Nufam’s Stupidity – Episode 3

The journey of the National Union for Flight Attendant Malaysia in typical circumstances is a shortest stint ever recorded in the history of trade unionism as assisted by the Director General of Trade Union – the Cleverest Young Bastard (YB) Mustafa Bin Ali and his collaborators that included AirAsia’s CEO Tony Pariah Fernandez working hand in glove with another born-to-be-bastard “Roslee Sabaruddin” who works discreetly with MAS imported spy – Mohammad Fauzi Mahayahuddin to destroy the National Carrier from the inside.

This is how the department of Trade Union collaborates with Nufam…

And the hero comes along…

Let us take a closer look at NUFAM chronologically…it was registered in 2012 by Ismail Nasaruddin the Lipas Man who recently was fired from Malaysia Airlines for public defamation against the National Carrier and six other MAS cabin crew. Nufam was approved by Roslee Sabaruddin (Assistant of DGTU) who then was believed to have received a sum of RM50,000 (under table) from AirAsia for assisting in the formation of Nufam to stir trouble inside MAS.

Now Every Crew Can Vote!

The slogan Nufam uses are in conjunction with AirAsia’s advertisement clearly revealing such slogan was authorised by AirAsia’s Tony Pariah Fernandez. The mission is to poison MAS cabin crew so to join AirAsiaX with those unfurled lies about how wonderful and fabulous that AirAsiaX is than any other local airlines.

This is how AirAsia get to recruit the experienced cabin crew from another local airlines for its quick expansion avoiding payable inland and airport taxes. The profit AirAsia makes are generated from all taxes specifically the airport taxes and the pre-paid airfares collected in advance from its customers.

Nufam is tasked by AirAsia’s CEO Tony Pariah Fernandez to pressure MAS CEO Ahmad Jauhari to fully committ to his promises that he made with Tony Pariah on signing away MAS quota for Los Angeles route paving way for AirAsia to fly into Los Angeles by the end of 2014.  When a CEO fails delivering it on time…Nufam strikes…The fact remains that Nufam was truly formed by Tony Pariah Fernandez working hand in glove with the cougar bitch – Maznah Mazlan whose collaboration included those resentful ex-MAS workers in her attempt to avenge MAS for terminating her nephew who was once also a cabin crew of Malaysia Airlines under 5 years of contract service.

Last year was the most memorable year for Nufam President who then finally joined the resentful clowns.

Here’s the memoir of Nufam 2013…

Nufam’s memoir for 2014…

Digging a grave…

Building a tomb and finally…

Done Yet? or Well Done? Looks like the steak is sizzled and well done.

Congrats Nufam for being so D.U.M.B – Don’t Use Many Brains! Stay tuned to us for our next episode 4 – Against all odds – Ex-executive councils of AEU strikes back against MAS!

AirAsia – The failing Low Cost Airline

The first failing airline of a low-cost concept in Asia-Pacific region is AirAsia – TheConAirliner (TCA). The master planning by Tony Fernandez for AirAsia has failed unexpectedly from his organizational infrastructure that fully support unsuccessful execution in view of now that Tony Fernandez is indeed a creative WMD (Weapon of Mass Destruction). His fine creativity of WMD is a reflection of his gradual slope in his management.

AirAsia never stops cheating its customers and it continues to promote its misleading and fraud deals to the public. But for how long is this going to be? For Tony Fernandez; cheating is a new trend of business ideology which he learned from his late mother who sold tupperware for a living.

Tony Fernandez is the first idiot who adopted the modern psychological warfare in airlines industry; slacken his management via his hunger for suicidal decision. Tony Fernandez is a greedy famish pig who wanted every airlines deal for himself thinking he’s a genius aviation man.

Until he fell from the ladder he was trying to climb through his underground fast-track lane; he still is the same “never learned” pig-asshole fat boy.

Tony Fernandez’s failure in its collaboration with the Malaysian National Airlines – MAS and his most recent failure in securing his board of directorship with Japanese National Airlines predicted his next failure to secure the India’s most popular cities – Mumbai and Delhi.

Mumbai and Delhi do not welcome Tony Fernandez. Tony thought his smart ideas penetrating airlines business into India market will secure him another hub-based in India. His con-job on IPO had the India’s investors fooled. AirAsia’s share prices changed for “before and after” signing of agreement with Indian investors. Before signing – AirAsia’s shares were at RM3.50 but after having closed a deal with the Indian investors – AirAsia’s shares dropped dead to RM2.20.

There’s one principle that Tony fails to adopt is the discipline of the Japanese that would never try telling lies to the shareholders. The Japanese counterpart will not follow Tony’s sly way bullshitting for AirAsia Japan by falsely declaring the airline was making profit when it was actually making a huge losses amounted to RM113 million.

Unlike AirAsia Malaysia; it’s still making losses in its balance sheet and it declared profits from AirAsia’s credits combined with the 6 months pre-paid sales of airfares. In reality; Tony uses his credits that he owes to MAS for aircraft’s maintenance as top-up profits for AirAsia’s account. Until todate; AirAsia’s shareholders still received zero dividend for falsifying accounts.

AirAsia parted ways with Japan’s All Nippon Airways (ANA) when it sold its 49% stake in AirAsia Japan to ANA in June this year. Both airlines had clashed over management and operational differences followed by losses amounting to ¥3.5 billion (RM113 million).

Fernandes, 49, has publicly said that he wants AirAsia to re-enter the Japanese market and is on the lookout for Japanese-Indian financial partners.

“We’ve just got to look for the right one this time because we screwed up the last time,” he added.

When Tony said “Japan was a disaster. Our partner didn’t understand what we wanted,” he actually meant that the Japanese counterpart didn’t want to lie for him.

