The Hindu Business Line : Resigning without notice — Pilots body moves HC against DGCA fiat

THE Indian Commercial Pilots Association (ICPA) has challenged in the Madras High Court a directive of the Director General of Civil Aviation (DGCA) that made it mandatory for all pilots to give six months notice before resigning and also preventing them from refusing to undertake the flight duties assigned to them.

In a directive on September 1, 2005, the DGCA said failing to adhere to these directions could result in the pilot being debarred permanently or temporarily from holding a licence.

The pilots association contended that the DGCA directive violated fundamental rights guaranteed under the Constitution and also questioned its authority to issue such a directive.

The directions from DGCA observed that pilots were resigning without providing any notice to the airlines resulting in cancellation of flights in the last minute. Such resignations and consequent cancellation of flights cause inconvenience and harassment to passengers. Sometimes such an abrupt action on the part of the pilots is in the form of a concerted move, which is tantamount to holding the airlines to ransom. This goes against the public interest.

The direction further states that the pilots are highly skilled and shoulder complete responsibility for the aircraft and the passengers. They are highly paid for the responsibility they share with the airline towards the travelling public and are required to act with extreme responsibility.

In view of this, it has been decided by the Government that any act on the part of the pilots including resignation from the airlines without minimum notice period of six months, which may result into last minute cancellation of flights and harassment to the passenger would be treated as an act against the public interest.

These directions apply to all pilots working for air transport undertakings.

The pilots contend that the DGCA does not have the authority to issue such a directive as it violates Constitution of India Article 14 in discriminating the terms of employment vis-à-vis other professionals, Article 19 (1)(g) is an unreasonable restriction to carry on an occupation, Article 21 as it threatens to deprive the pilot arbitrarily from his livelihood by threatening to cancel his licence and Article 23 as it interferes with the freedom of the pilots to engage themselves in the work they choose and the airline in which they want to work.

The very purpose of issuing the directive in the pretext of pubic interest is questionable as today there is rarely a case where a passenger would be stranded due to cancellation of a particular flight owing to the resignation of a pilot without giving six months notice.

The pilots contend that the air transport undertakings are like any other commercial ventures and DGCA has no role to play in assisting the management by issuing these directives. The directives they contend give an unfair advantage to the air transport undertaking and could lead to harassment of the pilots.

More Stories on : Human Resources | Courts/Legal Issues

Article E-Mail :: Comment :: Syndication :: Printer Friendly Page

Stories in this Section
Delta loyalty programme for SMEs

Cabinet clears bids

NMPT gets new Deputy Chairman

GE Shipping Q3 net down 35%

Resigning without notice — Pilots body moves HC against DGCA fiat

Frankfinn to open 6 centres overseas

Airport employees strike work; flight operations normal: Govt
Traffic disruption mostly felt in Kolkata

AAI employees strike: Passengers little affected

Cargo movement hit at Chennai airport

Air operations remain normal in Coimbatore

Flight operations normal in Bangalore, Mangalore airports

Stirring times

Checking out?

TNT to invest 100 m euro in India — Rolls out domestic services

TCI may foray into rail containerised services

Concor rationalises freight rates for Nepal-bound containers

Drop in global piracy attacks: IMB