By Industrial Front Bureau | October 2025
Montreal/New Delhi: India’s call for a United Nations-level “Code of Conduct” to restrict the migration of its aviation professionals failed to gain traction at the 42nd Session of the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) Assembly. The proposal, presented by the Ministry of Civil Aviation under the working paper titled “Practices Impacting Orderly Conduct of International Civil Aviation,” sought to curb what India described as “aggressive poaching” of its pilots, aircraft maintenance engineers (AMEs), and other skilled aviation personnel by foreign airlines.
According to India’s submission, the large-scale migration of trained professionals had created operational stress for domestic airlines and endangered the stability of India’s fast-growing aviation ecosystem. The paper urged ICAO to consider a Code of Conduct that would compel member states and international airlines to follow “ethical recruitment practices,” including notice periods and mutual consent from the parent regulator before hiring Indian professionals.
However, the proposal met strong resistance from global stakeholders, including European Union (EU) member states, Canada, and several ICAO panels. The EU’s official working paper, presented by Denmark on behalf of its 27 member states and the European Civil Aviation Conference, emphasized that workforce shortages should be addressed through “collaboration, competitiveness, and inclusion” rather than restriction.
The EU argued that the aviation sector’s staffing crisis—impacting pilots, engineers, and controllers—was a worldwide challenge linked to post-pandemic disruptions and competition from other industries. “Member States should focus on improving retention and attractiveness of aviation careers,” the EU noted, encouraging ICAO to coordinate with the International Labour Organization (ILO) and other bodies to enhance diversity and working conditions.
ICAO Response: Retention, Not Restriction
Following deliberations, ICAO declined to advance India’s proposal for a restrictive global code, underscoring that migration of skilled professionals is a sovereign and labor-mobility issue best handled through domestic policy reforms and bilateral cooperation. ICAO reaffirmed its ongoing initiatives such as the Next Generation of Aviation Professionals (NGAP) program and Global Aviation and Aerospace Skills Taskforce, which aim to strengthen talent pipelines and training partnerships instead of limiting movement.
Delegates at the Assembly reportedly cautioned that a “code” regulating cross-border hiring could contradict ICAO’s founding principle of international cooperation and the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) that promote fair labor mobility.
Domestic Backlash: ALPA India’s Strong Objection
The most vocal opposition to India’s proposal came not from abroad, but from within the country. The Airline Pilots’ Association of India (ALPA India), a member of the International Federation of Air Line Pilots’ Associations (IFALPA), issued a public letter to the Civil Aviation Ministry on August 8, 2025, condemning the working paper as unconstitutional and regressive.
ALPA argued that the government’s plan violated Articles 19 and 21 of the Indian Constitution, which guarantee the right to profession and personal liberty. “Restricting lawful overseas employment would amount to bonded labour under a duopoly environment,” wrote ALPA President Capt. Sam Thomas, warning that such policies could increase mental stress among pilots and compromise flight safety.
The association also accused the Ministry of bypassing ongoing legal proceedings in the Delhi High Court concerning the six-month notice period and mandatory “No Objection Certificate (NOC)” requirements under India’s Civil Aviation Requirements (CAR). “It is contemptuous to present the same issue at ICAO when it remains sub judice,” ALPA said in its communication.
Citing cases like Kingfisher Airlines and Jet Airways, where thousands of employees lost pay and benefits during shutdowns, ALPA contended that the government had failed to protect workers domestically while attempting to control their international movement. Instead, the body urged reforms in working conditions, parity of pay between Indian and expatriate pilots, and tax incentives to retain talent by choice.
Broader Implications
Aviation analysts view the episode as a diplomatic setback for India, which had sought to position itself as a global hub for aviation manpower. While the intent—to prevent skill drain—is seen as valid, experts argue that restrictive measures contradict the globalized nature of the industry.
“The failure of the proposal shows the world expects India to strengthen retention through better pay, training, and welfare rather than by limiting freedom of employment,” said a senior official from an Asia-Pacific carrier who attended the Assembly.
ICAO’s stance aligns with broader international sentiment: aviation’s recovery after the pandemic depends on mobility, inclusion, and global cooperation. With the 2024–25 period witnessing record demand for air travel and a simultaneous shortage of trained personnel, the focus has shifted to joint training programs and equitable work environments rather than workforce control.
As ICAO prepares for its next Worldwide Air Transport Conference (ATConf/7), the issue of human-capital development is expected to remain central—but with an emphasis on collaboration, not constraint.