Tony’s next con-job really had the Thailand’s Prime Minister accepted his idea to fly long haul via Bangkok to Los Angeles using  AirAsia X’s new Airbus jet order – A330-300.

25th September 2013 – AirAsia X has revealed it is getting closer to launching its new long-haul division in Thailand after confirming in a filing to the Malaysian stock exchange last week that it had reached agreement with Thai AirAsia chief Tassapon Bijleveld and Julpas Kruesopon, a businessman and advisor to Thai Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra, to formally incorporate the business.

The joint venture, called Thai AirAsia X, marks the first overseas foray by AirAsia X, the long-haul arm of Asia’s largest low-cost airline by passengers.  Although not formally part of the AirAsia Group the business has common shareholding with the other airline interests.  In the statement Thai AirAsia X said it submitted an application for an air operator’s license on June 20, 2013 and expects approval to be granted by end of this month when it will then apply for an air operator’s certificate.

As predicted; Tony Fernandez isn’t as smart as he thinks he is as an aviation man. Thai Airways fly from Bangkok to Los Angeles using B777-200/300 long-range aircraft for a flight time of more than 14 hours up to 18 hours. His latest order for 25 A330-300 airbus jet could fly a longer range where he also leases 6 A340 jets from airbus to deliver a one-two punch by 2015 to MAS and Malindo Airways especially after the Malaysian National Airlines rejected Tony’s initiative and collaboration to penetrate Los Angeles whilst Malindo Airways is busy attractting millions of AirAsia’s regular FED-UP flyers.

Whilst Tony Fernandez is planning his next route penetrating Los Angeles; his collaborative double agent CEO of MAS Ahmad Jauhari is tasked to end MAS oldest route KL – TYO – LAX by 2014 before he leaves MAS paving ways for AirAsia X to launch its first long haul route into United States of America via Kuala Lumpur. This will be Tony’s hardest punches for Malaysia Airlines after CEO Ahmad Jauhari contract ends.

Ironically, soon after Tony had the under-tabled discussion with the Thailand Prime Minister to accept his landing rights for Los Angeles to Bangkok; Thailand Prime Minister Yingluck initiated for amnesty bill passed for her cloned brother Thaksin to return home from exile. Consequently Yingluck faces street violent protest and fled from being captured by her protestors. The latter is calling for new election to calm the protestors.

Tony has his right hand wing flown to Los Angeles to discuss the landing rights for both routes i.e. LA – Bangkok and LA – KL (via Taipei). If FAA approved AirAsia X to fly directly from KL; Tony Fernandez will firmly deliver his punches to MAS workers who got his ass kicked out of Malaysia Airlines.

AirAsia has a bad record of its safety performance over the last one decade as compared to Thai Airways;

• 8 November 2004 – On AirAsia Flight 104, the Boeing 737 plane carrying 111 passengers and five crew skidded while landing. Three passengers – a five-year-old girl and two women – were injured while evacuating from the plane and received outpatient treatment at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital.
• 14 December 2005 – The Kota Kinabalu International Airport was closed for a few hours after an AirAsia plane burst a tire on landing. There were no injuries in the 10.30pm incident.
• On 10 January 2011, AirAsia Flight 5218 skidded on the runway whilst landing. The incident occurred around 10:15pm during a heavy downpour. Four passengers were rushed to Sarawak General Hospital, believed to have suffered from health complications.
  
• 3 August 2012 – On AirAsia Flight 5187 from Miri to Kuala Lumpur was scheduled to take off at 7.40pm. Furious passengers had their journey delayed for over an hour as a result of a man’s emphatic decision not to remain on the plane until take off. A witness said that as the plane was about to take off, the man suddenly opened the emergency doors and leapt out. On-duty flight attendants reportedly said they were powerless to stop him from opening the emergency exit and jumping out once the plane had started to move on the runway.

For Yingluck to have approved AirAsia X – a subsidiary of AirAsia to take long haul flight away from Thai Airways that basing on AirAsia’s bad safety record; is a bad luck for the Ying-luck. Ying-luck now turns Bad-Luck! Corruption does not choose its gender and Yingluck is a fool to have fallen into her bad-luck at this stage.

For public knowledge on Tony The Scumbag’s strategy; he always applies espionage as his gateway to heaven! Tony Fernandez will do anything to survive from the fierce competition including bribing the middle management of  MAS to screw up the operations and paying top-dollars to Ahmad Jauhari; Azhari Dahlan; Zaharah Zaid and remain as the champion eventhough his AirAsia’s debts-growth rose and tripled to maximum.  Tony’s next con-job is to shake those who rejected his proposal and initiatives – Revenge will rise!

Stay tuned to us for more updates on this scumbag – Tony Fernandez the pig asshole fat boy!

The New World Order on Privatization – Part 3

Previously published for Part I and Part II, here is the Part III on The Effect on Employment.

Many observers fear that privatization and the associated efficiency improvements will require large labor force reductions both before privatization as governments cut the workforce and after as privatized firms continue to restructure; also narrated that large-scale job losses have been associated with privatization in most transition countries, and new private sector growth had not been sufficient to absorb labor retrenched by formerly state-owned enterprises.

