Re-FLIGHT Model: ESG-Based Strategic Communication to Mitigate Layoffs Issues in the National Aviation Industry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
A global wave of layoffs has swept across industries such as technology (Google, Amazon, Meta, Microsoft), media (News Corp, BBC), manufacturing, automotive, banking, and higher education. The World Economic Forum (2025) projects that 41% of global companies—including those in aviation—plan workforce reductions within five years, driven by economic slowdown, geopolitical uncertainty, cost pressures, and AI adoption. The aviation sector has been severely affected: Boeing cut 17,000 jobs, Airbus 2,500, and airlines like Southwest and WestJet have also reduced staff. In Indonesia, Lion Air, AirAsia, and Garuda Indonesia collectively laid off thousands of workers between 2020–2021. Though mass layoffs have since slowed, rising costs and fragile finances signal renewed risks that could threaten public welfare and national stability. This study examines how ESG-based strategic communication can mitigate layoff risks in Indonesia’s aviation industry. It proposes the Re-FLIGHT Model—anchored on six pillars: Reskilling, Fair Labour, Innovation, Growth, Human-Centered, and Transition—as a framework for proactive, ethical, and sustainable communication. Integrating ESG principles into corporate and regulatory strategies, the model promotes inclusive dialogue, responsible leadership, and resilience, positioning ESG as a foundation for social transformation in the aviation sector. The World Economic Forum 2025 reports that 41% of global companies project workforce reductions within five years, including the aviation industry. This continuing wave of layoffs in 2025 is driven by global economic slowdown, uncertain geopolitics, corporate restructuring, operational cost pressures, and the implementation of new technologies (AI), which shift workforce demands. The aviation industry, both global and national, has also faced layoffs. Aircraft manufacturers like Boeing reduced 17,000 employees, while Airbus cut 2,500 from its defense and space division. Global airlines followed: Southwest Airlines (USA) laid off 1,750 staff in February 2025; WestJet (Canada) laid off 6,900 employees in 2022. In Indonesia, Lion Group laid off 2,600 employees in 2020; AirAsia laid off or furloughed 882 staff in 2020. Garuda Indonesia Group laid off 2,400 employees (including pilots) between January 2020 and November 2021. These layoffs are a lingering consequence of the COVID-19 pandemic, digital transformation, post-pandemic efficiency, and macroeconomic pressures. Though Indonesia has not experienced another mass layoff wave, signs of stress are evident in rising operational costs, unrecouped international routes, and airline financial vulnerabilities. The potential for further layoffs in Indonesia’s aviation industry poses significant risks to public and national interests. Layoffs here could have systemic impacts on public welfare and national stability. This study explores how ESG-based strategic communication can mitigate layoff risks in Indonesia’s aviation sector. It emphasizes planned crisis communication, multistakeholder dialogue, and human-centered public narratives to build institutional trust and resilience. Through six key pillars—Reskilling, Fair Labour, Innovation, Growth, Human-Centered, and Transition—the study analyzes how strategic communication, leadership, organizational narrative, and public governance can create a more inclusive and adaptive employment ecosystem. The Re-FLIGHT Model integrates ESG values into organizational communication strategies and introduces an innovative communication framework grounded in sustainability, social justice, and inclusive governance. It can be adopted by regulators and national airlines as an anticipatory, proactive, fair, strategic, and sustainable workforce crisis communication model—broadening ESG perspectives in aviation as a driver of meaningful social transformation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,007 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,004 | 0,005 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,008 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,009 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,008 | 0,002 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».