Trends in ground handling

[tgdxb]

Hi everyone,
I am trying to summarise the key challenges faced by the ground handling sector and wondered if either you would have document(s) to share or remarks to share.
Also, what results are expected from ground handlers and what are their major pain points.
Many thanks for your contribution(s).

[mantug01]

So many pain points .....

Airlines are offering passengers very cheap fares, just to get a bum on a seat, this is causing the airlines to cut their costs (so they can make a small profit) and tendering for ground handling at very reduced rates, this is causing the cost per turn to be greatly reduced from what it was only a few years ago.

The reduced turnaround rate is now causing strain on every handling agent to turn the aircraft and make any small profits to keep their business alive.

Some contacts its a very fine line for the ground handler to break even. The result is a very poor standard of handling i.e. no staff available to meet the inbound flight, as they cannot afford to hire any excess staff to allow for it.

The airlines are still expecting the ground handler to jump through hoops even through they are not even paying enough for a loop in the first place!

[groundhogbhx]

It would appear that the worm is now starting to turn. The trend with both Servisair and Aviance now seems to be to push for increased charges to get to a level that makes the business viable. This has resulted in some changes in HA's around the country, and some new base openings for existing opens. The only one bucking the trend seems to be Swissport, they have gone from charging at least breakeven to going as low as it takes to keep/win the business.

If only they would all sing from the same hymn sheet the good staff would stay and service levels would improve :ugh:

[ReadyToGo]

My main gripe with ground handling was the trend in reduced turnaround times.

Low-cost airlines want it both ways, minimum time on the ground and impressive on-time performance. And sadly it can't always be done.

YES, you can turn around a 737 in 25 minutes. IF everything goes to plan, but sometimes delays are un-avoidable. 25minutes is not long to offload a hundred bags and pax, and get them all on. Sometimes there are going to be complications that you just cannot avoid. More often than not, these factors that cause delays are often only very minor delays of 2 or 3 minutes, but as far as the airline is concerned its a good excuse to issue a penalty to the agents and keep their own costs down.

Part of the reason I left the handling side of aviation was because at times, some airlines were willing delays and demanding the impossible. All with the aim of catching us out so they can impose thier penalties.

RTG!

[tgdxb]

Thanks for these useful comment; wondering if more available. Thanks again.

[Opssys]

I would like to see the Analysis which makes a 25 Minute 737 Turnaround a standard!
If this is considered to be both the planned and minimum time, then even a short delay at the beginning of an operating day could propagate through the rest of that days flying.

[groundhogbhx]

Good morning Mr Vine, maybe the unions should give them 1 more chance to talk and warn that the consequences of not talking are their members not working. It is bad enough having to put up with the poor working conditions without the company going back on a pay deal:ugh:

[no sig]

Opssys

It really isn't about any analysis as such and I don't know of any 'standard' of 25 minutes for the 737- it's a target; and at the most basic level it is simply about optimial aircraft utilisation.

The 25 minute turnaround on the B737 is achieveable most of the time at some airports, but not achievable all of the time at all airports. Smart airlines know that and schedule accordingly taking into account historial turnaround data at a given airport. What you don't see at the turnaround is the scheduled block time for a given sector which will often soak-up some of turnaround delays and provide the ops controllers with a bit of schedule recovery. But the point you make is valid- with unrealistic scheduling you can carry a morning delay to late in the evening if the line of flying has no buffers or you don't have an opportunity to swap the delay out by using another aircraft.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

Wages are definitely the primary issue as far as safety goes.

Some of the dispatchers at a certain "Circus" are on as little as 13k and would not know how to do a manual loadsheet, know the bear minimum about DG, have the IQ of a mosquito and are generally useless.

You get what you pay for I guess..........

[ReadyToGo]

I'm not sure if its industry-wide, but last year when I finally decided a career change was needed, UK low-cost carriers were expecting a 25minute turnaround of a 737. Obviously they would schedule for more where they could, but if delays were building up, 25mins was all an agent had to turnaround a flight before the fines and penalties began. Then they began scheduling 25minute turnarounds in summer schedules.