The following is the examples of some countries that give a flavor of the employment challenge associated with privatization:

1. Bulgaria:, Industrial employment in Bulgaria fell by 31.3 per cent; employment in privatized firms fell from 4 million to 1 million people, between December 1989 and December 1991.
2. Czech Republic: A government survey of 572 companies — 101 in food, 159 in engineering, 184 in manufacturing and 128 in construction — revealed a “significant decline in employment”, with engineering (12 per cent) showing the sharpest drop, manufacturing and construction each cutting jobs by 10 per cent, and the food sector by 4 per cent.
3. Hungary: Employment in engineering dropped by 12 per cent, in manufacturing by 10 per cent, in construction by 10 per cent and in food processing by 4 per cent during 1992 and 1993. Before privatization the lighting company Tungsram employed 35,000 people which were left 9,500 after privatization by 1993. This was done mainly through early retirement and voluntary redundancy, alongside a freeze on recruitment. Many of the jobs were redundant as a result of administrative functions being centralized with the new owner’s offices outside Hungary. As a result, non-manual grades were affected disproportionately by the Tungsram job losses.
4. East Germany: The numbers in employment fell from 9 million before transition to 6.3 million by the end of 1992; the numbers employed in enterprises under the privatization agency, the Treuhandanstalt, fell from 4.1 million to 1.2 million during that period.
5. Poland: Government research into 130 companies (24 per cent in manufacturing, 45 per cent in construction and 31 per cent in trade and services), employing 285 each on average, showed that employment fell by 15 per cent in the first year and by 25 per cent over the first two years after privatization, leveling-off in the third year with a drop of a further approximately 2 per cent. A study of ten privatized Polish industrial and trade companies indicated decreases in employment averaging around 12.5 per cent. In the Bialystok Municipal Refuse Collection Enterprises, privatized with a large employee stake, employment halved over the first year, and, as a result of being shareholders, the workers received no severance pay.
6. Russian Federation: At the Shatura Furniture Company, introduction of an electronic data management system enabled nearly half the 3,700 jobs to be cut while Uralmash, the heavy machinery manufacturer in the Urals, reduced employment from 70,000 people to 20,000.
7. Viet Nam: Between 1988 and 1992, 1.5 million workers, equivalent to 20 per cent of the urban labor force, were retrenched from state enterprises and the civil service.

Despite the concern about possible job losses, studies undertaken by World Bank showed that “African government have done very little to track the effects of privatization on employment.”

Not only that privatization is causing unemployment in Tanzania, most of workers lost their jobs before Privatization started, because more than 70 enterprises were closed and workers lost their jobs.

It concluded that despite all these successes the government goal to employment rate has not been met since most of workers lost their job at aftermath of privatization. It also concluded that privatization has a significantly negative impact on total and workers’ employment.

In the light of evidences, Pamacheche and Koma (2007) suggested that privatization is in the interest of employees, although there are a few exceptions to this.

Such benefits take three forms:

1. employment levels tended to increase after privatization;
2. remuneration packages tended to improve after privatization and;
3. many employees bought shares at discounted prices in the privatized firms and these benefited when share prices eventually rose.

In cases where employees lost their jobs as a result of privatization, such employees tended to receive generous severance packages. Severance and retirement incentives buy labor support and allow privatization and its benefits to happen and, where unemployment insurance systems are not in place, mitigate the social impact of layoffs.

In some cases, the reduction in the level of employment took place prior to privatization and as such, could be attributed to the need for greater efficiency, and not just privatization. In cases where shut down enterprises were re-opened by private investors, employees benefited directly.

Evidence argued that many enterprises have been privatized with their labor force intact, either because increasing competition led to labor force adjustments under public ownership or because new private investors were willing to take on modest levels of over staffing that could be absorbed by new investments and dynamic expansion.

More important, particularly in sectors with large investment backlogs, privatization and the investments that accompany it have created new jobs at both the enterprise and sector levels. Workers remaining with privatized firms have often benefited by obtaining better-paying jobs, company shares, and improved training and career development prospects.

In general, privatization has had a minimal effect on employment in countries that carried out labor reforms well before privatization.

Chile, for example, began extensive labor market reforms in the early 1970s by rationalizing state enterprise employment and wages and changing labor market regulations regarding the hiring and firing workers. These reforms led to significant employment reductions by the early 1980s in both public and private firms.

As a result the second round of privatization that began in 1985 and involved larger firms in sectors such as telecommunications and electricity resulted in no layoffs.

In fact, employment in these firms increased by 10 percent as a result of overall improvements in the economy but also of the new investments that accompanied privatization.

Privatization has also had a minimal effect on workers in competitive enterprises. Ghana, Mexico, Morocco, and Tunisia are among many countries that have been able to sell such enterprises with their labor force more or less intact. However large employment reductions have often accompanied the privatization of state enterprises that were, in the past, heavily subsidized and protected from competition.

As reported from some studies in 1994 that in Mexico Employment in four steel plants was cut from 35,578 in 1985 to 17,485 in 1994, with the largest declines occurring just before privatization in 1991.

The privatization in the early 1990s of the two heavily overstaffed and highly unionized state airlines also involved major downsizing before privatization. In the case of Aero-Mexico a massive strike led the government to declare the company bankrupt.

The company went into liquidation and its assets were sold; new owner rehired only a fraction of the workforce. In the case of the second airline, Mexicana, the prospective buyers insisted that the lab or force be cut before privatization, and the government reduced it by more than 40 percent.

What’s next?  The Effect on Employees’ Income

In a research about Tanzania, it was reported that salaries and other incentives for workers have been increased and improved, for example before privatization the lowest salary plus other incentives at Tanga Cement Company was 120 USD per month, now after privatization the salary is more than 360 USD.

Tanzania Breweries Limited for lowest salary was 72 USD per month before privatization and after raised to 96 USD per month. Earle (2006) is of the view that the implications of privatization for wages are also ambiguous. New owners may reduce wages as part of a general cost-cutting policy, but if the firm expands, it may have to offer higher wages to attract new workers.

New private owners may also be more likely to adopt skill-biased technologies, resulting in a compositional shift toward higher-paid workers. Depending on the relative strength of such factors, wages may either rise or fall as a result of privatization.

