QUOTE: "I do not know, or care."
Oh WOW. That is Manchester's problem right there. Neatly summarised in six short words.
Thankyou, HOVIS. I take it that you are a MAN-based handling agent, then? Or have experience of the role?
But whilst I don't doubt the issues you identify, I do differ from you on how MAG and their onsite handling agency partners should respond to them.
Let's analyse the points you raise.
"Maybe other airports have free stands available, maybe they have fewer peaks and troughs."
This issue is best addressed by implementation of a dynamic diversion policy (which is the way most airports do address stand availability). Airport operators issue advice to ATC and operators along the lines of we can accommodate one more widebody and upto three aircraft of A321/B738 size. This process ensures that the airport can make best use of available resources, yet not become overloaded beyond their capability. It maximises the revenue opportunity, which is a good thing for all concerned. A blanket "NO DIVS" notam offers none of this flexibility. It is a blunt instrument, inappropriate for use at a major airport for days and weeks at a time. An advisory of this sort should only be used when exceptional circumstances dictate, and that should apply for a matter of hours only and be subject to regular review. Remember that handling agents are not the only folks to be considered in this loop. When the largest airport in Northern England refuses all diversions, do you realise the pressure this places on ATC, amongst others? Other agencies have to deal with the fallout. They don't have the option to shrug their shoulders and look the other way. And they aren't overrun with extra staff on call either.
"The handling agents right now, today, do not have enough staff to offer the type of diversion availability you want."
Do you speak for all handling agents on the campus? When a Jet2 flight which had recently departed MAN asked to return, they fell foul of the no divs notam and were turned away by default. But Jet2 self-handles at MAN. They wouldn't ask to come back to MAN if they were unable to handle their own aircraft on site. So again, a dynamic diversion policy would address this. If Jet2 are able to service their own diverted aircraft, allow them the flexibility to do so. That doesn't impact other handling companies which don't have the resources to cope, does it? But the blanket no divs notam allows no discretion to those operators which can cope. Let them do their job on their own terms.
As for not having enough staff, there are ways to address this. At MAN, the ingrained culture seems to be that nothing can be done, or perhaps we don't know or care. The solution is actually to recruit sufficient staff to cope with the business opportunity which an airport the size of MAN offers. And to motivate those staff with appropriate terms and conditions. Yes, I am aware of the race to the bottom which has resulted in the collapse of staff morale amongst handling agents, and across other departments at MAN. Demotivated, miserable staff won't go the extra mile to help when the need arises. They won't pitch in for overtime shifts when they're desperately needed. They say things like we don't know, or care. But this mindset should not be allowed to prevail unaddressed. A good management team will bring all interested parties together to resolve a situation of this sort for the long-term benefit of the airport operation as a whole. MAG in particular needs to address this, because we are not seeing these problems on anything like this scale at other similar airports. And I very much doubt that handling agency staff at competing airports are on significantly better pay, terms and conditions than their MAN-based counterparts. So the problem is Manchester-specific.
"All of this takes resources."
Of course. Things don't happen by magic on an airport campus. If the airport suffers a chronic shortage of contact stands on a routine basis, that is an issue which senior management should be addressing. Mr Cornish, Ms Smart ... over to you! Baggage teams unavailable due to being deployed on earlier aircraft. This again relates to understaffing ... an issue which can and should be addressed. The solution to this should not be beyond the wit of any self-respecting manager.
"Many aircraft are going out less than half full. It's a mess."
I acknowledge this and agree with you. Not only are the aircraft half full, there are far fewer of them! The mismanagement of C-19 by inept and cowardly politicians has reaped devastation across this industry above all. The lack of help for aviation in the UK from HMG has been shameful. But it's always darkest before the dawn, and pandemic restrictions cannot last for ever. Politicians who seek re-election cannot abuse their voters indefinitely. And there is certainly huge pent-up travel demand awaiting the day that border restrictions are removed, pointless testing is axed, and the uncertainty of crazed kneejerk quarantine orders are removed from the equation. Our industry needs to be ready for this, ahead of the curve. Management teams must think ahead and train up staff now ... how ever challenging that may be financially. Because - perhaps as soon as Easter 2022 - restriction-free travel will return. Management at MAN needs to make sure that the entire campus is ready for this, inhouse staff and and partner agencies alike. Yes, it will require money, investment and close liaison with other agencies on campus. But the airport must prepare now. This is the key challenge which Mr Cornish, Ms Smart and their business partners must prepare for. It will be quite the challenge.
In answer to GrahamK: I believe that the taxiway realignment work at MAN is largely complete now. If I'm mistaken, others can correct me, but I'm not under the impression that large-scale work-in-progress is impacting apron availability at this point.
And to Andrew H52: Your posting is gratuitously abusive, but that reflects on you. However, your advocacy for Liverpool Airport is a common theme amongst your posts. When MAN turns away business, whether potential diversions or a series of cargo flights such as Nordwind, much of that business ends up at LPL. Those new routes which MAN does welcome will have been secured in spite of the long furlough of the marketing team. We know that opportunities were missed during their absence (Vueling, Transavia, others?). Competing airports benefitted from that own goal. So your motive in cheerleading the status quo is transparent. But contributors such as Navpi and myself will continue to encourage MAG management to address the challenges which the airport faces head-on. My posting record shows that I give praise where it is deserved and criticism where it is justified. The weakspots which I highlight to managers at MAN are very specific, not generic. A good management team should be motivated to address them. They should strive to make MAN the best it can be. I won't apologise for urging them to do that.