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 –

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…

buildingtomb20132buildingtomb2013And 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.

numb20131Now 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…nufam2014The 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.

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

Here’s the memoir of Nufam 2013…

numb20132numb20137Nufam’s memoir for 2014…

tomb2013Digging a grave…

tomb2014Building a tomb and finally…

tomb20142Done 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!

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!

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…


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!!!!


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.”


For more of AirAsia’s scams; please visit facebook page 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

AirAsia runs Malaysia Airlines with defective management skills – Episode 4

Extreme Prejudice is the code for AirAsia on its active campaign annihilating Malaysia Airlines.

AirAsia, a low-cost airline is trying to survive from the global fuel hikes has resorted to deploying its most loyal espionage into demolishing the national airlines – Malaysia Airlines.

As exposed in our previous Episode 1, 2 and 3; here is the evidence of AirAsia that runs Malaysia Airlines with defective management skills;-

On August 23rd this year, the Airfreight forwarders in Malaysia are seeking compensation and a refund on terminal charges following what is said to be the worst service disruption in the history of the MAS Advanced Cargo Centre at the KL International Airport in Sepang, involving cargo from 27 flights.

In an Aug 20, 2013 letter, of which a copy was obtained by SunBiz, to Malaysia Airlines’ cargo arm, Airfreight Forwarders Association of Malaysia (Afam) chairman Walter Culas told MASKargo Sdn Bhd that it was seeking compensation and an immediate improvement in service levels. This follows an incident which saw a complete shutdown of import services at its centre last Friday due to a shortage of workers.

Culas stated that after 6pm on Friday there was a complete no show of foreign labour at the front line as well as reduced workers turning up for work in the import breakdown area.

“As a result, there was a complete shutdown of import activities at the Advanced Cargo Centre as there was no staff to perform cargo breakdown and retrieval activities,” he said in the letter.

When contacted by SunBiz, Culas said import breakdown could not be performed on 27 flights.

“This unacceptable situation meant that our forwarders had to wait long hours at the Advanced Cargo Centre to retrieve their inbound shipments. This resulted in total productivity loss,” he added.

He said forwarders could not carry out their Customs clearance process as well as make deliveries to their customers.

“The customers also were furious as delays were affecting their production processes especially those who practice “just in time” manufacturing,” he said in the letter. All cargo could only be cleared by Sunday morning, Walter said, a two-day delay.

Describing the incident as a “fiasco of no-show”, he said the lack of workers also affected export and transhippment cargo. The exact amount of cargo affected could not be determined as at press time.

Culas told SunBiz that warehouse handling was a crucial part of cargo operations and should not be outsourced.

“It especially should not be handled by foreign workers who are unskilled. MASKargo should instead takeover and build the skill within the group itself,” he said.

Warehouse handling at the Advanced Cargo Centre is currently outsourced to Kumpulan SF Powertech Sdn Bhd a company majority-owned by Kumpulan SF Bersatu Holdings Sdn Bhd and three other individuals namely, Abdul Talib Yacob, Jamaliyah Mohd Ambia and Norita Mohd Tahir.

It has been reported that the contract worth RM10.8 million runs until October this year.

MASKargo is one of two licensed government warehouse operators. The other company is KL Airport Services Sdn Bhd, a subsidiary of DRB-Hicom Bhd.

In response, MASKargo CEO Mohd Yunus Idris told SunBiz that while there was an issue with workers at the cargo terminal last Friday, minimal services were affected.

He said two freighter flights were delayed because of the incident.

“The vendor concerned will be taken to task as per the agreement in the contract between them and MASKargo.”

Yunus defended the use of foreign workers, saying they are involved in manual job activities and are managed and supervised by technically competent supervisor and managers.

He said the outsourcing of warehouse handling is a practise since its operations at the old Subang airport in 1994.

Malaysiaairlinesfamilies is going all out exposing the scams by Tony Fernandez who leads his specific instructions designed for MAS Aerospace & Enginnering CEO – Azahari Dahlan and MAS CEO Ahmad Jauhari together with MAS Human Resource Director Zaharah Zaid to insure MAS clients will further be successively suing Malaysia Airlines for each delay on MAS Cargo functions.

Following the 23rd August’s incident; MAS Cargo CEO – Azahari Botak Dahlan continued his disruptive planning for Malaysia Airlines with his third consecutive delays on 10th September; also in this year – MAS Cargo ops once again at standstill;-

Air freight forwarders operating out of the KL International Airport in Sepang faced major delays for the third time this year at the MAS Advanced Cargo Centre on Sept 10, prompting the the Airfreight Forwarders Association of Malaysia (Afam) to once again write to operator MASkargo Sdn Bhd to complain.

In a letter dated Sept 17, 2013, a copy of which was obtained by SunBiz, Afam chairman Walter Culas said it saw a complete standstill of cargo operations at the import and export truck bays at the MAS cargo centre on Sept 10, 2013.