The Upjohn Institute, in collaboration with partners from Heriot-Watt University in Edinburgh and the Central European University Labor Project in Budapest, has recently undertaken an empirical analysis of the effects of privatization on the wage bill, employment, and wage rates of firms in Hungary, Romania, Russia, and Ukraine—countries where thousands of businesses were privatized in a relatively short period of time during the 1990s.

These four countries had varied success with privatization reforms.

Hungary was considered one of the most successful, Russia and Ukraine were less successful, and Romania was somewhere in the middle. The new research in this project, however, finds no evidence of large systematic negative consequences of privatization for employment and wages.

Privatization is in the interest of employees and when the industries are given in the private hands their performance is increased manifold; remuneration packages tended to improve because employees are given better wages and salaries in order to improve their productivity and retention in the business. Privatization can be followed immediately by worse terms and conditions, but such an initial impact can be reversed later when a restructured company is able to reward employees for their contribution to its success with improvements in pay and conditions.

However, the converse initial improvement followed by later deterioration has also occurred. The examples of decline of salaries due to privatization of many countries as mentioned in following lines.

In post-reform Viet Nam, the wages of civil servants and state enterprise employees declined by 60 per cent from 1985 to 1991, followed by partial reversal of that trend in 1993. In 1989, a Vietnamese civil servant’s salary could buy 2.3 kg of rice a day and that of a state enterprise worker 3.3 kg, so that, at most, only one person apart from the principal breadwinner could be supported by the wage, compared to four people in 1985. In addition, health and education subsidies declined.

In Poland, average wages and salaries fell by 27 per cent between 1989 and 1992, opening up inequalities in income. A study of ten privatized Polish companies revealed a tendency for wages to increase sharply immediately after privatization but to stop doing so soon afterwards in favor of performance-related pay incentives.

In Estonia, foreign owners have blocked pay increases. A law on collective bargaining, which took effect in 1993, forbids new private owners from unilaterally scrapping collective agreements; it does, however, allow them to be renegotiated.

In Kazakhstan, according to a labor ministry official at an ILO seminar, while the ministry has aimed to ensure that the principles of the ILO on fair wages are followed, external pressures have pushed policy in another direction.

It is believe the consultants of the World Bank and IMF are the people dictating such policies the Governments, including of minimum wages, so that the real wages are falling. So the cheap labor of the Soviet Union, which was criticized for being cheap, remains cheap and gets cheaper. The experts of the IMF calmly ignore these principles and as there are more of these experts in our country, so the politics of ILO in this field has a rather small impact and low profile.

It had been reported that non-payment of wages (after privatization), sometimes for months at a time, has also caused great hardship on employees.

Sometimes this has been caused by government subsidies being cut or simply not paid as failure to restructure has become unsustainable. But there is also anecdotal evidence that, in some cases, managers have deliberately withheld wages due to employees in the hope of financially forcing them to sell (to the managers) their privatization vouchers at knock down prices.

How about the Effects on Working Conditions?

Sri Lanka, analyzing effect of privatization on workers who opted to remain with the privatized firm, expressed that overall the working conditions of workers who remained in the privatized enterprises seem to be at least as favorable as they were when the firms were SOEs.

In several instances there have been wage rises and better working conditions. For example, some firms now offer workers transport (Kabool Lanka Ltd), wage rises (Telecom) and better housing and sanitation facilities. In SOEs, the workers were entitled to take 42 days leave annually, absenteeism was not heavily penalized and public holidays were high. They also enjoyed a high sense of security and treated the public sector job as their entitlement rather than a position that had to be secured by efficient performance. Another reported that in Hungary, while some privatization contracts have committed foreign companies to retaining staff levels for a set period of time, there have been other adverse effects, such as cuts in staff training.

The same country has also had the opposite experience, however. In the General Electric takeover of Tungsram, for example, although jobs and pay were cut, the company quickly put in place a number of environmental and health and safety measures.

These included monitoring factory air and noise pollution levels, fixing the worst problems immediately and adopting plans to make further gradual improvements.

New safety devices were installed and comprehensive worker training programs introduced. As a result, the number of serious work-related injuries has been substantially reduced.

The changes or new privatization structure have big effects on Employees’ Health And Performance.

Experts have expressed results of their study that majority of respondents reported deterioration in conditions of employment and operational participation since privatization. It concluded that once an organization begins changing, its employees might face threats to their jobs, roles, positions, and resources. These threats can lower the employees’ trust in their organization as a whole which can be negatively reflected in employees’ attitudes toward their work. They found that stress is a general and global phenomenon encompassing man’s psychological, physical, familial, and social dimensions.

Researchers have made great efforts studying the effects of this stress on mental and physical health of employees to better understand its nature. When individuals contemplate the stress of organizational change, their perceptions, choice of reactions, and working attitudes all strongly influence whether the change will be successful and if the newly reconstituted organization will function efficiently or not.

Researchers have also concluded that after privatization, the job stress of employees increased significantly. This increase was associated with a decrease in mental health. They illustrated a recent study conducted in Thailand, which concluded that the organizational change has a significant association with more psychological stress, which in turn, resulted in poor job performance.

In Canada after privatization employees of a large healthcare provider surviving from downsizing had a higher degree of delay and also a higher degree of stress due to less control exercised over their jobs.

Consequently, they enjoyed less job satisfaction and living standards and worse general health. In this respect, International Labor Organization in 2001 discussing safety and job health, reported that privatization, organizational restructuring and increasing the number of small business units increase unemployment, stress, alcoholism, job insecurity and prolongation of work hours, all of which lead to psychic trauma at work and private life.

Moreover, it has been shown that stress and its related diseases lead to an increase in the incidence rate of indigestion, heart disease and mental disorders.

