[canucklad]

Gentleman…

On the Rouge topic, I’ve just posted a comment lambasting AC’s race to the bottom by creating Rouge.So in the same vein….
I can understand the reasons why airlines outsource, but they also need to accept the consequences of abdicating responsibility in-house of a primary function.
And no disrespect but as someone who works closely with outsource companies, or lets be euphemistic here.. ..“Partners” ….. The relationship is pretty much dictatorial. You’ll find that Swissport, Gate gourmet et al are pretty much down the food chain. With the airlines adopting a take it or leave it approach to contractual agreements.

As I’ve stated before, employees of outsourcers have no loyalty to their employer, many are now on ZERO contracts, so can you really expect them to have loyalty to their employer’s clients?

And sadly Simon, switching from one “partner” to another “partner” just shifts the underlying problem.

If we want profitable airlines selling us cheapish tickets then I’m afraid we are going to have to accept that there are people serving us on minimum wage with hardly any employee benefits, their wage probably being subsidised by our taxes via income support etc… after we’ve accepted that fact, then it doesn’t take too much to realize we also need to accept sub-standard service from time to time.

EDIT..Posted before I read BigDogs comment

[esselle]

It may not be overtly clear from the preceeding posts, but outsourcing of groundhandling generally has been the norm away from home base for many years, with Swissport, Servisair, Globeground etc etc etc being long established players in the market.

Over time, contracts get renewed at lower tariffs, or they get lost. This means the contractor has to constantly find ways of being more “efficient”. With labour as the major overhead, the gradual erosion of flexibility and buffer can only lead to one thing……

[SimonS1]

Big Dog – I agree although I didn’t word it very well. There is always a trade off between cost and service. However in the airline industry where margins are wafer thin cost is clearly a major driver.

[LuganoPirate]

MrMichael, Swissport was once owned by Swissair so it was Swiss, but was sold a few years ago to a French Private Equity firm. Since then Swissport has gone downhill. If I’m not mistaken they even lost some parts of the ground handling at Zurich to DNATA.

[AMcWhirter]

There’s a piece in the Independent today:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/gatwick-chaos-airline-axes-baggage-handler-swissport-after-extended-delays-9640737.html

[LuganoPirate]

Following on from Simon, BigDog and Canucklad’s comment, while Airlines like any business seeks to lower costs, it’s no different from the majority of us as travelers as we seek the lowest fares and cross over from one airline to the other in order to achieve that. Look no further than this website as we see sales from Emirates, Qatar, BA etc. Sometimes this is even a false economy as savings of say £50 often morph into costs of £100 as other surprise costs emerge.

On another thread Markiv was asking if a fare of $1475 was good value from Seattle to CDG then LHR to Begalaru and return to Seattle. I’m not even sure how the airlines can make money at this fare.

So as we passengers drive down fares the airlines have to save somewhere and so it goes on. Where it leads to I don’t know but as the old adage goes, “you get what you pay for”!

[LuganoPirate]

Mrs. LP travelled from ZRH to JNB this week. Behind her was a man boasting (in German) how little he had paid for his seat, something like chf 450 return. It seems he was a bit of an awkward and demanding passenger and he’d also ordered a special meal of some sort.

When it arrived he immediately started to complain it wasn’t good enough. The cheese was in a box, not fresh cut and so on. The steward was apologetic saying that was what was provided but he would look to see if something else could be found, when a Swiss German said in a loud voice, “you’re boasting how little you paid, so what do you expect, if nothing is good for you then pay to go Buisness next time”.

All those around burst out laughing embarrassing him, but it shut him up and he said not a word more for the rest of the flight.

[canucklad]

LP, just a quick question…..

In light of the gatwick fiasco and the resulting bad publicity, do you think that after it was sold to a foreign company it should have been forced to change its name or at the very least lose its Swiss branding?

After all to the layman, Swissport is directly associated with Switzerland and what that country stands for!!

[BigDog.]

Fair point canucklad.

A country should be able to safeguard its name/brand. Too often companies seek to leverage a name to promote an image synonymous with the country, the whole geography and/or its values and then behave in a totally contrary way.

Elsewhere have said BA should be stripped of the British as since it closed many regional stations it no longer serves Britain.

Though appropriate, it will never happen.

[Poshgirl58]

I wonder why it has taken so long to highlight Swissport’s poor service. My experiences of them at BHX have left a lot to be desired. After landing from EDI, parked on stand with no airbridge, waited 15 minutes for bus. It arrived with no ground staff on it so it went back, had to wait another 10 minutes, by which time passengers and captain were getting very frustrated. Then we were herded into a locked room because they didn’t know the code for door to the baggage hall. This was 8pm in August!

ZB flight to PFO was delayed because 4 Swissport staff could not get the passengers numbers to agree. Senior FA was getting very frustrated with them, especially when they eventually got the same number that she had.

Both companies now with Menzies.

[BigDog.]

The bean counters have removed all slack as being low cost/ cost effective is their mantra. They have forgotten that people are at the centre of their business whether customers or operators/employees.

Having no slack will enable lowest cost when everything goes to plan, however when it doesn’t it goes rapidly awry. Recently an unexpected high arrival rate caused huge backlog in baggage which knocked onto baggage being loaded (or not as the case may be).
Other examples of major delays have been passport control at LHR, long backlogs following minor weather hiccups or runway incidents.

Basically there are little to no tolerances. Mostly caused imo by cost pressures, which at present appear to be condoned by the buying public.

[SimonS1]

Indeed BigDog. Add to that discouraging any discretion on the front line and you find that customer facing staff are literally scared to take any decisions or show any initiative without contacting a manager first. Better to say no and keep one’s head below the parapet.

[AMcWhirter]

Interesting piece on Sky News today re baggage handling statistics at LGW.

Although the figures relate to last June, not a single flight (presumably handled by Swissport) met the target time for baggage delivery.

news.sky.com/story/1311408/gatwick-fliers-advised-over-swissport-problems

[openfly]

I am fascinated that Swissport have recruited 60 extra baggage handling staff and overnight this is going to solve their problems.

My question is…how do these 60 people get instant security clearance to work airside??! It takes several weeks to achieve clearance. Or maybe Gatwick are just turning a blind eye to the security aspect in this instance to quickly improve the situation…and their reputation. Needs must!

[BigDog.]

As mentioned elsewhere, zero hours, minimum hourly rate, subcontractor all leads to zero goodwill.

With UK airlines, gone are the times employees would go that extra mile to help out in problematic occasions (weather, ash, unplanned incidents, back logs etc). Indeed why should they when they are bullied, demotivated and led by amoral aloof bean counters.

I wonder how many ivory tower/waterworld types have had the wherewithal to role up their sleeves and lead from the front.

[Author]

Posts