BBC News (16 November 2009: “New president slams Thai Airways”) has an interesting report on Thai Airways and its new President Piyasvasti Amranand.
The president explained: “The management had not really been allowed to manage the company…”. He added that: “The company had been interfered heavily by the board, by the politicians. That had substantially weakened the management of the company, and our response to the crisis.”
Piyasvasti “refused to own shares in the airline,” saying “Thai Airways was a company which did not provide transparent information to investors…”. He said he wanted to reduce “political interference in the day to day running of the airline, which is majority owned by the state.” He also referred to “nepotism and favouritism” in personnel promotions and “in the awarding of contracts.”
What kind of political influence does Piyasvasti mean? The influence of the military has long been known. Politicians usually fix the board, and presumably that continues. PAD had considerable support from the companies unions and many of its staff.
But what about the favoritism that extends to the royal family. Do they and their entourages pay? Who knows? Watching the royal news suggests that the royals travel repeatedly in the best classes. And how will the airline deal with Prince Vajiralongkorn who is apparently qualified to fly 737s and, until recently, was even listed in the Thai Airways organization chart.