Reports shown that in the Russian Federation, conditions of labor have been affected by the “marginal” state of the economy, in transition from a planned economy to a market system. Eighty- eight per cent of equipment in Russian factories is obsolete, 400,000 work in unhealthy conditions, 8,000 every year (more than died in Afghanistan) die because of working conditions, and 14,000 become handicapped we made an inspection in newly privatized companies about how conventions on labor were being respected — these were conditions of real slavery, no human conditions. A slave owner says you must work from morning to evening, no choice, no trade unions.

Privatization also contributes to the Effects on Social Welfare of Workers

Consultants have expressed that in some cases, the true scale of unemployment has been concealed by the practice of state-owned enterprises keeping workers at home on some proportion of their pay.

Workers have also been badly affected as, many of them lost and entitlement and the social impact was worse. It was further argued that even where unemployment levels have remained relatively low, a new phenomenon has emerged — that of long-term unemployment.

In the Czech Republic, for example, despite low levels of unemployment, by the end of 1994 over a third of all job applicants had been without work for more than one year. Only those firms, which have managed to gain access to resources and modern technology, have been surviving. However, the foreign investment that can play the key part in resolving those challenges can also bring other problems.

As privatization enables formerly closed economies to join the globalization trend, employment opportunities can erode, as the Tungsram example in Hungary demonstrates.

Next episode will explain the effects on the share of ownership!

About Nufam’s stupidity – Episode 2

What does NUFAM stand for? Literally; it is an acronym for Nuclear Fire Planning and Assessment Model. However; NUFAM is also known as THE trade fair for commercial vehicles in southern Germany.

In Malaysia; NUFAM is a Flight Attendant Union for rude; disrespectful; frustrated and disgruntled workers and to be exact it is a National Union for Frustrated Attendant Malaysia. It’s website at http://www.nufam.net cannot be found – When a registered trade union’s website has gone kaput – it’s a sign that it has lost its interest in what it really stand in for.

In the last few days; the Malaysian local dailies were busy issuing statements produced by a registered trade union for the disgruntled employees of Malaysia Airlines on threatening to stage a walk-out protest – read here – Nufam threatens to walk out next month.

An employee’s threatening behavior can be no more than a way for an employee to blow off steam or it can lead to violent episodes. MAS management should evaluate an employee who threatens the airline’s CEO and take action based on the seriousness of the situation. Employees who make detailed and specific threats may be closer to violent action than those who make vague threats.

The Union for frustrated flight attendants in that statement against Malaysia Airlines had threatened to stage a massive staff walk out if Malaysia Airlines failed to withdraw the suspension from flying duty on its President – Ismail a.k.a. Mr. Lipas Man and accord immediate recognition to Nufam as the bargaining body for its cabin crew.

This crazy yet stupid Nufam Union also claimed there will be approximately 1000 cabin crew currently working for Malaysia Airlines will stage the walk-out by next month if the suspension of Nufam President – Mr. Lipas Man is not withdrawn.

This public humiliation against MAS management by MAS disgruntled employees leaves a lasting impression on MAS customers and can really kill workplace morale.

Malaysia Airlines has 3,800 strength for cabin crew of which 90% of the strength will always be away for flying duties leaving the remaining 10% will be on the ground for days off as scheduled. Contrary to Nufam’s threat against Malaysia Airlines; there can only be a total of 380 cabin crew on the ground to fully backed Nufam President on the day for walk-out.

Given the fact that Malaysia Airlines employed 95% locals where almost 100% of locals are committed to paying monthly subscription credit card bills; hire-purchase scheme and mortgages; we doubt these cabin crew will take the risk to stage a walk-out for Mr. Lipas Man.

We believe those cabin crew will not stage a walk-out for Nufam President after he humiliated a reputable airline’s CEO. We figure the number as predicted by Nufam could be wrong. Perhaps Nufam meant 1000 cabin crew minus last two digit of zeros which is only 10 cabin crew as in the picture above.

Out of 10 cabin crew; we figure probably only 5 stupid cabin crew would stage the walk-out with Mr. Lipas Man if only Tony Fernandez in AirAsia is willing to take them all. Walking out of a secured employment or opting an instant resignation is truly impulsive for youngsters.

However, if applying with logic we believe no one would ever risk a decent job to strike against the employer for others. Nufam must stop bull-shitting to the public and making threats against your own employer.

Read our first episode – here! Do stay tuned to our next episode 3!

The New World Order on Privatization – Part 2

The term “privatization” describes a shift in the ownership of assets or the provision of services from the government or public sector to the private sector. The scope of privatization, however, varies greatly in different parts of the world. In the former Soviet bloc countries of Eastern Europe, privatization means changing the ownership and control of all major industries and utilities from the national government to the private sector.

As the privatization trend gains momentum in the new world; has come to encompass a variety of economic and political changes including the transfer of assets, services, and responsibilities from the state to the private sector; a lessening in the regulatory powers of government; and an increase in the individual’s responsibility in meeting his or her own needs. Regardless of definition, privatization is driven by both specific public policy decisions and general socioeconomic trends.

Forms of Privatization

• Contracting Out or Outsourcing is the first and probably the most prevalent which can be described as public sector choice and public sector financing, with private sector production of the selected service. Under contracting out, the citizenry makes elected officials aware of a collective needs. The government is also responsible for financing these respective services—generally through its taxing powers. Hence, the government finances the service while the private sector provides it. The government determines the service level and pays the amount specified in the contract, but leaves production decisions to the private contractor. However, if this does happens to the National Carrier; Malaysia Airlines – The government workers who previously performed the job may undergo “employee dislocation”—a polite term for layoffs, transfers to less desirable positions, etc.

