I was a ground crew trainer for an airline manily focusing on front line passenger services staff for numerous bases in the UK before being made redundant. This included training for 3rd party airlines that the company handled. I then joined a handling agent and was shocked at the level of training that was delivered. It was the bare bones needed to satisfy the authorities and not a lot else. Alarm bells ring for me when any company practically hands the trainees answers to tests on serious mandatory subjects in a plate. I would like to think this is not the norn. Unfortunaltly the lack of training transpires itself on the shop floor and the service delivery which doesnt help with a companies reputation.
Good quality training works, it provides happy motivated and knowledgeable staff with tools and information available and a service level to be proud of. A company can only benefit from this. Training costs should be measured against the long term savings in lower staff turn over, and less costly errors, if only managers can see this. I was lucky the airline I worked for was very pro training and it paid off. I was inundated with applications from shop floor staff when I advertised for mentors to help with the after classroom online coaching.
I started my career many years ago with a handling agent and have found myself back with one. Im very much of the mind that as a handling agent looking after numerous carriers there is a variety to the job that should be enjoyed and staff given the right tools and information to deliver a service. I hate hearing this phrase "i dont know i dont work for the airline". Fair enough maybe we dont work for the airline, but we are employed to represent them in the absence of their own staff. Staffing levels aside, why shouldnt we up our game and provide a service that rivals that of an airline? Perhaps that way the reputation of a handling agent will be that of a good service provider.