IG Metall demands strategic clarity on IAV’s future

In December 2025, management announced its intention to cut around 1,500 jobs in 2026. Around 600 jobs had already been lost in 2024 – coupled with a promise that this would put the company back on a stable economic footing. That assurance is now, in effect, once again up in the air.

“Employees have borne significant cutbacks in recent years,” says Thilo Reusch, IG Metall’s lead negotiator. “Anyone who holds out the prospect of a positive future after major job losses cannot, just a few months later, launch the next round of restructuring without robust justification and without a viable overall concept.”

For weeks, the talks have been progressing slowly. Agreed documents were submitted late, and positions that had been promised were later watered down. In the fifth round of negotiations, the employer side itself put forward a proposal that envisaged job security through to 2029 once the planned headcount reduction had been completed. IG Metall responded constructively and signalled its readiness to make substantial concessions – including on working-time arrangements and a pay freeze for 2026. An agreement appeared within reach. “That makes it all the more frustrating when the very basis for those talks is later called into question again. If you put proposals on the table, you have to stand by them in a reliable and meaningful way,” the trade unionist added.

At the heart of the dispute is the question of funding for a possible voluntary programme. To date, management has not presented a viable solution for how a socially responsible reduction in headcount on the scale announced is meant to be implemented. At the same time, it remains unclear how the remaining workforce is to be safeguarded over the longer term. “A headcount reduction of this magnitude requires a concept backed by real funding. Without realistic planning, it looks as though risks are being pushed onto employees,” Reusch explained.

Further uncertainty has been fuelled by the commissioning of an additional report from an auditing firm. After months of talks and analyses already on the table, the question arises as to why another review is now deemed necessary. “If fundamental strategic issues are only now being checked externally, that is a clear sign that there is apparently still no final clarity internally,” the union representative said. “Employees have a right to know which scenarios are being examined, which sites could be affected, and what consequences may follow.”

In light of IAV’s current stop-start approach, IG Metall has submitted a comprehensive catalogue of questions to management. This addresses, among other things, the economic basis of the restructuring plans, the financing of a possible voluntary programme, the strategic going-concern outlook, the role of external reports, and potential impacts on sites and headcount. The union expects complete and comprehensible answers.

For IG Metall, one thing is clear: any further restructuring can only be viable if it is embedded in a coherent future strategy and linked to a binding job-security commitment for those who remain. Further demands placed solely on the shoulders of employees are not a sustainable way forward. “A company needs strategic consistency rather than constant course corrections,” Reusch said. “Reliability towards sites and employees is the prerequisite for rebuilding trust.”

“The employees’ side has played its part. We remain ready to negotiate. After years of upheaval and repeated cutbacks, it is now down to management to present a consistent strategy. The company’s leadership must now live up to its responsibility,” IG Metall negotiator Reusch concluded.