cloud_9The Virgin Atlantic routes are the attraction – Branson being the only one holding the decision for the majority stake 51% or is Etihad interested in the SA stake (minority =<49%)?
I think you meant to say SQ, as in Singapore Airlines, not South African Airways…;)
cloud_9La Perle pleaded guilty to performing an aviation function with excess alcohol in the blood.
Neil Fitzgibbon, defending, said it was a ‘terrible misjudgment’ and La Perle, who has also flown for American Airlines, was deeply remorseful.
Sorry for asking what might be a rather stupid question, but how can you have someone defend you if you choose to plead guilty…is it just so that he can try to get a lesser punishment by confessing from the start?:confused:
At the end of the day, the guy was found to be over the limit…you can’t claim it was a ‘terrible misjudgment’ and that you’re deeply remorseful when you do something like this, and now sadly it will more than likely cost him his job and be the end of his career in aviation (well certainly flying, that is for sure!).
cloud_9So if its runway cant handle something as big as a B738 doing LoCo economically, then the only real airlines we can expect to see at SEN are Aer Arran, FlyBe & possibly Eastern…oh and that Dutch airline, GLM, that was mentioned in a seperate thread!?
Compare this to somewhere like Manston/MSE, where the runway length is capable of handling much larger aircraft already and where a previous LoCo airline use to operate to/from.
Its such a shame though that it is considered to be just that bit “too far” out for it to be useful/viable enough for people who wish to visit London; that said though, I have heard that plans were submitted last week for access to funding towards the building of a “Parkway” railway station near to the airport, which would be linked up to the current High-Speed rail service between Ramsgate and London, and thus reducing travel times down to 64mins…again, not ideal, but still does not put Manston out of the running quite yet!
The main thing is, now that the Government have quashed any ideas of a third runway at Heathrow (and rightly so!), and also with the PM ruling out any possibility of “Boris Island” ever making it further than another one of Boris’s mad-capped schemes…we really do need to start looking into what alternatives are viable if we are to increase aviation capacity here in the UK. As I have said before, I am a big believer in regional airports and I think that more should be done to market these.
cloud_9Well Ryanair could possibly be a contender seeing as they often have hissy fits and threaten to leave Stansted.
Southend is just down the road to Stansted, so wouldn’t be too much trouble for them to move.:D
cloud_9The union has said it is waiting and willing to negotitate…but if you are right about it only being 1% of BA staff that are holding the rest to ransom…how and why did 43% vote in favour of more strikes?
The thing is I am only able to base my opinons on what I see/read in the news, and of course, both sides involved in an argument are always going to try to outdo each other with their “war of words” and PR spin…something else that needs to change if both sides are going to get along with each other.
cloud_9Perhaps, as you said earlier Paul, it is the fact that maybe I just get a bit “too passionate” for my own good?:o
I try to have a philosophy of always aiming high, because if you don’t achieve what you initially set out to achieve then you can’t be that disappointed with what you do achieve in the end. In theory this works and maybe I just try to kid myself into beliveing this, but in reality the truth is that I often find that when things are going well, they go very well for me…and when things go bad, they go seriously really bad…and its sometimes really hard to dig yourself out. Worse thing is though, it comes and goes, in peaks and troughs, although the dips usually happen alot quicker than the rises up. I’d certainly be very interested to know how to adapt to your “just get on with it and try to look at things in a clear, straightforward way” of thinking. PM me if you can help me with this.:)
Anyways, to try and get us back onto the aviation related theme here, might I ask for people’s opinions on what they think should happen at BA now, because I am sure none of us would like to see it go under, and it is quite obvious that changes need to be made (on both sides!)
If we can avoid the “sack the strikers/the crew should just shut up and put up!” kind of slanging matches we’ve had so far that would be much appreciated, whilst we can’t help BA resolve its problems directly, we all no doubt might be able to come up with some ideas of our own as to how things could be made better?
My initial thoughts are that with a change of CEO, now is a perfect opportunity to try and turn things around. Ok, so the threat of more strikes is a worry and concern, but management shouldnt just be so stubbon to say “we’re not changing or negotiating”, as that will only serve to further the division between them and their crew and the Union, thus continuing this dispute on even longer than is necessary. If anything the threat of more strikes should be the incentive for both sides to come sort of agreement…the management don’t want them, the crew don’t want to have to do it, and most importantly the public don’t want them either.
