British Airways

[benjamat]

Ok, no offence taken. Having spent more than 30 years in senior management in large businesses I have been involved all of this time in maximising profits whee possible. A lesson I have learned is that what looks good on paper often does not translate into practice. Another lesson is that if you have been squeezed on price by a customer (here BA) there is an element of inevitability in a deterioration in service levels.

Of course BAA is a momopoly but BA is also by far the biggest customer.

Thanks for comments, nice to see serious thought about posts.

[Captain Chaos]

I used to fly BKK-LHR-BKK regularly (5 - 6 times / year) on business from 2002-2006. Have to say never had any huge problems with BA biz class (Club World) but I just didn't get on with those funny lie flat beds they put in - they were too narrow and too hard for me.

Also found food and service a bit hit & miss at times but then can probably say that about virtually every airline I have been on.

When Qantas introduced their own biz class sleeper seats I quickly swapped to QF - more comfortable for me personally and I thought the booze and tucker was MUCH better than on BA.

Couple of friends came out on vacation to BKK and flew BA super cattle - oops, I mean Premium Economy - and thought it was really good for the money. Looks like the old BA biz class to me but at about half the fare! Never tried it myself but it seems like a good deal and I wish more airlines had this option...

Overall, BA to me are a bit like Thai - not necessarily a 'bad airline' - can think of many worse ones - but expensive for what they offer compared to the other first division players (SQ, CX etc).

Just my two satangs,

CC

[CharlieB]

I swore I would only fly BA if I couldn't get a seat on another airline after my first flight on them about 14 years ago. Since then I have only flown with them three times, once because they were the only airline flying into that particular airport and once because it was booked for me by a friend. Somehow they managed to get a reputation many years ago of being a decent airline, but have rested on this for the last 20 years and somehow think they can get away with a shoddy service and still have people choose them. I would much prefer to fly with any other major airline than with them.

[tw25rw]

I think BA had a good reputation in the US (which might say more about their airlines) but have had a crap reputation in the UK as long as I can remember, which goes back to BOAC and govt ownership. I'm sure most people who flew them swore off them at one time or other.

I honestly don't think they are that bad, just overpriced and, in economy, cramped

[geriatrickid]

Oh and I forget Geriatric kid this little self-admission from the baggage problems during T5 opening....

Airport operator BAA's computer system which sorts bags before they are loaded onto flights malfunctioned and manual sorting had to be carried out.

British Airways cancelled 24 flights to and from Terminal 5 on Saturday due to the latest baggage problems.

The terminal suffered baggage problems within hours of opening nine days ago.

A spokeswoman described the situation on Saturday as "incredibly disappointing" but said the airline was working with BAA to resolve the situation as quickly as possible.

BAA said the problem was entirely its responsibility.

A spokeswoman said: "We apologise to BA and all passengers who have been affected, and we assure them that our specialist staff are working hard to resolve the problem and keep disruption to BA's operation to a minimum.

Does this not contradict your earlier statement saying that baggage handling was the responsibility of the airlines?

No it doesn't.

BAA took responsibility for its actions. You are aware that BAA wanted to delay the opening of T5 precisely because of the software and mechanical issues but was pressured to open earlier than it should have. The same issue happened at Denver airport with a similar automated system. Airlines never learn. When the engineers say don't do something, that means don't do it.

The fact that there was a systemic error in the machinery over a number of days does not contradict my earlier statement. A properly tagged bag that falls off the internal transfer conveyor is easily retrieved. The issue gets down to improper tagging at the checkin counter and failure to load the baggage into the containers. That's where the problem is for most airlines. (As well, some PAX don't show up on time and there is inadequate time for the bags to pass screening and travel to the loading destination.)

If your position was correct, then the number of lost bags should be specific to T5. The fact is that the numbers are constant. They were bad before T5's opening and they are just as bad today. If your logic was corect, then there would be no lost or delayed luggage at other BA destinations. The lost baggage issue is not isolated to BA's LHR hub.

Look at your baggage tags. They are bar coded. As that bag passes along the conveyors the tag is read and BAA (and other airports) is able to trace the bag within the airport. If they lose it in the BAA system, they have a good idea where it is in the system because of the positioning of the barcode readers. BAA knows when the bag is deposited at the airlines baggage loading location. If the airline is short staffed or the bar code is incorrect, then the bag will most likely not be loaded on the plane.

