Originally Posted by
MANFOD
That's an interesting question regarding the relationships between Airlines, Handling Agents and the Airport.
The Airport's Business Development people will be trying to attract new business from airlines, perhaps with incentives where permitted, as well as maintaining relationships with existing airlines. But on a day to day basis when flights are operating, it's the Handling Agent providing the service to the Airlines. As an outsider, I assume from the Airport's standpoint that the Handling Agent is a tenant under which certain standard of performance are required but I'm sure others will be more knowledgeable on this. It's been said in the past that airlines are the customers of the handling agents and the airport's customers are the passengers. Is that a bit too simplistic perhaps?
For ad hoc flights like the freighters mentioned, wouldn't the airline's initial contact be with the Airport and also with ACL? The choice of Handling Agent I imagine may be dependent on whether there is a contract with a particular Agent at other Airports.
Questions have arisen in the past on the old chestnut of when MAN has turned diversions away. Sometimes it has apparently been the Airport itself because of a lack of parking space for example. At other times, it appears to have been the Handling Agents who've refused extra traffic allegedly because of a lack of staff or work load with regular flights. One would like to think that whether it's diversions or requests for ad hoc flights, there is proper coordination and communication between Airport and Agent. In certain circumstances, it may be possible for an alternative Handling Agent to take the work depending on existing contract constraints. Whether the Airport would apply pressure on Agents to accept additional business is another question.
Good point Manfod, but no idea how the contracts work between handling agent and MAG.
Yes the loss of an airline that clearly wanted to operate to Manchester is irritating. In order to choose Manchester as a destination they must have had a rationale for wanting to do this in the first place ?
Was the freight for a customer here in the N West ?
The 1st obligation of MAG is obviously to its shareholders but it is also a vital part of the suppy chain working in partnership with handling agents for import customers and the wider business community across the North of England.
That said it was only 5 flights, (although there is of course the possible loss of any future pipeline business that they might have directed towards MAN had this been successful). I've no idea what the freight was nor for whom it was destined so that is not quantifiable.
If the handler is so stretched that it is unable to handle 5 ad hoc albeit "messy" 747s as these take up a disproportionate amount of manpower for very little reward, where does that leaves us re expansion of other routes.
Does the handler dictate who serves Manchester or MAG ?
On a wider point is anyone aware of staffing problems at other airports ?
Is it a localised problem specific to Manchester and if so why The freight village off airport for trucked freight is significant, are there better opportunities "off airport" for former employees in positions that are now seen to be more stable and financially more lucrative ?
Birmingham is currently taking numerous cargo charters and has a similar economic demographic to Manchester albeit within a smaller footprint does anyone know if they too are suffering structual issues ?