Sjoerd

http://www.telegraaf.nl/dft/nieuws_d...kse_top__.html (in Dutch)

Google-translate:

KLM pilots sound the alarm at the poor competitive position of the Air France KLM Group.

Steven Verhagen, vice president of the Association of Dutch Pilots CNS.
"The competitive position of the Air France KLM Group gets worse and worse. There is no clear plan of attack in Paris, while the urgency is high ", said Steven Verhagen president of the Association of Dutch Pilots VNV yesterday against De Telegraaf.

"With the release of the earnings target and only cut costs and work harder, we will not make it. We are devastated flown by the subsidized Middle East companies. We see that more and more of our passengers drop out because they get a better elsewhere and often even cheaper product. That is a dangerous development, "warns Verhagen.

The Air France KLM Holding should the rudder as rigorously upset him to turn the tide. "A new capital injection is desperately needed. The flight company should have fresh money to sustain invest more rapidly in quality and price war. There is also a need for a contemporary marketing strategy. "

The CNS and other Dutch unions denounce the lax attitude of the French top. Air France will start the collective bargaining instance until after the summer. "It seems like they do not realize the seriousness of the situation. Instead of making plans, they will have some real things. The French version of mañana mañana has struck, "said Verhagen.

He believes it is high time that is raised business. "The policy fails and it lacks a coherent vision. Time after time we are trumped by competitors, both financially and commercially. "

Verhagen feels that all KLM staff on the ground and contribute seriously in the air to get the airline healthy. He is shocked by the bellicose language of cabin union VNC in this paper. "Maybe the KLM management must once again turn firmer. The polder is no more fertile ground for collective bargaining. "

According to him, people mistakenly think that KLM is still doing well. "In reality, we are too expensive, too cumbersome and become too moderate. Incomprehensible that there is only defensive action is needed, such as in the freight. We will not win the war with this. "

This week talks Secretary Mansfield (Aviation) with its French counterpart and executives The Juniac and Elbers on the emergency at Air France KLM.

Fly Baby

As I’ve got to learn more about the KLM flying schedules, the stop overs and the (for want of a better term) ‘perks’ enjoyed by those who work and fly for KLM, I’m amazed it makes any money at all (not that I would say that out loud at home - I value a quiet life too much)

But I don’t think it’s fair of Verhagen to simply point the finger at AF or the KLM cabin crew and say “it’s their fault – they need to do more”. There appear to be hard decisions needed across the entire company…

He may not be a popular choice but they could do worse than offer Willie Walsh the job of shaping AF-KLM for the future

florin

I think Verhagen is pointing at the AFKL management first and foremost (if I understand the Google translation correctly).

From what I understand, it seems to me that it's an overly simplistic view. KL does have a decent product, IMO. (Am I the only one on the forum who likes KLM? ) Also, KL provides tons of connections to Europe, where middle Eastern carriers don't fly (though there are fewer and fewer such airports.)

AFKL can never seriously compete on labor; they may be able to improve upon the current situation but ME carriers can get away with all sorts of stuff that can never fly (no pun intended) in Europe.

Fly Baby

You're not alone, I like them too

I wonder, if they had their time again, would the KLM Board have joined with AF? Listening to some of their employees, they are of the opinion that it has only benefitted AF...just their view of course and I have no idea whether or not that's true.

Agree that its a far more complex issue than presented by Verhagen. LCCs and the ME3 have changed the game forever.

Klmdwsq

I like KLM as well. Food on air France is also great and I also feel rather at home on their planes. However, I would love KLM to join the one world alliance instead of the sky team. Air France can need the money, BA holding has the cash, one world is currently underrepresented in Europe and they can definitely use Schiphol as hub with low costs, easy transfer and strategically great location (at least compared to Helsinki and Madrid)...

In addition they have Qatar airways......

chrismoose

Wasn't BA-KLM something that was considered but rejected back before it became AF-KLM?

I still (mostly) like KLM, although some of the recent changes (charging for checked bags) have decreased that somewhat.

florin

A BA-KL is a different discussion, IMO. From someone who lives in EU and flies KL a bit, ZeroWorld is not attractive to me at all. The 0W EU carriers are at the outskirts of Europe (UK, Spain, Finland) and because of that I'd probably never fly them (as opposed to AF, OK, RO or AZ, which do provide some viable options). Flying towards Asia or ME would entail backtracking for almost everybody. There are many other considerations from the airline perspective (such as route network), which is a different topic.

I'm not sure the competition from ME3 has anything to do with the AF/KL merger. A that a different merger (BA/KL) would face the same exact challenges.

deissi

Actually flying AY from HEL to China, S Korea and Japan involves little to no backtracking at all for most. For example, most CDG-HND/NRT flights fly almost directly over Helsinki.

Example: http://flightaware.com/live/flight/A...530Z/RJTT/LFPG

irishguy28

KLM appears to have called off that planned merger largely because they had concerns that their traffic rights would be affected by being insufficiently Dutch after the deal.

In these days of Open Skies that now barely matters, but even AF managed to come up with a structure that got around "the problem" - and which, ironically, resembles the structure now used by IAG themselves.

I wish there had been more urgency/appetite for that deal 15 years ago!

NickB

The appetite might have been there but there was just no structure to be found: the setup that worked for AFKL would not have worked for BAKL and I struggle to see any structure that could have worked. Not so much a technical legal question as a political one: even as things stand now, a country that wanted to be difficult could create problems for KLM since if is enough for the airline to be "controlled" by a majority of non-Dutch nationals for it not to be regarded as Dutch for the purposes of most bilateral air treaties. Thus, whatever structure you have, if the airline is de facto controlled by non-Dutch nationals, the other state could be awkward and deny traffic rights. You therefore need to make sure that other countries which are important for your business and are also powerful enough generally from a diplomatic/trade negotiations perspective are not going to create problems.

In the case of BA, the US authorities had made it clear that they would not play ball unless the UK concluded an Open Skies agreement with the US. As the UK preferred sticking to Bermuda II at the time,* the merger was pretty much a non-runner.

That said, , IIRC, in addition there were also concerns in KLM that BA wanted too much control and would not leave KLM enough autonomy so the merger might still have ended up scuppered even if the regulatory issues could have been overcome.

*: France, OTOH, did have an open skies agreement with the US (as did the Netherlands, of course)

CXBA

the attempted fusion BA-KLM clearly haunts many posters years after its failure. It should be interesting to understand what kind of support, if any, can have a possible "demerging" between AF and KLM, and a new negotiation with another suitable partner (that may be not BA) among KLM rank and files and most importantly with the Dutch politicians. With increased growling out from Amsterdam directed against the French, their managers and their personnel one may surmise that such a possibility does not look remote.

florin

Can someone please explain to me why a BA/KL merger would have been better than AF/KL?

But why would the British managers would be better for KL than the French ones?

baccarat_king

They would have been better off merging KLM with Delta. or, maybe not.

But, a vast majority of Delta (flight attendants) is NON-union.