Sorry to go off on a slight tangent here, but just as an example, when the Lib-Dems joined up with the Tories, each side negotitated long into the night and each compromised on a variety of complex issues before they agreed to form the Coalition…so why can’t management at BA, the crew/unions get together, and thrash out something between themselves that they can all agree to stick with.
cloud_9They probably did initiate the scheme, BE have probably just followed suit, simply because they have seen the £’s rolling in from the comissions that they no doubt recieve from those people who have unwittingly fallen victim to it.
cloud_9cloud-9 I’m sorry, but I do question the importance of the factors that you highlight. To the vast majority of airline passengers today, with the possible exception of the first/business class people, those aspects are, by and large, of secondary importance. The rise of the God awful ‘LoCo’ carriers are testimony to that. Your own writings ‘ sod customers, sod a decent level of service’ etc would seem to illustrate my point, in this mega competitive age, these standards, so dear to you, and rightly so, have had their day for most travelers. Nowadays the bottom line is how cheaply can I get my bum on that seat and get to where I want to go , and thats it.
cloud_9 I hope we will still be on speaking terms;)
Interflug, I have found your posts to be very interesting and thought-provoking indeed, and may I congratulate you on that…of course, we’re still on speaking terms!:)
The only and real reason that I appear to put up such a fight is because I am so passionate about customer service standards…I live and breath it day in, day out, and I feel an imense amount of personal satisfaction when I am told that I am doing a good job, or when I open a letter (or should I say e-mail…who writes letters thesedays!;)) that says thank-you or congratulates me on offering a great service…it is what inspires me to continue doing what I do, and I do think that some people just don’t understand or appreciate this.
I totally agree with you about the fact that the low-cost carriers have brought about these changes in the industry and the attitudes of people, and I do think that its a great shame that people’s attitudes towards air travel have changed to the point that it now results in “how cheaply can I get my bum on that seat”…or more so, from the airlines perspectives, “how much can we get out of the passenger, seeing as we only charged £5 for his/her seat”.
The truth of the matter is I am going through a bit of a rough patch at the moment because I happen to represent a well-known US airline (Continental), which is merging with United. Continental obviously prides itself on providing an International Concierge service to its Business Class customers, whereas United offers something similar but it is no-way near as good as ours, but as and when the merger nears completion, a decison will ulitmately be made as to whether CO’s Concierge service will survive or not…and I have a hunch that it may not survive, simply because it is a “cost” in some people’s eyes that could be gotten rid of in order to provide a slightly bigger profit than normal.
Flying maybe just isnt meant to be as “fun” or as “exciting” anymore as it once used to be, and perhaps I should begin looking for a new job because at this rate, I could be on the dole queue myself pretty soon!:(
cloud_9Things are changing, and unless BA change with them then there won’t be a national airline in the UK for long. What would you rather have, slightly harder working cabin crew or thousands of people out of work because the airline’s gone bust? This, sadly, is the reality you need to understand.
But BA could/should have changed long before…in fact, when low-cost airlines first came onto the scene. Instead, they blindly chose to think that it/they would be a fad, and that they wouldn’t be successful…how wrong they were/still are!? Of course if you strip everything “service” related out of a “service” product, you end up with lower costs, and then you can pass these savings onto customers, but you cannot then realistically expect people to work just as hard to provide a high level of service, when they do not see any kind of appreciation or reward for their efforts. Also, and I fear we’re going to end up in a similar situation as we did on the Ryanair thread, just because you like to travel with low-cost airlines because they are cheap and convinenet for you, doesn’t mean that everyone does and you have to accept that there are those people who are willing to pay that bit more in return for a better quality service.
The way to look at this is to try and find out how airlines such as Virgin Atlantic managed to change…I’m sure that back in the so-called “old days”, their crews were probably overpaid and they had more crew onboard than was necessary, but they have somehow managed to adapt and change to the market and avoid a strike, probably by negotitating and compromising with their staff, which clearly demonstrates that they care far more about their workers than what BA does about theirs!
What I would like to see is both management and crews working in harmony with each other in order to make the company profitable again, and then continuing to do so for many years to come…which is slightly different to what BA appear to want at the moment which is to make super-massive profits…in these extraordinary economic times, why can’t they just be intent on making a small profit and looking after a loyal customer base?
Sadly though, until this dispute is resolved, and whilst there is all this bitterness and anamosity on both sides, this is not going to happen.
cloud_9The situation you mentioned has no need to occur, therefore it was invented.
Ok, so I might as well just give up now then had I Paul…sod customers, sod a decent level of service, sod everything!
Think this thread needs locking before I do/say something that I am going to regret!:mad:
cloud_9You’re inventing scenarios rather than looking at the actual issue in hand logically.
Inventing scenarios now am I…what nonsense, I am actually quoting almost word for word what I say day in, day out to the passengers that I see and deal with!?:mad:
Clealy goes to show just how much contempt you have for people that try to offer you a decent level of service.
cloud_9For doing what exactly? The strikers have cost the company money. They do not deserve their bonuses.
