Originally Posted by
Gonzo
[B]t1grmAgreed, but look at this from BA's point of view.
35 minutes for everyone is easy to police, easy to understand, and does not lead to accusations of unfair treatment ("Well, you're letting him through, why not me?" or "I was let through last time with 20 minutes to go").
If you, as BA, choose a different route, where do you draw the line?
Hand luggage only vs hold baggage?
T5A v T5B v T5C?
Able bodied v wheelchair?
Young v old?
Frequent v infrequent flyer?
Flown from T5 before v T5 virgin?
Near stand v far stand?
Near stand to N security is a far stand to S security and vice versa
Flight still on time or running a few minutes late?
Not defending the policy, but if you make it anything other than a blanket time, then any other criteria of determining 'conformance' will inevitably provoke stories and customer service issues when someone who was let through for one flight gets denied for another flight.
With today's data mining technology etc. this should easily be done. Rather than having a fixed time cutoff, the agent should get a Red, Yellow, Green (and other shades in-between). S/he can then say NO, RUN (but no guarantee) or You're OK. But applying the same rule when security queues are 30m at times when they are 5m (and v.v.) is insane. It seems to be all about the airline and not the customer. A proper airline would invest in improving their passenger's experience rather than frustrating it. (But I hate BA, so take that into consideration)