| Journal: TWUK | Section: |
| Title: | Issue Date: 08/05/00 |
| Author: | Page Number: 13 |
| Copyright: Other |
We always pander to the demands of airlines when they change flight times. With new EC proposals it seems they may be about to get their comeuppance
Noel Josephides
The start of the season is upon us and controlled chaos reigns.Our biggest problem is the very late advice from airlines that timings have changed. It’s easy for them because they don’t have to face the music. I resent having my reservations staff, who work so hard, being reduced to tears by clients.
But the buck stops with us and not with the airlines or the crazy system which creates so much ill-will. You see, our clients think it’s our bad practice and not the airlines’ or the system’s bad practice. I would like to invite any charter airline chief to spend a day answering telephones when clients have received letters informing them of flight time changes at the last minute.
It’s just no good raising the public’s expectations with fancy advertisements and glossy promises when we all know that we, as an industry, are just incapable of getting even the basics right. Instead of hiding problems from customers we should be truthful and tell them of the enormous difficulties of getting anything to work on time so that, when it all does go wrong, they don’t get an awful shock.
Our glitzy airports with space-age images hide terrible inadequacies.It’s ironic that while all this is going on, we should get an e-mail from Mike Ambrose, the director general European Regions Airline Association, asking the industry to help deflect the attention of the European Commission’s proposals for consumer protection where they relate to airline delays.
I quote from the text: “The items of greatest concern to Europe’s airlines and airports are proposals to introduce financial compensation from airlines for passengers that have been delayed. The Commission believes that the airline concerned could then, where applicable, claim the cost of the passenger compensation from the Air Traffic Service Provider or airport whose inadequate performance caused the delay. The theory is that the creation of financial penalties on these service providers would act as a deterrent against poor performances.”
The text goes on to outline the enormous difficulties in apportioning the blame for delays and ends as follows: “The EC proposals were framed with good intentions but they are likely to create an unhealthy relationship between airlines and infrastructure and service providers. The great majority of consumers will gain little benefit and could end up paying higher fares.”
Well, I could manage a hollow laugh in sympathy with the airlines who have had it their way for far to long.
We tour operators take the flack when charter airlines get it wrong. We sign contracts that belong in the stone age, we are fobbed off with excuses that we know are often sheer fabrication and our poor reservations staff do all the dirty work for them for free.
Many of us have little sympathy for Mike Ambrose. When it comes to dealing with customers, the airlines have had it too easy for far too long. They do not live in the real world in which we tour operators live. If they bent a little towards us, and supported and appreciated what we do for them, then perhaps we may be more interested in helping them fight the EC. After all, did they help us fight the EC package proposals which have made our lives so difficult?
“Our glitzy airports with space-age images hide terrible inadequacies”