Photo: ANA
business

ANA to offer flight attendants 2-day workweek after COVID

72 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2023 GPlusMedia Inc.

72 Comments
Login to comment

Checked out a couple of LCC airlines for Feb/Mar flights to Se Asia and there wasn’t availability for my dates nor 4-5 days either side

There is demand for air travel but not at the prices ANA has set

17 ( +23 / -6 )

If they will have the pick of when they can fly. But is basically a filler service for the airline.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

All Nippon Airways Co plans to offer its flight attendants the option of working two days a week, starting fiscal 2023, enabling them to pursue second jobs as the coronavirus pandemic has dented demand for air travel, company sources said Monday.

At least ANA is passing along some of that sweet COVID bailout wealth transfers from the the public they got to make their flight attendants lives a little easier.

-10 ( +2 / -12 )

enabling them to pursue second jobs 

is that anything like: 'putting them in a position of needing two jobs in order to survive?'

13 ( +19 / -6 )

If they will have the pick of when they can fly. But is basically a filler service for the airline.

So? What's your point?

5 ( +6 / -1 )

@dagon - Once again someone under the misconception that ANA received a 'bailout' (please note this exact word). They most certainly did not. JAL did years back and they paid for it dearly with loss of slots.

@kurisupisu: Prices are indeed very high, but seat maps and availability tell a different story when it comes to demand.

5 ( +9 / -4 )

@dagon - Once again someone under the misconception that ANA received a 'bailout' (please note this exact word). They most certainly did not. JAL did years back and they paid for it dearly with loss of slots.

Google is not your friend.

https://simpleflying.com/ana-japan-international-travel-rules/

Hotels were given aid, while ANA and rival Japan Airlines received money to help boost passenger numbers on domestic flights. Katanozaka said that if the government was serious about helping, it could resume the subsides as early as next month and ease entry limits for overseas visitors.

Just subsidies no bailout! Call them what you like.

-4 ( +4 / -8 )

ANA best Japan's Airlines !!..

1 ( +7 / -6 )

Two day week? Suppose she cannot find another job for only three days?

1 ( +6 / -5 )

 Once again someone under the misconception that ANA received a 'bailout' (please note this exact word).

Yeah, and cherry picking posts to make a point doesnt support what you want to say either. Please note the exact words COVID bailout!

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Two day week? Suppose she cannot find another job for only three days?

Please read the article! It clear states "OPTION" and the reasoning is plainly noted as well!

3 ( +4 / -1 )

A bailout is when the government writes off your debts and gives you money for nothing.

The government loan and undersigned loans and gave support payments in return for keeping critical infrastructure in tact.

-6 ( +2 / -8 )

This is meant to sound like a good thing- Like working for a company in a profession that was desired, trained for, and once served as full-time employment, is now benevolently offering employees the “opportunity” to branch out and “get a second job”...

Air travel was once an affordable and prevalent part of life, and now they’re attempting to normalize dysfunction, not only in this but in every aspect of (non elite) human life; health, economic, social, etc.

This isn’t about Russia, COVID-19, Climate change, or pick your favorite globalist excuse/scapegoat-

It’s about their attempt to con people into accepting guilt, blame, and a sub-standard quality of life, to follow an agenda that has only control as its goal.

8 ( +11 / -3 )

There is demand for air travel but not at the prices ANA has set

Is that why their US routes are 95-100% full? When I wanted to fly? Because “there’s no demand at the prices set”? because there seems to be enough demand to fill the plane.

-5 ( +3 / -8 )

This is meant to sound like a good thing- Like working for a company in a profession that was desired, trained for, and once served as full-time employment, is now benevolently offering employees the “opportunity” to branch out and “get a second job”...

Yeah, and they work for a company that did it's best, during the pandemic, to keep ALL their employees and not fire them.

Look at the article again and see the reasoning:

 will also be used to learn new skills, potentially linking them to new endeavors for the company, according to the sources.

I personally know a flight attendant who went to work, with the blessing of her company, on a 2 year hiatus during the pandemic, for a local technical college. The knowledge she gained from that experience, helped her gain a promotion, after returning to her airline position.