• Franchising is another form of privatization similar to a monopoly privilege awarded to a private firm that provides the service but with the price of the service being regulated and determined by the state. Most utilities, such as gas, electricity, and telephone service, are provided under the franchise form of privatization. A relatively recent service, cable TV, is also generally awarded as a monopoly privilege. Another important distinction of monopoly franchising is that the consumer makes direct payments to the provider for the service.

• User Fees is a variation on franchising and contracting out fees. Under this system of privatization, the consumer pays a set fee to cover all or part of the service costs. A municipality may, for instance, charge a set fee per household for trash collection rather than pay for that service out of a general tax pool.

• Load-shedding is the last form of privatization whereby the government steps aside entirely. The consumer is responsible for deciding whether or not to make use of the service, the selection of the provider, and all payments for the service.

The effects on Privatization will lead to Employee Layoffs and Retrenchment

Arguments for Privatization – the proponents of privatization argue that government providers have no real incentive to hold down costs or to provide quality service.

Private firms, on the other hand, are motivated by a profit motive that depends on holding costs down. The lower the cost incurred by the firm in satisfying the contract, the greater the realized profit.

Private providers are also motivated by competition from other potential service providers. Competition between potential private suppliers to win a contract generally results in the lowest cost to the government and the taxpayer for the specified level of service.

It was well-argued that the “Competitive markets are rooted in private property, and there is no way to stimulate competitive conditions under conditions of government financing or government production”.

However, politically the most difficult and feared impact of privatization is employee layoffs. The fear is justified because many public enterprises are greatly overstaffed, as they are often used as instruments of job creation.

Privatization typically is associated with reduction and reorganization of the labor force, either in preparation for privatization or soon afterwards. It had been revealed that a universal concern in privatization process is the effect it has on labor.

Many observers fear that privatization will cause major job losses as new owners of privatized firms shed excess labor to improve efficiency and as divesting governments cut the workforce to prepare for privatization.

Fearing unemployment and the loss of benefits, labor unions and state enterprise workers are often among the most vocal and organized opponents of privatization, taking actions to deal or block reform. It was reported that in most Eastern European countries privatization accompanied by redundancies and the introduction of hard budget constraints on enterprises has resulted in large-scale job losses. This has created a pool of unemployed workers, which often cannot be absorbed by other privatized firms or new firms.

The expressed by quoting empirical examples, that depending on the results of the voluntary departure program, redundant staff may still need to be involuntarily laid off. Though, politically the most difficult of all restructuring options, retrenchment of workers who did not accept the voluntary program have been sometimes necessary in the last phase of the restructuring.

In Argentina railways the last 5,000-6,000 workers who did not accept voluntary retirement were declared redundant on the basis of performance and laid off. About 3,000 additional workers were sent home with 50 percent of their salaries.

In Brazil more than 14,500 of the 18,000 redundant railway employees were terminated by December 1996 with a large number opting for early retirement benefits. Private operators of three recently introduced systems have further deepened the staff retrenchment program initiated by the railways company, cutting as much as half the labor force they received with the concession.

In Brazil railways, redundant staff was given the choice of voluntary separation. On average, the scheme, however, are laid off with legal entitlements plus a separation package equivalent to 80 percent of the incentive offered under the voluntary program. The railway also agreed to pay an involuntary separation grant to remaining redundant staff that was not hired by the concessionaire, up to a maximum number of staff specified in the bidding documents.

Compensation packages for layoffs beyond the specified number were the concessionaire’s responsibility. As a result of this approach most of the 16,000 or so redundant workers took up the incentives and left through the voluntary program.

In Bangladesh more than 22,000 workers in the state’s jute corporation were retrenched between 1990 and 1993 as part of the restructuring and privatization program; further reductions are required for the privatization or closure of the remaining mills.

In Mexico a recent study of 218 privatized firms across a range of sectors found that the firms had reduced the number of white- and blue-collar employees by nearly half in the four years before sale. In some companies the reductions were significantly higher.

Many asserted that commonly accepted trade-offs that occur throughout the privatization process typically create an imbalance of accrued benefits to various segments of the workforce and members of the community in general.

There is concern that privatization negatively impacts the most vulnerable segments of the workforce. As illustrated; the privatization of a water system in Bolivia and an energy system in Thailand increased unemployment and decreased consumer welfare in both countries.

Therefore it was asserted that the greatest opposition to privatizing a firm usually comes from the firm’s own employees, who are fearful of wage cuts and job losses.

The other argument – Private firms may also be more innovative, using different approaches to providing a service. Government, by contrast, tends to stick with known approaches since changes often create problems, especially with an entrenched bureaucracy or a strident municipal bond.

Private firms may also use earnings to finance research or to purchase capital equipment relating directly to the service, while governments may not be able or willing to allocate revenue in the same manner given the many competing demands for tax dollars.

Another contributing factor to this cost disparity is the general overall efficiency of the private sector. The private sector has a strong incentive to operate efficiently.

Private firms that spending more money and employing more people to do the same amount of work will have lower profit margins and decreased profits. In the long run they will no longer be able to compete in a market economy.

The disciplining effect of competition, however, does not affect the public sector. Government agencies generally operate in a non-competitive environment and therefore can charge more for their services and be less concerned with consumer satisfaction.

Government services that are provided in a non-competitive market also deny the consumer comparability. The consumer or taxpayer has no real way of evaluating the price of a government service. This tends to make government less responsive to consumer needs.

The private sector generally offers the consumer a higher quality of service while keeping costs under control.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies commented the above privatization argument does not prove the trend of privatization will guarantee an increase in efficiency and productivity as the case proven by AirAsia – the first private-owned airlines in Malaysia by Tony Fernandez.

In fact, Tony Fernandez proves that privatization on airlines business is provided with more rooms for exploiting the labor force. It is well-known that AirAsia; a private-owned airlines is forever struggling to uphold its safety performance and barely surviving from the market competition.

