Decisive moment for AB board

The clock is rapidly ticking for the Board of Air Botswana to make a decisive call on the fate of its suspended General Manager, Lulu Rasebotsa.Currently serving a 30-day suspension, Rasebotsa's time is down to mere hours—a development that, depending on when this article is read, may mean the suspension period has already expired.Should that be the case, the board may be compelled to extend the suspension, provided all procedural requirements are met.Sources within government circles have indicated to this publication that the board is allegedly facing significant frustration and is in a difficult position. The challenge lies in identifying a legally sound and fair resolution that satisfies all parties involved.Compounding the issue is a longstanding internal directive at Air Botswana, which mandates that any information flowing into or out of the organisation must first be vetted by legal counsel and authorised by management. This policy has reportedly created procedural hurdles for the board.For instance, it is alleged that at one point, a recently appointed board member visited Air Botswana’s headquarters to gain operational insight and requested access to certain documents relevant to the ongoing matter.A memo was subsequently issued to staff, notifying them of the visit and instructing them to cooperate with the board member's requests—except on issues relating to engineering, which were deemed off-limits.This situation, on its own, allegedly points to the existence of internal alliances across various levels of the organisation.The example cited has reportedly hampered the investigation process, as the board initially assumed that, in Rasebotsa’s absence, gaining access to necessary information would be straightforward.However, it is now alleged that the new board is struggling to obtain critical information. Individuals expected to cooperate have reportedly not done so—not necessarily to protect Rasebotsa or any specific person, but because they may have been involved in past decisions or may have advised Rasebotsa directly.This dynamic has allegedly created significant complications for the board. As external actors, board members cannot easily expect internal staff to willingly provide information that might implicate them—especially if they played a role as decision-makers, advisors, or signatories.It is further alleged that the board underestimated the complexity of the situation. They had expected that within the 30-day suspension period, they would be able to gather sufficient evidence to make a conclusive decision—either to terminate Rasebotsa’s contract or to reinstate her.Their assumptions were seemingly based on preliminary reports suggesting a dire state of affairs at Air Botswana.This leads to a critical question: where was the board when management made the decisions now allegedly being cited as grounds for Rasebotsa’s suspension—decisions that may ultimately cost her the job?To be fair, some suggest that the board’s role should have included demanding regular oversight, such as monthly or quarterly management accounts.It is alleged that it is at this level of governance where the board may have faltered. In an ideal scenario, the board chair should have been regularly informed of significant operational decisions.However, despite these concerns, it appears the board may have failed in fulfilling its fiduciary responsibilities—particularly in asking critical questions and requesting key documents when necessary.It is alleged that during their meetings, the board did not adequately seek to understand the operational framework of the airline or align its oversight with international aviation standards.Among the most pressing oversights is whether the board ever sought detailed information on Air Botswana’s market share—a key performance indicator that has reportedly declined at an alarming rate.This trend, according to sources, has continued to deteriorate without significant intervention.Moreover, it is alleged that little to no effort was made to rectify structural or operational deficiencies that have contributed to the airline’s prolonged decline.Questions are also being raised about the board’s advisory role during the fleet renewal process, which is when many of the irregularities now under scrutiny allegedly occurred.Of particular concern is the board’s apparent lack of involvement during the procurement and integration of a new aircraft.Normally, in exercising its oversight mandate, the board should have actively participated in the transition into operations by, at a minimum, posing probing questions.However, there are claims that such engagement was either minimal or absent.Notably, one of the key irregularities reportedly uncovered includes poor record-keeping. For example, there are said to be no formal records documenting how a United States-based company was directly approached for the procurement of two Embraer 145 LR aircraft.Furthermore, it is alleged that the Air Botswana Valuation Committee did not prepare valuation reports for three aircraft that were purchased, despite claims that they had inspected them before acquisition.It is alleged that a fleet status report revealed concerning details regarding Air Botswana’s new aircraft.One of the Embraer ERJ-145LR jets was reported to be due for a new Auxiliary Power Unit (APU), estimated to cost over USD450,000 at the time of purchase.A preceding borescope inspection reportedly identified erosion and missing material on the turbine stator vane.However, to the surprise of Air Botswana's new board, the final evaluation contradicted the findings, giving the aircraft a clean bill of health.In another instance, the Embraer 175 aircraft was reportedly acquired with its undercarriage—comprising both the main landing gear and nose gear—already due for a mandatory 12-year overhaul.As a result, Air Botswana purchased a completely new undercarriage set for over USD 1 million, while also sending the expired components for overhaul at USD 64,000.Alarmingly, despite this overhaul, it is alleged that there is no record of the refurbished undercarriage being added to inventory, raising questions as Air Botswana should, under normal circumstances, now have two undercarriage sets in stock.A further concern involves a management agreement entered into with West Air Namibia, which operates under the Fly Namibia brand.This arrangement is reportedly problematic, as a portion of FLY Namibia’s shares is held by Airlink, Air Botswana’s direct competitor from South Africa.Although this ownership structure was widely known, it is alleged that there is no documentation indicating that a competitive tender process was ever undertaken.This lack of transparency makes it difficult to determine whether Air Botswana secured the best possible deal.Adding to the complexity, while the public celebrates the acquisition of faster and more comfortable aircraft, it is alleged that Air Botswana has no direct control over the maintenance planning of the ERJ-145LR and the ERJ-145 (serial number 1451040), both operated by West Air.This lack of oversight is said to pose a significant operational risk. The issues highlighted above are among the many reasons that prompted the new Air Botswana board to initiate an investigation into the airline's operations.Of equal concern is the alleged lack of evidence showing that current management has implemented any cost-cutting measures to address the airline’s financial challenges.Another matter troubling the new board is how several staff members were allegedly hired or promoted—reportedly outside established policy frameworks and allegedly based solely on the discretion of the General Manager.At present, Air Botswana’s staff complement exceeds 400, a figure believed to be significantly higher than necessary for efficient operations, especially given the current size of the fleet and the fact that all operating routes are reportedly running at a loss.These concerns reportedly form part of the motivation by the new board calling for the removal of the two remaining board members: Deputy Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of Transport, Agnes Mothobi—who also oversees Human Resources—and Captain Clement Nsimbi, an Air Botswana employee responsible for safety oversight.The Botswana Guardian has reliably learned that at a recent Human Resources subcommittee meeting, a private attorney was engaged to provide legal guidance on how to resolve the suspension of Rasebotsa amicably.This is said to represent the first phase of the process, with the next stage expected to involve an external consultancy.Meanwhile, conditions at Air Botswana are said to be deteriorating further.Reports indicate that the airline struggled to meet its salary obligations this month.Management is said to have issued a communication to all employees, informing them of the financial difficulties facing the organisation.

Explore

More

News

Decisive moment for AB board