There are HUGE benefits for corporations, particularly during lean times, in having their employees expand their knowledge and experiences.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

@Nemo. I've got 2 return trips with them over the next 3 weeks. All but one of those 4 flights is rammed.

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

Side note: ANA did not layoff a single employee during the pandemic including cabin attendants.

Now They are providing flexibility that CAs can CHOOSE IF THEY WANT.

It is no doubt designed to strengthen the company both in retention and recruitment in a labor market marked by a diminishing pool of available workers.

3 ( +6 / -3 )

Sounds like cutting staff hours under the cover of work life balance option.

-3 ( +2 / -5 )

That is called part-time without the benefits and protections of fulltime

2 ( +6 / -4 )

Wallace that is incorrect. Nowhere in the article does it state that employees who take the option will lose protections or benefits.

1 ( +4 / -3 )

@kurisupisu: Prices are indeed very high, but seat maps and availability tell a different story when it comes to demand

If that is the case then where are the flight promotions and discounts?

Maybe ANA likes to fly near empty planes?

If ANA were not on some type of favorable wicket then how is it that their business model allows them to do what they are doing at present?

-2 ( +2 / -4 )

If ANA were not on some type of favorable wicket then how is it that their business model allows them to do what they are doing at present?

I dunno, could have something to do with the fact that their planes are not empty.

Demand is back at 2019 levels domestically.

Internationally the flights are full.

So, Not “empty”

That might be part of it….

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Part-time workers don't have the same benefits or protections as full-time workers. ANA won't be giving full-time pay for part-time work. They want to reduce costs.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Part-time workers don't have the same benefits or protections as full-time workers. ANA won't be giving full-time pay for part-time work.

It doesn't say one way or the other in the article. But if this were simply ANA providing part-time work, I don't see it resulting in an article, as part-time work is a thing that happens everywhere. However, ANA providing the benefits of full-time worker to someone only working part-time does make sense. I don't see them paying these employees for a 5-day work week however, but I am suspecting they will get benefits that don't normally come with part-time work.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

@kurisupisu: But. as we keep telling you, the planes are NOT empty.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I do not think ANA will provide 5 days of pay and benefits for 2 days of work.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

I do not think ANA will provide 5 days of pay and benefits for 2 days of work.

I don't think so either. I think they'll provide 2-days of pay, and benefits, for 2-days work.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

I do not think ANA will provide 5 days of pay and benefits for 2 days of work.

The employees are full-time employees that choose to work less on a temporary basis. There is no evidence that the company is reducing benefits although they are surely reducing pay.

Any company interested in retention and recruiting would not be so foolish as to cut benefits to its full-time employees in Japan, in an environment of labor scarcity.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

A Full time employee gets shakai hoken, kosei nenkin, rosai hoken, employees savings plan, annual leave, travel benefits to name the basics.

But those part time flight attendants will have to pay for own kokumin hoken and nenkin and no most of the perks.

This is not a fair deal unless they are ok with it. I wouldn't settle for this deal.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I don't think so either. I think they'll provide 2-days of pay, and benefits, for 2-days work.

1/5th of pay, 1/5th of benefits like sick leave, vacations, and pensions. Good if you can live on that but most cannot.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

But those part time flight attendants will have to pay for own kokumin hoken and nenkin and no most of the perks.

It doesn't say that in the article, where are you getting this info from?

1 ( +3 / -2 )

1/5th of pay, 1/5th of benefits like sick leave, vacations, and pensions. Good if you can live on that but most cannot.

You just described any part-time job. I don't see why this would even be a news item if they were just offering part-time jobs, that's not news, part time jobs existing is the norm.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

But with COVID-19 denting demand for air travel, the airline has been allowing them to work fewer days.

Didn't all the previous articles talked about how travel was "back, back, back baby!"?

0 ( +1 / -1 )

Did any of you naysayers actually READ the article?

There is nothing in it that says the company is cutting benefits. No company dependent on a steady and reliable labor force would cut benefits for full-time employees in a labor market that is encountering scarcity.