The airlines have cut back on baggage handlers. In North America, many airports have literally had meltdowns because airline baggage staff took mass sick leaves or just didn't bother to show up during holiday time. Classic examples are the shutdown of US Airways and ComAir (Delta) a couple years ago during Christmas. PAX were flying without luggage because there were no handlers. Same thing happened at Pearson International, Air Canada over Christmas a couple years ago. BA is no different than any other airline in that regard. They've cut back on airline staff both onboard and outside the aircraft.

[torrenova]

Overall, BA to me are a bit like Thai - not necessarily a 'bad airline' - can think of many worse ones - but expensive for what they offer compared to the other first division players (SQ, CX etc).

Just my two satangs,

CC

I think you've hit the nail on the head there. When I did the LHR-BKK-LHR or LHR-HKG-LHR or LHR-NRT-LHR routes for years I started in the back of the plane, had a good few years in the middle and front, then after finishing work went back to the rear again.

BA we ok in business and first and had the advantage of being direct. JAL were the best for years to Tokyo for me and Cathay or Virgin into Hong Kong. However, when paying yourself and in the back, price is obviously a major consideration or you would not be in economy. If JAL were $xxx and BA were 75% $xxx then you vote with your wallet. When prices are largely similar, your mileage programme and preferences come into it.

With taxes and fees being so great a percentage of economy prices these days, the mileage programmes are largely immaterial in economy as you have to pay the surcharges and taxes on free flights anyway.

Going to BKK, there is not a carrier direct or indirect that can compete on price with Etihad and their equipment is first class.

[bkkjames]

No it doesn't.

BAA took responsibility for its actions. You are aware that BAA wanted to delay the opening of T5 precisely because of the software and mechanical issues but was pressured to open earlier than it should have. The same issue happened at Denver airport with a similar automated system. Airlines never learn. When the engineers say don't do something, that means don't do it.

The fact that there was a systemic error in the machinery over a number of days does not contradict my earlier statement. A properly tagged bag that falls off the internal transfer conveyor is easily retrieved. The issue gets down to improper tagging at the checkin counter and failure to load the baggage into the containers. That's where the problem is for most airlines. (As well, some PAX don't show up on time and there is inadequate time for the bags to pass screening and travel to the loading destination.)

If your position was correct, then the number of lost bags should be specific to T5. The fact is that the numbers are constant. They were bad before T5's opening and they are just as bad today. If your logic was corect, then there would be no lost or delayed luggage at other BA destinations. The lost baggage issue is not isolated to BA's LHR hub.

Look at your baggage tags. They are bar coded. As that bag passes along the conveyors the tag is read and BAA (and other airports) is able to trace the bag within the airport. If they lose it in the BAA system, they have a good idea where it is in the system because of the positioning of the barcode readers. BAA knows when the bag is deposited at the airlines baggage loading location. If the airline is short staffed or the bar code is incorrect, then the bag will most likely not be loaded on the plane.

The airlines have cut back on baggage handlers. In North America, many airports have literally had meltdowns because airline baggage staff took mass sick leaves or just didn't bother to show up during holiday time. Classic examples are the shutdown of US Airways and ComAir (Delta) a couple years ago during Christmas. PAX were flying without luggage because there were no handlers. Same thing happened at Pearson International, Air Canada over Christmas a couple years ago. BA is no different than any other airline in that regard. They've cut back on airline staff both onboard and outside the aircraft.

If your position was correct, then the number of lost bags should be specific to T5. The fact is that the numbers are constant. They were bad before T5's opening and they are just as bad today. If your logic was corect, then there would be no lost or delayed luggage at other BA destinations. The lost baggage issue is not isolated to BA's LHR hub.

The above statement is interesting. I pointed to T5 as an example and I certainly don't disagree that the baggage situation at LHR was terrible before it's opening but to imply that 40,000 bags were mis-barcorded by a lack of BA staff is just wrong. LHR is a distaster period (over capacity, poor facilities) and the one's that run it are BAA. Because BA has the majority of international slots there also means that any baggage issue (self-afflicted or by 3rd party such as BAA) will have a greater affect on it and its passengers.

This is a debate that could go on and on and on mate. I am not saying BA were / are faultless but I think BAA should share shoulder their fare share of the blame.