Malaysia Airlines; however is state-government owned airlines has established a proven record of its safety performance as compared to a private-owned airlines – AirAsia.

Simply put; privatization is politically a game-changer  and it has been advancing by the political party to restructure a monopoly system for a new regime to rule over. Ultimately, privatization is a political process.

Because the burden of privatization will fall most heavily on the public workforce and their jobs and income are at risk. Public employees and their unions are strongly opposing privatization.

It is because the government almost always operates as a monopoly provider, the decision to privatize usually means de-monopolization, even if not always robust, free-market competition.

Regardless of the mode of privatization, the government could have improvised the common motivation for engaging in all four types of privatization to substitute more efficient business operations for what are seen as less efficient, bureaucratic and often politicized operations in the public sector. Such way, the fear of massive job losses could be lessening and monitored.

The key difference of Privatization is the substitution of COMPETITION for MONOPOLY.

The Effect on Privatization – The New World Order on Privatization Part 1

To be continued – next episode 3 will cover “The Effect on Employment”.

AirAsia the Scams Airlines causing many stranded without refunds – Part II

Previously exposed here have been receiving very serious feedback from flyers of AirAsia.

Natasha wrote;

We have had nothing but endless complaints about the budget air line air asia even complaining to the CEO Mr Tony Fernandez himself gets you nowhere now that should tell you what type of air line this is. We are not letting this slip by and we will be seeking and taking all avenues to make this airline reimburse us what we are due. Advise to future travelers think twice about this carrier as it may be cheap but the problems you have after are what cost you thousands.

Chong wrote;

The previous article is a little outdated but still good for others to know. Scoot Airlines have already started but fly very few routes. In fact, the scam-like practices of AirAsia is even more now. I have these to share…..

(1) In the beginning, AirAsia do correspond via phone calls or e-mails. They cancelled one of my flight booking and all 4 of us lost a total of over RM2,000 due to no fault of ours. During the correspondence process, they change people and e-mail address several times and after one year, they told me they don’t have records of my booking anymore and that any seek for refund cannot be later than 6 months.

(2) Beware of their flight time change trick. Once they changed their flight time to more than 45 mins(I think now they change to 60 minutes) delay so we decided to cancel our flights and opt for full refunds. Their staffs in Malaysia will not give you any acknowledgement in black and white. They will tell you it’s standard procedure and not to worry. So we canceled the trip plan. Few days later, they rescheduled their time again to be earlier and denied that I have ever seek for refund as there wasn’t any records on their side.

(3) Now they don’t even entertain you in person for any refunds. All refund-seeking process in Malaysia must be done via their e-form, of which you will have no prove that you have submitted it.

(4) In Malaysia, they have reduced the airport tax amount and increased the “admin or other fees” amount several times so that you will not get any airport tax refund for missed flights(after lessing out their processing fee).

(5) My worst experience was when a friend of mine whom I booked the tickets for him cannot make it for the trip when he was hospitalized due to old age sickness.

AirAsia told me I can get refunds for cancellations due to medical reasons but after going through all the problems of getting the medical documents, they keep changing their requests hoping that I will give up seeking the refund. When I finally met all their demand, they told me I shall not get a full refund but have to minus some “processing fee” charges. I have no choice but to accept since a dollar is still a dollar. Guess what ? They told me the money cannot be returned to my credit card which pay the tickets but can only be returned in a form of a credit shell that must belongs to the passenger concerned and he must have an AirAsia account and e-mail address to process it.

Huh !! The passenger is already dying in the hospital and if he had an e-mail address or AirAsia account, he probably don’t need me to buy the tickets for him earlier.

(6) In another instance, which is quite similar to no. 5 above, a friend of mine purchased some tickets with his own AirAsia account but paid by my credit card. When he seek for refund due to flight cancellation, they told him the refund cannot go to him but to my credit card. See the irony?

I am sure they are other “tricks” they used that I am unaware.

My advice to anyone is “be prepared to lose your money if you fly with AirAsia and only if you can really get cheap tickets and worth your risk”.

Recently(2013) I have seen their fares on offer are the same price for the same period, offered 3 times; and some of their AirAsiaX fare is in fact even cheaper during their 2nd and 3rd time offer.

Lawrence wrote;

I recently booked 4 tickets (including 2 kids – Air Asia do not provide special fare for kids unlike MH) from KL to Langkawi at RM608. I reached airport late by 5 minutes and asked to go by baggage security (have only laptop bag without laptop) even before I went near the Airlines boarding counters and asked to go around unnecessarily instead of going through a straight path.

This took another 5 minutes and when reached counter they just go through my online ticket and kept on trying from their mobile phone and told boarding closed and pls check at another counter who can help. At the next counter he told I am 15 minutes past before boarding closed and told I should take another flight. I was astonished at their lethargic reply when I pleaded that I entered around 40mins before boarding time close so can you consider it. He informed me very cool the next flight is one hour behind and pay 1230RM.

I understood it is complete cheating with all the latest methods if you think it is legal (it may be). I am not interested to travel by another flight when my earlier booked seats sold to another 4 people who might bought it with high price and they are trying to squeeze more from me. I asked them to refund and he informed only airport tax be refunded per person RM8. My family is waiting with all hopes flying to the island and imagine my situation. So beware!

Micheal wrote;

Agreed with the details of the scam about refunds, I booked and paid in December 2011 for 3 people flying Phuket – Christchurch return, and have had nothing but lies and broken promises regarding refund… I am seeking other people to explore a class action against these scammers, cheats and liars.