And this program is clearly noted to be VOLUNTARY. Nobody is making anyone take this option.

In fact, a careful reading will show that access to the program is limited to prevent operational interruptions.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

The purpose is for ANA to reduce wage costs while retaining sufficient staff to operate a recovering service. It is in the news because it is ANA and not the local store.

"offer its flight attendants the option of working two days a week, starting fiscal 2023, enabling them to pursue second jobs"

why would they need second jobs if the first job was paying?

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Nemo

Wallace that is incorrect. Nowhere in the article does it state that employees who take the option will lose protections or benefits.

There is no company that will give full-time benefits for part-time work. At best benefits are reduced to two days.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Nemo

Did any of you naysayers actually READ the article?

There is nothing in it that says the company is cutting benefits. No company dependent on a steady and reliable labor force would cut benefits for full-time employees in a labor market that is encountering scarcity.

But they will cut or reduce benefits for part-time work.

And this program is clearly noted to be VOLUNTARY. Nobody is making anyone take this option.

In fact, a careful reading will show that access to the program is limited to prevent operational interruptions.

Yes, it will be voluntary because the workers are protected by labour laws.

Good if some are happy to have part-time work.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

ANA best Japan's Airlines !!

Best them they did!

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

I looked this up in the Japanese media, and it appears that the change is that they will allow attendants to have a flexible schedule, working as few as two days a week. They can work two days one week, and four the next for example, if that works for them. I couldn't find anything related to benefits, but it does not sound like they are being downgraded to part-timers/contract workers.

https://news.yahoo.co.jp/articles/fef064a1a8cf1d87f3b23dd9f224f16e8bdc2ced

https://news.yahoo.co.jp/pickup/6450759

https://www.nikkei.com/article/DGXZQOUC261GL0W2A221C2000000/

ANA is aiming to provide schedule flexibility to its employees.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

In some occupations, it is 10 days on and then 10 days off.

Flight staff are also shift workers.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

There are a number of reasons why the company would offer this program, cost cutting in only one of them. Retention and recruiting in a changed job market is also a reason. Employees who have the ability to flexibly control their work schedule are going to be more loyal (and be able to be more loyal if their family situation changes), and potential employees will be more likely to apply knowing that they have the option of adjusting their flight schedule in the future.

Of course if they AGREE to work less they are paid less. But there is no evidence, at least you have provided none, that there is any reduction in benefits. If you are going to continue to make this non-factual claim, then provide facts or stop making it.

As for why someone would want to take this program as an employee, there are several reasons (Child rearing, Care of elderly relatives, Additional skills attainment, Pure curiosity about what else life has to offer) and none of them are predicated on the Company is not paying a fair wage or providing enough benefits in the first place.

The program is not limited for the employees' protections under labor law. It is limited so that the company can continue to plan smooth operations.

The fact is that there is no evidence to support this narritave.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

In my 50 years of adult life, I have never heard of a single company providing full-time benefits for part-time work. You would have to be a top professional with the needed skills.

It would be an exception even if they received reduced benefits.

There is also the question of paying health and pension insurance required by full-time workers but not part-time ones.

ANA is a public-listed company and is answerable to the stockholders.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

wallaceToday  11:35 am JST

In my 50 years of adult life, I have never heard of a single company providing full-time benefits for part-time work.

Many companies offer part-time employees paid family leave for example, which traditionally was a full-time benefit.

3 ( +4 / -1 )

In my 50 years of adult life, I have never heard of a single company providing full-time benefits for part-time work.

You may be being confused because of the difference in contract work (契約社員), which is how almost all part-timers in Japan are classified, and "full-time" (正社員). Contract workers in Japan do not usually receive the same benefits as full employees, and only required to receive 'beneifts' that are dictated by law, whereas full-employees get additional benefits provided by companies. It would appear that ANA is offering a flexible schedule to company employees, and not making them become contract worker. They will still be full ANA employees. This doesn't mean that someone who works 2-days a week is going to get the exact same number value, rather they would likely get 40% of what they would have received for working 5-days that week. The company benefits will be better than those dictated by law however.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Many companies offer part-time employees paid family leave for example, which traditionally was a full-time benefit.