(In fact, I had heard through the grapevine that this was one of the key reasons that Servisair at NCL pulled the plug on the easyjet contract. They simply couldn't provide the men and equipment to ensure a 25minute turnaround on what EZY were prepared to pay, and they weren't prepared to be fined heavily for not meeting the 25min deadline or leaving bags behind)

If what "ex cargo clown" is saying is true, and that you have poor dispatchers, and they are under time constraints of 25minutes, then I hate to say it, but safety will be compromised, and it will be compromised regular.

Poor wages, poor training by handling agents... poor contracts and high expectations by airlines... all adds up to what is wrong in the industry. In many ways I'm happy to be out of it

RTG!

[tigger2k8]

on domestic (inbound and outbound) its possible to achieve the 25min turnaround... sadly EZY have a habit of having such routes as "KRK-GVA" or a "FAO-ALC" and schedule them for 25mins... thats when it gets interesting, as in most cases u will have 3 man teams... by the time the steps and GPU are in thats down to 20mins (unless ofcourse theres problems with the GPU, which then means 1 guy is running around looking for a replacement, which wastes approx 5 mins) so that leaves around 10 minutes to get the bags off and then reload.. and the remaining 5 mins to get buggies, remove back steps, disconnect GPU and put tug on....

and ofcourse the possible offload of bags.. cant believe they make the handling firm accountable for any delays caused in offloading bags.. its not exactly a 2 minute job looking for 1 bag among 110 in a 737

if EZY increased their turnaround times to 30 minutes they'd run with far less delays... sure it might mean that the a/c will nightstop an hour later at night, but wouldnt that be better than missing a slot for a busy airport due to ground crews struggling?

i think the UK has the fastest easyJet turnaround time (25min) while most places in Europe/international will get 35mins+

[42psi]

I'd suggest tigger has hit the nail on the end there ...

25 mins is achievable ... many years ago I was involved with B732's (that shows how long ago...:eek:) that did regular 35 min turnarounds with 120 pax + bags + 1500 Kgs frt/mail off & on.

There is little margin for error or timewasting so you need a capable dispatcher and adequate numbers of groundcrew.

And in those days a computer failure up to STD - 7 mins was not expected to result in any departure delay. Data grabbed off the logging printer and a manual loadsheet completed/delivered so that doors closed of -3mins could still be achieved for an on time push.


That was the world I knew prior to "low cost".


Now ..... all costs are at minimums.

Many (not all) of today's dispatchers (sorry no insult intended but it's what I've seen myself) do not "drive" or "control" the turnaround.
They turn up (it seems) simply to record the delay reason, tear the loadsheet off the printer, walk it to the flight deck and hand it over.


That's driven by the cost control .. someone works out that using poorly trained/motivated staff results in one delay every XXX flights ... that's cost effective so it's done.


With the turnaround prices being paid (plus penalties to recoup some of that) you get only three ramp staff to unload/load and position all the kit.

It's not rocket science ... two sets of steps, enough trailers for the bags, belt loader(s) plus tug/bar and often a GPU 'cos the low costs don't want to use FEP's.

Cover all that lot with three staff and what sort of a work environment and likleyhood to succeed are you creating?


Oh dear .. that did rather turn into a min-rant didn't it .. sorry :E

[ReadyToGo]

oh and add the fact that ACARS has actually killed off any form of understanding between dispatch, ramp and flight deck, and theres another "trend" in handling.

Before ACARS, Dispatch, Ramp and Flight Deck, (generally) worked for each other. The flight deck would often be happy to explain the +3minute delay as "Busy Ramp" or "long taxi to runway".
In return, when the Flight Deck needed a little extra time, Dispatch would cover them in the same way.

When a Passenger was a few minutes late, Dispatch might let them on because it would save the hassle of having the lads re-open a hold and root through all the bags. Because they knew they could "wing a few minutes" from a decent captain who understood the logic.

Now, ACARS tells everyone EXACTLY when the doors were shut. So everyone is fighting to pass the delay. I got to the stage where dispatchers were willing passengers to be late, because that extra 10mins allowed for finding the bag would be enough to let them finish what they were doing.
I've seen Ramp Agents called into offices over a a 5minute delay because they had an offload of 120 from Malaga, and an onload of 111 (+18 golf clubs) on a Faro, and line managers refusing to accept delays.
I've even seen Captains refuse LMC's on manual loadsheets for no other reason than to buy more time to cover their own inefficiencies.