Larisa Smirnova wrote;

I booked my trip online and paid for it, however after the payment my webpage went blank so I did not obtain the reservation number for the trip. My Bank confirms that the transaction went through, however I received no confirmation from Air Asia, and Air Asia reps could not find my reservation in your system (using neither my name, nor my email address, phone number). They could confirm that they charged me, and promised that they would refund me within 30-60 days. I am really scared to see this page on Fb… Will I be able to get my refund?

Yewch Lam wrote;

I’m still waitng waiting for the refund for my tax since feb,and you know what, apparently they are not going to do that.

Rain Gambo wrote;

Bought 3 flight tickets from them on April 19, 2013. May 24, they cancelled ALL their June 15 flights leaving Clark – my flights affected. They sent a generic email with no new schedules. We had to beg beg beg for them to send us updates or the next steps. Had to beg, plead and bugged them for 2 weeks before they sent us our booking status. Filed for refund as the new schedule didn’t fit well in our schedule (and who else would trust them given the quality of customer service they provide). if getting updates and schedule were a real bother and pain in the (&(*00. Wait til you file for refund! They told me refund process must take a process of 30 Banking days. BUT, the 30 Banking days would start once their team acknowledge my refund case. Unfortunately, they are not acknowledging my refund request. They won’t put it in their system. I feel robbed in broad daylight. Much like modern day theft. They got my money as early as April 19. Cancelled my flights and gave me unfavorable flights. It’s now June 7 and I still don’t have my money back. They won’t even acknowledge my refund claim!

Come to think of it, they get people’s money, they hold on to it for months. They don’t give the flights you paid for. They hold on to your money some more. You (might) settle for a schedule you hate rather than not get your money back. And, if by chance, you get lucky and you get your money back after 10,000 years, they give it back without paying interest. They don’t need to borrow from banks. The naive people give them their money — free and without interest.

Plods wrote;

Safety Concern & Excess Baggage RIP OFF- Air Asia
My first and LAST booking with Air Asia

SAFETY Concern:
Air Asia are placing monetary gain for “Hot Seats” ahead of safety!

RE: 31st July flight AK1948 departing Kuala Lumpur at 6.45pm
My seat on this flight was directly behind the 2 Emergency Exits rows, seat 15E.

Of the 12 seats within the Emergency Exit rows only 2 seats were taken, 13C and 13F.

I was one of the first to board and at NO time were these two passengers approached by Air Asia staff.

They were NOT asked whether they were happy to assist in case of an emergency…

AND

At NO time were they instructed by staff how or when to activate the emergency exits.This is something I have NEVER seen on a flight before and I have flown with many carriers Qantas, Jetstar, Virgin, Thai, British and Tiger airlines.

These seats are charged an additional fee for the “Hot Seats”. The person in 13F was a very small lady who may not have been capable to assist in case of an emergency.

Why were these people not instructed by Air Asia staff?
What is Air Asia’s policy if no emergency exit seats are booked?

Excess Baggage – What a “RIP OFF” by Air Asia:

On my return trip from Hobart to Bangkok I booked to bring my bicycle back.

I have never transported a bike before so I was unsure of the weight. I initially booked 15kg Sports Equipment with Air Asia at a cost of $45 AUS.

I was surprised when I booked the bike in at Hobart with Virgin Airlines that it weighed 20kg. This did not impact the cost from Virgin as I had booked for 1 piece of baggage which provided for weight up to 23kg. I flew from Hobart to Melbourne on 30th July and was flying with Air Asia the next day.

I logged onto the Air Asia internet site that night with the intention of increasing the weight for my bike from 15 to 20kg. The site would not allow me to access my booking. This was a surprise as Australian airlines do not allow you to finalize your booking until the last 48 hours prior to flying.

Air Asia promote pre-booked baggage saves you 66%, so when I was unable to increase the weight I expected to pay an additional $20 – $30.

I was HORRIFIED when I was asked to pay an ADDITIONAL $200 AUS!!!!

AN ADDITIONAL 400%!!!

I was extremely frustrated and spoke with a manager who advised there was absolutely nothing that she could do. All Natasha could say was “I understand your frustration, I would be extremely frustrated too”. As I was in transit I had no option but to pay the whopping $200 fee, or leave the bike at the airport.

Upon my return I emailed Air Asia requesting a refund of the excess baggage charge. Their response was the charge was in line with their excess baggage fees.

I then phoned Air Asia who responded with:

1. Why did you pay the fee in the first place?
As I said earlier I was in transit, I had two options pay the fee or surrender the bike.

2. I was told if I was an Air Asia member I could have accessed the booking.

Once I booked the flight with Air Asia they invited me to become a member and I did join. But because the booking was prior to the membership the booking was not referenced.

3. Why didn’t you phone Air Asia?
Did not cross my mind, all airlines promote do it yourself via the internet.

I wish to share my HORRIFYING experience of Air Asia with as many people as I can. DO NOT fly Air Asia, I certainly will never fly with them again.

This is how they closed their emailed response to my inquiry:

“We apologize for the inconvenience caused. We truly appreciate your valued patronage and we look forward to serve you better in the future.”

WHAT A JOKE!!

For more of AirAsia’s scams; please visit facebook page https://www.facebook.com/AirAsiaCheats the community service to protect the Malaysian flyers too and everyone who have been cheated by AirAsia because AirAsia consistently misinforming and misleading people about refunds on its cancelled flights. The page is for people who are suffering from this cheating behavior to group together and expose AirAsia’s scams and lies.

Whilst updating information on our site; we’ve heard Tony Fernandez is losing more of his hairs and growing fatter each day due to the stress he has imposed upon himself by cheating many flyers and seeking to collaborate with Malindo Air as we speak. Cheers!

Do stay tuned on Malaysiaairlinesfamilies JV with AirAsiafamilies for more stories of AirAsia’s scamming strategy