Don't cry for me Argentina
 

SelfishFlyer, L337 and PartickThistle, your committment to the company makes me weep into my Latte. Rock on, there is at least 3 of you working to save the mothership. Give me a nudge when it's all over, you'll find me skiving at one of our many coffee shacks in waterside. You see I've borrowed all these books from the quest centre on writing a great CV, very busy planning my escape!

I don't quite know what to make of your sentiments overall, BAM, because when I saw SeLFish's very telling observations from his Sunday working in T5, I instantly thought, yep, there's some old-stager / supervisor-level-little-Hitlers in there that are evidence of rotten tails wagging dogs. I don't think I even mean people as high as junior management, but I wouldn't be surprised if some have made it that far over the years.

Now if I am right, it is evidence of a lot of (not just some) poor management higher up too.

In all your different guises in this thread and the others, I do still think that once or twice you have done the aviation industry a service by keeping the threads afloat, but nevertheless I am assuming you might be one of the rotten tails I am talking about.

I am not sure it is a good defence for a rotten tail to say well it was my dog's management that made me feel the way I do, although I can sympathise to a large extent. But it can't go on. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution or have you abdicated but are still taking the salary and letting others not in your clique take the strain as it appears you are saying in your last post?

Trouble is, you see, BA is in such a mess right now as a result of so many transparently exasperated staff and customers that I am not sure anyone can fix it except teams of staff who can be trusted a little bit further than to organise their own tea breaks fairly and sensibly and to make sure their carpark manoeuvres are not an excuse just to slope off for 90 minutes, rather than create nice little tickles for their clique of mates.

I sincerely hope no BA Engineers (which was one title I believe you assumed on PPRuNe) are acting like that, because if an engineer sloped off or buggered around with what should largely be a self-organised self-disciplined day, then I wonder what else he couldn't give a FF about when no-one is holding his hand or has a ring through his nose and a rope on it to remind him who's in charge?

It's so bad, that there seem to be a lot of staff that I would not trust to be part of my aviation experience right now. From what I read about moral, and internal bitching, BA pilots arguing for goodness knows what via BALPA, all coupled with the overall T5 Project disaster-recovery pressures, I do not believe that all the necessary work can possibly be still being done to keep every aspect of this airline safe.

And I seriously wonder what the CAA are doing about it.

Or maybe there's plenty of slack in everyone's day to argue, slag off, slope off and play musical chairs with cars in the car park, as well as actual work?

This thread appears to be degenerating into a "management versus entrenched unions." thread. Frankly, passengers don't care which one of you it was that messed up T5. The outcome is the same no matter who is to blame.

Frankly, I blame management because I find the allegations of union demarcation mess ups and feather bedding extremely weak. For one reason and one reason alone. You have had five years to plan the composition of your T5 workforce, their tasks, duty statements, job rosters, rotations, work practices, new technology, training, the lot, and you have had five years to negotiate any demarcation issues and work practice issues relating to your T5 workforce with the associated unions.

To put it another way, by blaming unions you are opening yourself to a charge of incompetence as managers, for you had ample time to negotiate changes. I am, by the way, speaking from experience.

To put it another way, your idea that the T5 debacle involves "Union sabotage" is fanciful, and in any case you had five years to prevent it.

As for preceding comments about experienced managers criticisms being sidelined, I've seen it all before. I now know that the smart thing to do when your criticism is rejected is to sit back and watch the young managers fall flat on their backside, then either move in and take their jobs or wait for them to humbly ask for your assistance.

It does make you wonder what they have been doing for the last five years...apart from trousering close to 250K a year each as Directors . Actually, that is a rhetorical question. I have a pretty good idea what they have been doing.

A little drift, but interesting about the car parks.

In terminals 1234, approx 80% of airline staff park outside the airport (remote parking) the other 20% use the terminal car parks due lenght of service or job T+Cs allow them to.

At about 18.00 every day, all staff can then use the terminal car parks, this means when they finnish work, they can get to their car quick and save 15/25mins of their own time and get home to walk the dog.

Problem is, when all these staff move their cars during shift time, they are not doing their job and they help clogging up the roads and terminal car parks.

T5, all staff park remote and they can't get their cars into the T5 car park unless they pay, so the company is very happy now, many staff will be unhappy with this set up.

Just FYI - You can plan all you like for five years, but if your planning's wrong, then it won't save you from a fiasco when your shiny new terminal opens. Then it comes down to flying-by-the-pants, i.e. being pro-active and being able to take charge and come up with a plan on short notice.