Name a few then.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

In my 50 years of adult life, I have never heard of a single company providing full-time benefits for part-time work. You would have to be a top professional with the needed skills.

Unless you have evidence to prove your asscertion of reduced benefits, now you have.

It's a new labor environment.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Strangerland

Full-time workers and their employers are required to pay monthly health and pension insurance. Part-time or workers working less than full hours do not pay it but there are voluntary payments for keeping up with the pension. ANA also offers a private pension which employees pay into.

Under labor laws, full-time workers are required to be given vacation time.

-3 ( +1 / -4 )

wallaceToday  11:45 am JST

Name a few then.

First, read what the guy above you posted.

Then, see if you ever heard of these companies in your 50 years as an adult:

J.P. Morgan Chase

Walmart

Starbucks

FedEx

Well--that puts this argument to bed.

1 ( +3 / -2 )

The scheme proposed by ANA is for the benefit of ANA otherwise they would not be offering it.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Of COURSE it benefits the company. It's a for-profit organization.

That doesn't mean it cannot benefit the CA's who voluntarily take it as well.

That is called win-win and it is the basis of all successful long-term agreements.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The scheme proposed by ANA is for the benefit of ANA otherwise they would not be offering it.

Sure, of course it is. But in the current market, companies that don't put forth benefits to employees find themselves with lower employee retention. Employee turnover is often a much higher cost to the company than providing a flexible working environment, so as t o increase employee retention.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

They will still be full ANA employees. This doesn't mean that someone who works 2-days a week is going to get the exact same number value, rather they would likely get 40% of what they would have received for working 5-days that week. The company benefits will be better than those dictated by law however.

Flight staff does not work a 5-day week. They are on shifts according to the routes they fly and are required to rest for a certain number of hours before another flight.

So if the ANA workers take up the scheme, they will still be full-time employees paying for full-time health and pension insurance, and the company insurance but will only receive two days' pay and other benefits.

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

So if the ANA workers take up the scheme, they will still be full-time employees paying for full-time health and pension insurance, and the company insurance but will only receive two days' pay and other benefits.

Do you have anything to support this claim?

2 ( +3 / -1 )

So if the ANA workers take up the scheme, they will still be full-time employees paying for full-time health and pension insurance, and the company insurance but will only receive two days' pay and other benefits.

Yes. They will pay LESS for health and pension insurance because those are both determined by income (which will be reduced by working less).

As a 50 year business owner, you are no doubt aware that all pensions and benefits are paid as a percentage of one's income. Make less income, pay less in insurance and pensions.

They will still benefit from the increased health and pension benefits of a full-time employee.

AND they have the option to return to full schedule as their circumstances change.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

Strangerland

Who in Japan is required by law to pay the monthly health and pension premiums?

All are between 19-65 years but employers pay too.

If you are a part-time worker, you must be covered if your weekly work hours and monthly work days are three fourth or more of those for regular workers in the same workplace.

If your work hours and work days are less than that, you still must be covered if your condition applies to the 5 followings:

(1) your weekly work hours are 20 hours or more,

(2) your employment term is expected to be one year or longer*,

(3) your monthly wage is \88,000 or more,

(4) you are not a student, and

(5) you are employed by a “specific covered workplace.”**

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

Who in Japan is required by law to pay the monthly health and pension premiums?

What makes you think those are the only benefits?!

1 ( +2 / -1 )

What makes you think those are the only benefits?!

Or to say more, you have listed legal employement requirements. Benefits are things companies provide above and beyond that. For example, we offer additional vacation days above the legal requirements to our staff, as well as flexible schedules, sick days, additional paternity/maternity leave, and more. None of these are mandated by law, and we don't offer them to our contract employees.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

I'll bet that a majority of them aren't going to be looking for a second job, but a husband to start a family. Working 2 days a week allows the hubby to take care of the kids while the wife is at work.