ACARS has created a "them and us" mentality that just didnt exist when you dealt with older non-ACARS aircraft. Although saying that, on the day I left the industry, there were still some great "old school" crews out there, but they're a dying breed!

Rant over!

RTG!

[Manual Braking]

I worked as a dispatcher on behalf of easyJet for almost three years and agree with all the above. One day the easyJet/ground handling 'management' came into our ops room with a list of each of the turnarounds we had performed in the past 2 weeks. They then wanted each of us to explain the reasons for the 1 and 2 minute delays that were not recorded, but had been picked up by ACARS.

In the end i was hoping the cabin crew would take as long as they wanted over their cleaning/seat pockets/security checks. As long as i had a corridor full of pax waiting, i felt i was doing my job.

I soon became a bit fed up with it all and only enjoyed the job when i was dispatching over at the cargo apron. I will never forget the day the easyJet base captain turned round to me and asked what the 30 SECOND delay will be.

I now work for the other low cost airline as flight crew - (non-ACARS aircraft). It seems to be a bit more laid back over this side!

MB

[jerboy]

And in those days a computer failure up to STD - 7 mins was not expected to result in any departure delay. Data grabbed off the logging printer and a manual loadsheet completed/delivered so that doors closed of -3mins could still be achieved for an on time push.

Hmmm... I call BS 42psi. Computer failure at -7, running the loadsheet out to the a/c and closing doors takes 2 mins (minimum), doors closed at -3. That gives you 2 minutes to complete a manual loadsheet. 7-10 minutes is what a well trained load controller will complete it in nowadays. I'm sure you guys were much better in the good old days but I doubt you were that good. My signature would certainly never go near a load sheet I'd completed that quickly.

But I agree with what you say. Often at my base a single dispatcher (no gate staff) is given a 733 to turn around. Up to 148 pax, 3 or 4 WCHS/C, buggies, preboards etc etc. How the hell am I meant to marshal the pax outside, tear boarding cards, enter boarding numbers, complete loadsheet/paperwork, liaise with check in/loading/ops/airport info and keep the crew happy. All whilst your next flight is on the final approach.

Certainly where I come from, the dispatcher doesn't just turn up and record the delay reason; without us the turnaround wouldn't happen at all.

Do I see myself as incapable? No. I have all the load control and dispatch training I need (its not difficult, lets not fool ourselves here), and have done the job for long enough. What makes things go tits up is the lack of staff, and this is directly related to the reduction in handling fees being paid to the companies. As soon as industry standard minimum pricing is agreed, things will improve (although price fixing is illegal remember). Until then airlines, especially LCCs, will continue to shaft the people that run their operation on the ground.

oh and add the fact that ACARS has actually killed off any form of understanding between dispatch, ramp and flight deck, and theres another "trend" in handling.

Amen to that. Since BA have phased out the non ACARS 733/5 fleet from LGW, to the ACARS enabled 734/A319, some stations figures have taken a battering!

Similar things occur elsewhere; on check-in for example its nigh on impossible to use your discretion and sneak an extra bag down for a pax, if an extra tag is printed money has to be paid - its no longer about understanding and trust. Its a shame...

[Trash_Hauler]

Good morning Mr Vine, maybe the unions should give them 1 more chance to talk and warn that the consequences of not talking are their members not working. It is bad enough having to put up with the poor working conditions without the company going back on a pay deal

Not that simple I am afraid... Since good old Iron Lady Thatcher ripped the testicles out of the Unions, we are very weak. It only requires 50%+1 for union recognition, and closed shops are against the law so therefore potentially HALF of the workforce is non union. Although they still benefit from those of us who PAY our union dues and are WILLING to stand up for ourselves, we the UNION MEMBERS are very very expendable. Management doesn't give a toss about us and looks at us as easily replaceable, so striking doesnt accomplish shiite!

[PRLB]

BHXvine

The end is very close with that shower of **** called pissport they put too many eggs in one basket or should i say they cared to much about one airline flybe!!!. They had warnings from other airlines if the service didnt improve they would be off thats prob why you havent got your 2 year pay rise the muppetts oh well the gate is slowly creeping open:ok::ok:

[Stopend]

Bottom line is that if the price is right an airline will stay with a handling agent. Quality of service does not seem to matter, unless it becomes so bad that its unworkable or the handling agent goes bust. Flybe are getting a very naff service at the moment with no staff on stand to meet the aircraft so often its become the norm!

[jorge.7460]

The dispatcher is a dying breed...

We do a job which is essential safety wise and we are being replaced for cost reasons by people who are not properly trained.

[groundhand]

Jorge,
"The dispatcher is a dying breed..."

In real terms the dispatcher should not be required if every service provider did their job effectively and efficiently and the aircraft are equipped with ACARS.

Back in the mid 90's SAS got rid of their 'standard' dispatchers in Scandinavia and contracted service providers to do their jobs and supervise themselves. they did have a 'hot squad' at their hubs to intervene if flights were off schedule.

In todays LC market, the dispatch role is defunct already. They are 'runners'; there is very little to coordinate on the turnround as the majority do not have TSU/WSU/Catering/Cleaning/Cargo; so its pax/bags/fuel and off we go. The Gh rarely do a full loadsheet, they do loading information for ACARS or the flight deck to complete their own loadsheets - all of which are very basic and very simple.

Question:

Is an Airbus 319/320 a better option for short turnrounds than a B736/7/8?
Airbus have wider aisles and the passengers seem to be able to pass one another more easily and there is not that huge rear hold per the Boeings.

Just a thought.

GH

[jorge.7460]

Getting rid of dispatchers is a big mistake if you ask me, but of course being one I maybe a bit biased :)

But I have never seen it as being a good thing.

For example I was a dispatcher for KLM and we were working closely with Air France who did not use dispatcher on its AMS flights but iso the role was partly done by ramp staff, partly by Passage staff...

Their punctuality was crap where ours was excellent and AF was the first to agree that it was because there was one person in charge of the flight and not three or four different ones :)

[Dropline]

Get rid of the dispatcher and you've got no-one to take full responsibility for the safe and efficient turnaround of an aircraft. That means no-one to:

Check the loaders are loading the correct bags cargo and mail into the correct holds...
Check the gate staff are boarding the correct pax in the correct manner onto the correct plane...
Chase up all the service providers and ensure they are keeping to SLA's
Check the fuelling is correct and that correct fuelling procedures are being followed if pax are boarding during fuelling
Ensure the aircraft is in trim and produce and/or check the loadsheet is correct and reflects the way the holds are loaded and the pax are sat
Sign off all the paperwork
Ensure all DfT, CAA, airport and airline rules and regulations are followed
Account for every minute of every delay
Spot and rectify the mistakes made by the increasing number of poorly trained low paid staff currently being recruited in an attempt to cut costs
Offload the drunk and the aggressive before they get the chance to wreak havoc at 30000 feet... (and find their bags)
Reassure the nervous and pacify the delayed and the disgruntled
Deal with just about everything else that can and does go wrong during a turnaround...

Get rid of the dispatcher and you've also got no-one to blame...

[jorge.7460]

I agree :)

AF has put the ramp chief (don't know how you call them in English) as more or less in charge of the flight, with the Loading Instruction and Loadsheet in charge of a CLC.

But the result is crap because it means he cannot do his job as efficiently as before and because he is missing the knowledge of the dispatcher to solve problems. Therefore any flight which does not go accordingly to plan has huge delays because there's nobody to arrange things.

[groundhand]

Dropline,

You miss the point.
What you are identifying is that people are not doing what thay are supposed to do - nearly all your points are check/chase items - add in either hand held or stand located access to DCS and you will struggle to justify the role IF everyone does as they are supposed to.

Splitting responsibility to overwing/underwing; loading TL responsible for underwing and for the vereification of the load; boarding agent responsible for overwing and for confirmation of boarding. Load planning and loadsheet provided by remote CLC facility and ACARS on aircraft. Service providers do what they are paid to do and why do you need a dispatcher?