It attributed the service failure to a walkout staged by foreign labourers employed by the vendor.

As a result of the walk-out, no shipment could be moved in and out of the import and export bays.

Culas said foreign labourers employed by the vendor, who operates the forklifts at the import and export bays, had staged a walkout at 7pm on Sept 10 as a show of protest for not receiving their salaries.

According to the association, this was the third major incident involving a walk-out by Powertech’s employees. The first incident was said to have taken place on Jan 12 and the second on Aug 16.

In an interview last month, MASkargo CEO Mohd Yunus Idris told SunBiz that the Aug 16 walk-out incident by the vendor’s employees was caused by what it called a “banking account failure”.

“We are completely disappointed with this state of affairs as we, the freight forwarders, are made to suffer because of the failure of other parties who are not within our control.

“We believe that MASkargo has however the ability to influence or rectify the situation as the vendor is appointed by them directly. Why are we made to suffer because of other party’s mismanagement?” Afam’s Culas said in the letter, which was copied to the ministries of international trade and industry and transport and Malaysia Airlines CEO Ahmad Jauhari Yahya.

Culas said the delays have led forwarders to wait long hours at the cargo centre to retrieve their inbound shipments, resulting in productivity loss.

“This also meant that the forwarders could not carry out their Customs clearance process as well as make deliveries to their customers. The customers also were furious as delays were affecting their production processes, especially those who practise “just-in-time” manufacturing,” he added.

The walk-out also affected the export operations as there were no export bins provided nor were there any forklift drivers to handle the shipments during this period.

“As a result, final acceptance could not be performed as final reweigh procedures could not be carried out. This caused a massive jam at the export dock when dozens of trucks could not unload their shipments. They had to wait there for hours until after midnight due to this walk-out,” Culas wrote.

Afam is also seeking refunds on terminal charges as well as compensation to the forwarders affected from MASkargo.

The other question is why such jobs are given to vendors and who owns the vendors? Who called for the vendor staff walked-out? We believe it has connection to Azahari Dahlan; Ahmad Jauhari and Zaharah Zzzz the sleeping “Pig” who employs Hayati Dato’ Ali who were the vendors appoint-er before she was chased out from MAS airport functions.

Did Azahari systematically delay MAS flights to disrupt MAS cargo functions simultaneously? If such is true; we have just witnessed a workplace FIXED-UP program designed by Tony Fernandez and his proxies – Ahmad Jauhari; Azahari Dahlan and Zaharah Zzzz.

Is it STILL not evident for MAS Shareholders and can’t we see through who’s not capable of running Malaysia Airlines? Is it STILL not crystal clear of the indicative patterns by Ahmad Jauhari that is truly working for Tony Fernandez?

STILL; are MAS staff blinded by the colors of these EVIL musketeers – Ahmad Jauhari; Azahari Botak and Zaharah Zzzz.

Once again; Ahmad Jauhari is paid to see through MAS; a truly destroyed company before he ventures into AirAsia as the next possible adviser or board of director.

Be warned “people” who work for Malaysia Airlines that you’re not safe – even the board of directors are not safe in this game-changing ploy.

The delays are plotted to divert MAS clients towards signing with Tony Fernandez’s new cargo business deals via its proxies.

Stay tuned people for more stories on the defective management led by Ahmad Jauhari.

AirAsia’s scams & lies – Part III

Is Tony Fernandez revolutionizing against safety conformity?

New MOTTO for AirAsia – Zero Safety Guaranteed!

Here’s another article written by ABIW for our world readers!

Spending too much time on the general election, we must have missed some news on Air Asia. We’ve discussed of Tony F’s plan to have a publicly listed Air Asia subsidiary in every country in Asia and possibly Europe. It raised our concern before that it could start a contagion effect on the financial market of the region.

Airline operation requires heavy funding. For fear, the European and American market will close up on Air Asia’s funding for many issues on their operations including safety, Tony F went for the regional bourses.

It could serve to by-pass local regulatory restrictions and a useful “arm twisting” as he threatened to move to Indonesia.

Only thing was his takeover of Batavia Air was aborted and the Indonesian grass is not as green as he thought any grass on the other side should be. He scraped through Thai listing but had to pullout of Japan. But, we weren’t aware that Tony F bought Zest Airways.

Since one of Tony’s troll wants to play cheap diversion game on the issue of safety on Air Asia, he is a special posting. Other issues will have to be on standby.

The airline that claim in their slogan as “Asia’s most refreshing new airline” is only an airline with a fleet of 15 and under order 31 new aircrafts.

Zest Airways was established as Asian Spirit in September 1995 by three friends: Antonio “Toti” Turalba, Emmanuel “Noel” Oñate and Archibald Po, who contributed $1 million each to start up the Airline Employees Cooperative (AEC).