This is precisely why they have taken them away. The stikers have cost the company money, refused to work and generally have shown disloyalty. Why should this be rewarded?
Yes, but they have not gone on strike for fun, have they? There must be a reason for it, something must have happened, a cause for all of this to have kicked off like this, and that cause has to have come from the management.
This is fantasy and union PR nonsense.
Almost every other airline from Heathrow and Gatwick operate with less cabin crew per flight than BA does. They have plenty happy customers.
BA pays a purser £80K a year for sitting in a chair telling others what to do!
At other airlines, that purser in “on the floor” pushing trolleys like the rest of them. BA want their pursers to start doing that.
As I don’t work for them, I cannot comment on how much they pay and what their individual job role invovles, but I can assure you now, the pursers most certainly does not sit in a chair and dictate to the others what they have to do!:mad:
You talk about good service, how about actually offering it, instead of striking all the time? THAT is what is driving passengers from BA. The uncertainty of whether or not they’ll get the service they pay for and expect. Instead they’re going to airlines where there is no monthly strike action.
They wouldnt be striking if BA didnt choose such a confrontational approach to handling things, would they? And why are BA allowing this ongoing dispute to continue…its in their best interests to get it resolved and as quickly as possible because, as I said in an earlier post, they simply do not have £150m that they can just throw away!
you can kiss that part of your job goodbye. Or maybe even your job completely.
Thanks very much for those kind words of encouragement…it is exactly that confrontational/bullying/offensive kind of attitude that doesn’t work or inspire anyone to want to put more effort into their jobs.
And its a good job that I don’t and would never want to work for BA as they are a terrible airline anyway!:D:diablo:
cloud_9Ok Bmused55/Paul, lets imagine for a moment that you’re onboard a plane and you’re travelling in Business Class.
A member of staff comes up to you…
“Good morning Mr Nichols, how are you sir, its great to have you onboard today. Did you use our lounge this morning? [await answer] Was everything satisfactory? [again, engages with the customer by allowing them to speak!] Ok sir, well just to let you know that we’re anticipating an on-time departure from London this morning, and we’re expecting to arrive into ______ [insert desintation of choice!] approx 30mins earlier than scheduled [await reply], is there anything else I can do to assist you today [await reply]. Ok sir, well like I said its a pleasure to have you onboard sir, I hope you have an enjoyable flight with us today, we really appreciate your business and I look forward to seeing you again soon, Goodbye.”
Compared to…
“Hello sir, welcome onboard, thanks for travelling with us!”.
Now, as a Business Class passenger who has paid quite a bit of money for your ticket, which of the above two would you honestly prefer to get?!
Quite simply, you are not likely to recieve the first of the above if you end up taking a member of the crew away because they are going to have more people to deal with and thus wont be able to dedicate enough time to provide the higher level of service that you might expect of them!?
cloud_9Travel perks help us to perform better because we know that we can reward ourselves with flights/holidays at substantially less cost than what it would normally cost somone like yourself or anyone else for that matter…its an incentive to encourage us to continue providing the same level of service each and every day. The same as our “100% attendance” reward each year is for those people that do not take time off work unncessarily.
I could understand management threatening/choosing to take them away from us if our performance was less than satisfactory…but you can’t just simply turn around to your workforce and say your cutting an incentive in order to save “costs”…without expecting a drop in the level of service that is provided.
As for cutting the member of the cabin crew, it means that the level of service a customer recieves will ultimately be less, and this could result in that particular customer choosing to fly with someone else.
Another example to do with my job…I have to go onboard the aircraft prior to departure and I speak to each passenger in Business Class, welcome them onboard their flight and give them some details such as ETA at their destination, terminal info if they have an onward connecting journey and generally provide whatever assistance I can. It has been shown from the many letters and e-mails that I/we recieve that customers really appreciate this “personal” touch and makes them feel more valued.
Now, on some occasions when we have been short-staffed, I have had to see many more people than what I would normally, and this results in me not being able to spend as much time with a customer as per normal…thus the level of service I can provide is less. If my company came to me and said, “Right Jon, we’ve decided to reduce the number of people in your team”, then they will have to accept that the level of service that can/will be provided will be less than what was able to be provided before…its really quite simple.
So, yes, whilst I agree that it is important to run a business at a profit, surely opearting to a smaller profit and having a loyal customer base who constantly use your service because they like the way it is provided is far better than trying to maximise your profits for the sake of your shareholders and also the pockets of the managers and the executives.
cloud_9Congrats on your 11,000th post GA, shame it had to be a “Moderator Message“…:D:diablo:
Sign In
