Aer Lingus chairman John Sharman has expressed regret to its staff over the "clinical and impersonal" language in a human resources memo - details of which were leaked to the media this week - which discussed how the State airline could go about cutting more than 1,000 staff from its workforce.

The company last night published the 30-page document drawn up last year. It sought to make life difficult for staff by introducing "adverse changes" in shift patterns, making staff wear "tacky" uniforms and tapping certain staff on the shoulder to tell them they had no future in the organisation.

In a further effort to calm disquiet about the document within the airline, about 25 managers attended a meeting with staff in Dublin Airport yesterday. All 2,900 staff are to receive the document in the coming days.

Mr Sharman said in his second letter to staff in two days that the document was an analysis compiled by the airline's senior human resources team at the request of senior executive team members. The chief executive then was Willie Walsh, now with British Airways.

While the memo contained a list of 12 "environmental push factors" that included many of those listed in a newspaper report on Wednesday, Mr Sharman claimed this was merely a list of factors considered likely in July 2004 to affect the attitudes of workers when they were assessing the attractiveness of a voluntary severance scheme.

This explanation was rejected last night by Siptu's national industrial officer, Michael Halpenny. "It seems to bear out the speculation about the 12-point plan. It's there in black and white. Despite the protestations of management it appears to have been part of the whole business plan cost-cutting exercise originated by the management team including the three senior executive members who have since left."

While Mr Sharman said the document included contributions from various departments in the airline to identify how they would achieve cost saving targets, he said the document was "never and is not now a statement of management policy".

Unions disputed such claims, saying they recognised each of the push factors described in the initial reports about the document as "tactics" to coerce staff into acceptance of a voluntary redundancy package.

The push factors were: "tap on the shoulder" of all relevant superintendents; management of underperformance - performance improvement plans; attendance management; adverse changes in work/shift patterns; lack of availability of in-week special leave (flexible arrangements for cabin crew); working contracted hours, change in uniform, significantly reduced overtime; the closure/reduction of bases; head office building relocation; no transport; and assignment to resource centre.

The resource centre was an office to which up to 48 pilots were deployed when the aircraft they were trained to fly were taken out of service. The pilots had previously been paid to stay at home.

There was no reference in the document to the specific change of uniform after newspaper reports said "jumpsuits" and T- shirts would be suggested. However, Aer Lingus unions maintain that T-shirts were put on display.

In a section titled key exit challenges, the document said there "must be a big take-up" of the plan and said it "needs to deliver 1,000 exits". The plan "must be appealing to the low service categories as that is where the large numbers are" and "must convey the message that it may be the last opportunity" to avail of such a package.