0 ( +1 / -1 )

I assume some posters here are not Full time (seishain) employee at large Japanese corporations.

Hence you don't understand the benefits and perks that come with the position.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Long story short: ANA is a failing business.

Unfortunate for me as a long time frequent flyer with them.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Long story short: ANA is a failing business.

Unfortunate for me as a long time frequent flyer with them.

Is THAT why they turned a profit in the 1st half of the year and the flights are all full? Because they are a failing business?

Hmmmm.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

nice.

new capitalism.

2 working day week-salary equals to that too.

sure many people will be "happy" get just faction of original income...new way to to exploit workforce in "nice way"

-1 ( +2 / -3 )

@Nemo - I don't get it. Seems like that a combination of this article and high prices have convinced them that ANA is a failing business although planes are full, frequencies and capacity being restored AND financials looking healthy!

Yes -Capitalism @Eastman - It's what makes the world go round!

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Previously, ANA had cut back on bonuses and was looking for a 30% staff reduction. It offered some employees a 2-year no-pay break. Last winter it paid bonuses for the first time in three years. Some routes are suspended.

https://www.ana.co.jp/en/jp/guide/plan/airinfo/int-routeinfo/

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Is that why their US routes are 95-100% full? When I wanted to fly? Because “there’s no demand at the prices set”? because there seems to be enough demand to fill the plane.

No fan of price gouging airlines at all, but they're not running a charity. Give em market 'freedoms' they'll charge what they'll get away with.

It was better when governments owned airlines and set prices to be within the average person's means.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

ANA had negative profits in 2020 and 2021. The year 2022 ends in March.

https://www.ana.co.jp/group/en/investors/personal/ana_earnings/

Like all the airlines ANA is trying to return to profit.

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Good on ANA to give this option to their flight attendants. Being on flights five days a week can be pretty rough. If they want to cut down on the number of days being in a pressurized cabin to be free to do other things, they're free to. My friend, a former stewardess, would've loved to have been able to do this.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

nice.

new capitalism.

2 working day week-salary equals to that too.

sure many people will be "happy" get just faction of original income...new way to to exploit workforce in "nice way"

Most of this word salad is indecipherable.

However, this is an example of new capitalism for a new HR environment.

And there is nothing “exploitative” about allowing employees to decide how much to work in a manner that suits their lifestyle.

Sorry, that’s just nonsensical bunk.

1 ( +2 / -1 )

@factchecker: No. When Governments owned airlines, prices were fixed. Service was appalling unless you go back to the 1950's/1960's and flew first class. There was zero incentive to offer anything 'different' and despite the current high fares, in the 30-35 years since deregulation many, many millions of people have managed to travel that wouldn't have done under state controlled airlines.

3 ( +3 / -0 )

Long story short: ANA is a failing business.

It's a bit too short. Explain how you have determined it is failing, as on the surface, they appear to be doing just fine.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

It will be available to around 8,500 of its flight attendants who live in Japan. However, ANA plans to restrict the number of people utilizing the system to prevent it from impacting its operations.

How very Japanese......here you are, we will give all of you this....but of course we won't ACTUALLY give all of you this.....we'll just pretend to so's we can tick a box that says we are proactive, because the head Oyaji wants everyone working until 11pm every night. LMAO

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

@factchecker: No. When Governments owned airlines, prices were fixed. Service was appalling unless you go back to the 1950's/1960's and flew first class. There was zero incentive to offer anything 'different' and despite the current high fares, in the 30-35 years since deregulation many, many millions of people have managed to travel that wouldn't have done under state controlled airlines.

This is what every capitalist says.....but there is no reason why a public company cannot be run LIKE a private company. Producing modest profits that can be re-invested back into the service/industry for the good of the "shareholders".....who would be the taxpayers! The only things being cut would be the ridiculously fat profits and dividends being shelled out to private individuals, while driving up point-of-use price for the regular man. The trains in the UK are great example.....not 1 system has been improved since privitisation. But they have become more expensive, just as delayed and embroiled in strikes despite posting 310 million pounds in tax payers funded profit last year.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites