Originally Posted by
Freehills
It is possible for both statements to be true.
HKA fills "value for money" niche & pays less
Airlines in the US/ OZ/ EU have coped by 'unbundling' & being clever about selling extras, allowing them to still pay decent salaries. Basically taking account of the human behavior that people will nickel & dime when buying something in advance/ with research, but will impulse buy at high price - i.e. an overpriced coffee at the airport. So bait people in with low basic prices, then make the margin on selling stuff to make the trip bearable when the customer can no longer switch.
Ironically, that is what CX does to their staff, but in reverse. They bait naive and ignorant youngsters to HK with the carrot of the 'shiny jet syndrome' then nickle and dime the value of their career downwards year after year. It's amazing to me how they expend enormous amounts of energy attacking and harming their own staff instead of concentrating on building real revenues and profits, like our erstwhile competitors are doing in the US, Aus and other areas of the world. Again, proof that this management is not fit for purpose.
