Brussels, 28/01/2014 (Agence Europe) - On 30 January, union action will take place almost everywhere in Europe to protest against the threat of the liberalisation of support services in air traffic management (communication, navigation and meteorological services). The Parliamentary committee for transport is expected to give its opinion on the Single European Sky 2 + that day, on the basis of a draft report by Marian-Jean Marinescu (EPP, Romania). As part of the union mobilisation initiative, François Ballestero, Political Secretary for the European Transport Workers' Federation (ETF), spoke to Europe and highlighted some of the concerns of air traffic managers.
Agence Europe: The ETF's call for union action is directly addressed to MEPs. How should they incorporate a “human pillar” into the Single European Sky?
François Ballestero: The regulation must ensure that a more important and binding role is played by social partners (CANSO, ATCEUC and the ETF). There should be a real consultation mechanism with a genuine method of social dialogue at all levels, including at European level. The European Commission should also propose that the airlines are involved in the strategic investment plans. Social partners should be as well. Ultimately, when measures are taken, there should be a social impact assessment prior to them being carried out. We do not want any job losses in the sector!
The ETF has criticised the liberalisation of air traffic management support services. Does the approach adopted by the rapporteur seem to you to be the most appropriate?
The Commission wants to make competition in the support services compulsory. Mr Marinescu has put forward a different formulation but he wants the same thing. We reject this liberalisation approach that exclusively serves the interests of the airlines. We are asking MEPs to treat it as a possibility, not something compulsory. If an Air Navigation Services Provider (ANSP) decides to launch a call for tenders, a social and safety impact study would be necessary. Air traffic control has a public service dimension and we do not want “low-cost” aviation controls. The liberal architecture that the Commission is seeking to create does not focus on efficiency and safety but rather cost reduction.
Do you also share member states' reservations about the appropriateness of the Single European Sky 2 +? What do you recommend?
The problem is that we have not yet finished implementing the Single Sky 1 and 2 and yet the Commission has already come up with a third package. This is destabilising everything in every country. Modernisation of air traffic controls and investment have been ongoing for a number of years. We can say that the single sky is well and truly on track! We are proposing that the introduction of functional airspace blocks is based on cooperation and that these new blocks are given a social dimension. We are also opposed to the performance-based approach, which exclusively focuses on cost reduction and subsequently work-based costs. Between 2014 in 2019, the Commission is planning to reduce the costs of air service providers by 13.43%! This will automatically have repercussions on jobs. Together with the employers (CANSO), we are demanding that realistic targets are adopted by the Commission. (MD/transl.fl)