Now, you may quote that at your airport etc. it would not work but that is not to say that, with the right structure, training etc. it could not work. It has and does work at some airports.

As an ex Dispatcher myself and then having moved up into management, I know that a good dispatcher can be worth their weight in gold however, I've also managed (on a temporary basis) operations where the disaptchers have been worse than useless (although they all thought that they were the Gods of the ramp - and Jorge, not too far from where I suspect you work) and super efficient operations with no dispatch function.

If I was starting up a new GH company with no history or employment baggage I would now not plan the Dispatch function into the company operating procedures - unless the client base were non ACARS.

Just one view point, not saying that it is the right one!
GH

[jorge.7460]

You're right saying that there are a lot of crappy dispatchers, at least where I'm working at the moment, but a good dispatcher will be a great asset and will be worth the extra salary :ok:

[Dropline]

groundhand... you miss the point also. The trend today in ground handling is down. Everything has to be done quicker and cheaper and everyone is trying to cut costs. New contracts are won on price, and undercutting is achieved by cutting costs (and dare I say it, corners?). Handling agents and service providers are caught up in a constant cycle of redundancies and re-organisation, and the inevitable outcome is less staff on lower wages. The consequent high turnover of staff leads to a lack of experience in all areas of the operation and mistakes are becoming more and more common.

ACARS can't make a gate agent double check all the boarding cards when they don't tally and ACARS can't make the loader move the bags he put into the wrong hold by mistake! Pilots can't call ACARS up to the flight deck when they need something!

IF everyone did their job properly my job would be much easier. But they don't, which is why someone has to co-ordinate the whole show. I've lost count of the number of loadsheet, loading and boarding errors I've spotted and rectified. Lets not forget that these errors can actually cause accidents.

Take away the dispatcher and not only are you removing a vital link in the safety chain, you also have no-one in control and no-one taking responsibility. Yes there are crap dispatchers out there, but if you pay peanuts...

[tigger2k8]

Is an Airbus 319/320 a better option for short turnrounds than a B736/7/8?
Airbus have wider aisles and the passengers seem to be able to pass one another more easily and there is not that huge rear hold per the Boeings.

in my opinion yes mainly due to the wider aisles and the rear hold having a door in the middle.. less pressure on ramp staff for loading/unloading as theres no throwing/sliding bags over a 3-4m distance (737s for example)... not to mention that around 150 bags can also go in the rear... so theres usually no messing around with the front hold (unless things need balanced or theres an unusally high amount of bags)

[Tyrekicker2]

Operational experience of the front line is not the only element required to make an effective manager. I will share my experience to explain my resoning.
I was one that came up through the ranks - right place, right time - and demonstrated commitment and ability got me into management relatively young. I did have over 12 years direct operational experience in all aspects of the handling operation by then (with exception of ticketing). I had the benefit of excellent operational and supervisory skills training by the well renowned airline I was working for. I was a ground handling department head in a huge airline company.

Then we were outsourced. I was now a member of a very small management team running a handling business at a major international airport. Although I knew the operation inside-out, I was not so savvy in other management skills like HR, finance, contracting, sales and marketing etc. As I had some responsibility in these areas, I kind of picked it up as I went along. I thought I was doing a good job, my boss was very happy with me and we were expanding the business in a controlled way.

Realising our people were our major asset we engaged in several inititiatives inclusing the Investors in People award scheme. Amongst other things this included a 360 degree evaluation system - something that I believe is extremely valuable (although it was very painful at the time:}). Having identified weaknesses and gaps in the management team we engaged a consulting company to provide a series of one-day training courses on management skills, self analysis and team building. This was in the good old days of the mid 1990's and we were in the black figures even if only just. The investment made in training was still a relatively high part of our budget.

Encouraged by what I had learned I enrolled in a college course: Certificate in Mangement Skills - degree level. Every tuesday afternoon and evening at college for a year. Very hard work with 15 assignments to be completed during the year on the 5 elements HR, IT, Operations, Finance and Personal Development. No easy task when you are working long hours already. I persevered and graduated successfully. I found I was much changed by the experience, I was no longer just a "technical expert" but I was also much more self confident and outgoing.