They invited 36 of their friends, mostly former Philippine Airlines employees, to run Asian Spirit through a salary-to-equity swap deal. The Po family held the majority of ownership.

It started operations in April 1996 with two second hand Dash 7 aircraft servicing only one scheduled commercial route with two flights per day from Manila to Malay, serving the fl-edging resort island of Boracay.

To maximize its aircraft utilization, it introduced new routes to the present-day towns of San Jose, Virac, Daet and Alcantara, and the cities of Cauayan and Masbate, regarded as secondary and tertiary routes by Air Transportation Office, and are not serviced by major airlines.

In 1997, the cooperative changed to a corporate set-up with the establishment of Asian Spirit, Inc., whose registration was approved by the Securities and Exchange Commission in 2005.

At the time, Asian Spirit has the distinction of being the first scheduled airline to serve Boracay. Other operators served the airport on a charter basis then. It became the Philippines’ fourth flag carrier (after Philippine Airlines, Cebu Pacific and Air Philippines) in 2003.

Transition to Zest Airways

Asian Spirit was sold to AMY Holdings, a holding company controlled by businessman Alfredo M. Yao, in March 2008.[5] After the success of the takeover, Yao expressed interest in merging Asian Spirit with South East Asian Airlines (SEAIR). The two airlines have been in merger talks and were expected to make a decision soon.

Yao was supposed to purchase a sixty percent stake in SEAIR, although the deal fell through because of a stolid response from SEAIR management. The merger talks failed and both airlines continued to operate independently.

On September 30, 2008, Asian Spirit officially announced that it will be re-branding itself as Zest Airways. Reports say the name switch reflects the Yao’s stake in the company, as well as an allusion to the flagship business of AMY Holdings: juice maker Zest-O. The firm’s board approved the name change in August, while the Civil Aeronautics Board approved the switch earlier this month.

The airline wants to fly to three international points to Sandakan (already stopped), Malaysia from Zamboanga, to Seoul from Kalibo, Laoag, and Davao, and Macau from Angeles City. However these international routing never took off.

It has also intended to commence international expansion to Bangkok and Singapore from Manila in 2009.

On March 12, 2013, Zest Airways signed a share swap agreement with AirAsia Philippines, a domestic airline with foreign interest. The share swap deal involves exchange of shares between the owner of Zest Airways, Filipino shareholders of AirAsia Philippines, Inc. and AirAsia Berhad of Malaysia.

As of May 2013, Zest Air suspended its chartered flights between Boracay and Taipei because of the political tensions between the Philippines and Taiwan.

Suspension of Air Operator Certificate

On Aug 16, 2013, the Civil Aviation Authority of the Philippines suspended Zest Air’s Air Operator certificate due to a series of safety breaches.

Among the violations were:

  • No qualified Accountable Manager since July 19, 2013
  • Failure to check aircraft logs, flight manifest, weather, etc.
  • Failure to present to the CAAP the airman license (Aircraft Mechanic License) during ramp inspection
  • Series of occurrences that affected several flight operations
  • Refueling with passenger on board involving RP-C8989 on August 14, 2013

Excessive flight duty time case under the enforcement and legal service

Tony F must be absolutely reckless in his zest for expansion.

If CAAP could announced in August of Zest suspension for the above reaons, it means Tony F’s management just do not care for safety and thought he can get away in the Phillipines.

There are issues of late issuance of AOC license from our local DCA, many occassions of crash landings, rejection by Singapore to do maintenance for Air Asia, and their maouvring to cut cost (and indirectly quality and conforming) on C and D checks.

Tony F has no concern for safety thus the reason he rant and rave on airport aerobridge without concerning for the passengers’ safety and airport security by insisted the passengers to walk on the tarmac.

DCA not firm

What is DCA in Malaysia doing about all this?


Despite their decision in dealing with Zest Airway, the civil aviation authorities of European Union issued a list of carriers banned from the EU and in the annex, they described CAAP, the civil aviation authorities of Phillipines had done oversight or error in their inspection of their air carriers.

All Phillipines air carriers with the exception of Phillipines Airline are banned from the EU. It means Zest had long not been complying with international safety standard.

Yet Tony F does not care and even allow Malaysian to board on Zest.

If the less efficient and effective Phillipines authority can make a deciaion on Zest, why can’t our DCA be thorough and strict on Air Asia?

Don’t bow to the public relation psywar of this conman against the authorities.

The EU’s updated blacklist can be found here for Tony F to use as his shopping list of new airlines to buy. Meanwhile, rivals are moving in to fill up the void left by Zest and Air Asia shareholders should start brushing up in their delivery or “Tony F.. you’re fired!”

Stay tuned to us for more updates on this scamming con-man Tony F & AirAsia!