BA’s practices (probably true for many other airlines)Back to Forum
Anonymous4 May 2015
I was due to fly back from LOS yesterday night. On Saturday evening though, I received an announcement that the flight will be delayed by … 10 hours! So of course I tried to understand. It seems this is a consequence of Saturday’s flight from LHR that was delayed by 21 hours. Crew resting time explain therefore my flight delay.
But why was the LHR-LOS flight delayed? I was told by BA it went tech. Fine. But digging a bit into the matter, it seems G-BYGB (that went tech) was initially due to go to JFK…
So what probably happened is that BA used the aircraft initially planned to fly to LOS to NYC, not to delay this one too much on a route under heavy competition while leaving the LOS passengers waiting for about 24 hours, since to LOS, the flight is full everyday anyway and the competition milder.
You might argue this is business, but I still see here a hight level of cynicism. Don’t you?4 May 2015
Hi Swissdiver, I agree. As a regular on IB to from Madrid it is one of the flagship routes for Iberia. A few times we have been advised of slight delays (an hour or so) while they get an alternative aircraft. I on more than one occasion have a few minutes later seen the IB flight to Rome or Athens go delayed or cancelled. Only guessing, but assuming the LHR takes priority and the Rome/Athens flights lose their aircraft. Good for me, tough on those going to Athens/Rome. To be honest though, it does make commercial sense to protect from delays and cancellations the routes most important to the airline, and let those less important routes take the brunt of operational difficulties.4 May 2015
Swissdiver, I’d say this was a rational business decision. Of course it meant major inconvenience for you and the other LOS-LHR passengers but I cannot see any cycnicism in BA’S decision, It’s usually the routes with most competition where airlines put their best aircraft. On monopoly routes (such as LOS-LHR where BA offers the only non-stop connection) airlines are particularly reluctant to spend money on their product.4 May 2015
…its not just the one route after… its about the routes after and after…. also a big consideration is when a particular aircraft needs maintenance…. keeping so many aircraft in the air and generating income is more complex than a game of chess…4 May 2015
It seems we are all more or less in agreement, which is a pity because it means we are accepting what is, at the end of the day, ethically questionnable, I think,
And for the record, the crew confirmed the change of aircraft.
P.S.: MartinJ: Virgin is also servicing this route.5 May 2015
Hi Swissdiver, I am not sure there is anything ethically wrong with what the airlines are doing to be honest. They are commercial enterprises and must at the end of the day make purely commercial decisions. If they consider some routes more important for whatever reason than others then it follows they should use whatever resources they deem necessary to protect its reputation and income stream. They then must accept that the routes they allow to suffer will undoubtedly struggle with the reputational damage a second class service will undoubtedly deliver. I am figuring it would all be based on average loadings, competition and margins.5 May 2015
No worse in my view than arriving into T5 from a european destination to be told by the captain that “…..HAL have asked us to park on a domestic stand, so it will mean you being bussed to the arrivals area….”, when it is clear HAL have nothing to do with BA’s stand allocation.5 May 2015