Shortly after I graduated I left the handling company (although not ground handling) to take a position in an international trade organisation. Here I had the opportunity to work on many consultancy projects around the world for over 8 years. I worked with a multitude of handling organisations, both independent and airline or airport based on a wide variety of projects including quality management, safety management, company restructuring and process re-engineering.

Pretty much everywhere I found managers and department heads that were promoted from the ranks - technical expertise abounded, but not one had received any real manangement training when they clocked off their last shift and took their seat in the mangement offices. Without fail, they were all very resistant to change. It was like looking in the mirror - been there, done that and got the T-shirt.

Of course the MD or CEO was a business manager, but in my opionion his/her team were all missing a few pieces required to see the bigger picture.

Sadly many companies see training as a cost rather than an investment. They do not select employees carefully enough. faill to train and motivate them, manage them poorly and suffer from high turnover.

The whole industry is in crisis. lurching from one problem to the next.

My simplistic solution:
Pay people enough to put bread on their table.
Select people according to their aptitude and train them sufficiently.
Properly manage and motivate them.
Involve them actively in safety and quality management.
Give them the tools they need.
Listen to them and don't forget to say thank you.

Airlines do see ground handling as a necessary evil, but unless they pay sufficient fees to allow the handlers to do more than merely survive, they may end up having to do it themselves again. That will be far more expensive!

Sorry was a long post, but if you have taken the time to read it I hope there was something useful in it :)

[42psi]

Groundhand.....

The key driving force is lowest possible cost.

In doing that you define the level of ability and expertise deployed to the various roles.

I feel you have missed how this really impacts.


The wage paid, the money/time spent on training, the money spent on equipment (buying & maintaining) etc. and the company owners (board etc) requirements for returns on investment are what decide if you can do the job.

With the key drivers these days being the minimum cost while producing a profit (often miniscule in general business terms) there are few options.


If you could attract staff with suitable skills/abilities and trained them well they could of course operate as you suggest.

But given the current market place you will not get those people generally and will get neither the funds nor the time to train up beyond absolute minimums those you do get.

I'd go so far as to suggest that if you look closely at most HA's training units/plans (and I've audited quite a few in my time) you'll see that their primary purpose is actually to protect the company (HA) from the HSE in case of accident.


This means that your loading team leader/lead pax agent/load control agent or whatever etc. actually don't have either the knowledge or probably the ability to function in that way.


They can only follow a "list" starting at item 1 and ending when the task is complete. They don't understand what each step actually does or how it integrates with the others on their list or someone elses.


Someone mentioned boarding pax while fuelling ... that's a good one and while the rules vary carrier to carrier if we're honest just how many of todays pax boarding agents, loading staff, or a/c fuellers or anyone else might actually know what the requirements are to do this?

And if they don't know either the needs or even if it's happening then how do they ensure that they don't without knowing compromise the requirements.

Other, of course, than simply saying "can't be done" !!

I see one particular handling agent lose bags off trailers regularly simply because they will not/can not (?) teach their staff how to stack them properly so they don't all come off at the first corner (of course they never use restraints as I've yet to see any on their trailers).


I've seen (and argued against) HA's fixing staff levels for a loading shift based on reducing the team numbers by one for a shift because "we did it with XX last week so keep dropping it by one crew until we hit problems!.


I often wonder from the comments I hear just how many pilots still think that the person on the headset talking to them is an engineer liney rather than realising it's simply one of the loading crew.

I've had myself to explain to a HA finance manager (who had just been recruited from outside the industry) why staff numbers fell in winter and rose in summer.

Believe me no accountant wants to have the staff employed before the revenue to pay their wages starts coming in the door......


We live in a world of minimums and that in reality means minimum costs/skills/abilities.

Not because the guys & gals doing the jobs (or even most of their managers for that matter) want it that way.


In the current economic climate this seems unlikely to change barring a serious accident being caused.

[jorge.7460]

Last year they did a test at one of the largest HA in CDG which gets all the contracts by providing the cheapest fee.

80% of their dispatchers were incapable of doing a manual loadsheet, scary...