S.

If anyone wants to know what has happened at BA to make it such a shambles of late,perhaps this will give you an idea of what most of us have to put up with on most days......Today i was one of a team of engineers at base awaiting the tow of a B777 from T4. The aircraft in question was due a pre-input "engineering wash" on the stand designated for this work. As we sat there awaiting it's arrival we suddenly realised that the towing crew were actually starting to position it on an adjacent stand!......Que my AMS,(supervisor),leaping around,arms waving in the air trying to get the tow crew to stop and reposition the aircraft onto the correct stand....All to no avail.
On walking over to the next stand,we were approached by one of the tow team...."the computer tells us that this a/c has to go on TA3 mate,so that's where we have to put it". "Well we need it on TA4 says our AMS,as thats the only stand that an engineering wash can be done"......."no problem says the tug driver,we can put it there for you,but ONLY when the computer says we can"!!. Now que the wash team supervisor running over to the a/c..."what the **** you parking this here for,this has to be washed....it has to go on the stand next door". "Sorry mate says the tug driver,(computer in hand),it says on here stand 408 to TA3....we have to work to the computer or we get a bollocking". By now 10 minutes has elapsed and six engineers and a complete aircraft wash team,(8 men and 4 wash trucks), are sitting around "twiddling thier thumbs".....Now que our boss,running around doing his daily "headless chicken" impersonation......."what have you parked that there for,...it has to go on the stand next door"!!........."Computer says nah" says the tug driver,"you had better get back onto the TRM to have the stand changed"...que our boss now legging it at speed back to his office to make the call........after about another 15 minutes "hey presto",the computer says "yes" and the tug crew reposition the a/c,(in about 5 minutes),to the correct stand!!.
On talking afterwards to the tug crew,they complained bitterly that the introduction of the computer system has taken "all flexibility" out of thier operation,so they now "just do as they are instructed" until instructed otherwise!!.......The same seems to go for many front line staff nowadays who are constantly becoming fed up /dissolusioned by constant change most of which is bought about by managers etc who "have to make changes" in order to meet thier own KRA,s KPI,s etc etc
This little episode today equates to 16 people sitting around for 30 or so minutes each awaiting for one persons decision.....If this sort of scenario is enacted right across the airline on a daily basis,god only knows how much time and money is wasted!!.......If only BA could get it's act together and stop putting "idealogical obstacles" in everyones way,then forget 10%......we could get that with our eyes shut!!

Ews + Sap = Chaos?!

Chinooker the reason for your frustration (absent some purely technical trouble like failure to update a database etc.) is an anomaly in what's called the "business rules" in IT speak, to whit, there should be a business rule that says that the aircraft can't be in two places at once, nor destined for two different destinations at once.

Of course the best part is that when this apparent computer anomaly is brought to the attention of the IT people, some very well spoken consultants in very nice suits and pastel ties will tell BA (or BAA) firstly that its their fault because they specified the business rules, and that fixing this "undocumented feature" of the system will cost a minimum of 750,000 pounds and take a minimum of six months (to allow for testing of course) to fix.

Of course that's if it doesn't require a complete redesign of the system.

The beauty of delivering large complex computer systems to companies and Governments is that the business rules will change faster than the software people will deliver (they like it that way), so with a bit of nifty footwork, there are always a string of changes necessary to accommodate changed work practices and the software firm is on the gravy train for life.

I've worked on both sides of one of these types of deals and I have the scars to prove it.

If what CHINOOKER has said is true then it makes me want to cry, and I have nothing to do with BA or the aviation industry. I just hold a British passport and enjoy old Ealing Studios type movies for nostalgia's sake.

That means I still smile at Peter Sellers in "I'm All Right Jack", and I still smile when I think of how it was when my father used to come home 40 years ago and tell us what a foul-up the new computer system had caused at his blue chip employer's premises , but frowned when he told us when he was most likely next to not be going to work because so and so and the shop stewards had called another strike ...

But now, in 2008, it just makes me want to weep for this country.

...I'll get my coat.

Would the last one leaving please turn out the lights.

Can concur with Chinooker.........

Many, many, many hundreds of engineering manhours lost just waiting for aircraft to be towed to base . One time we investigated, the slowness was due to "shortage of towing crews ".............a quick look in their crewroom revealed plenty of 'em !

Of course, in the dim and distant past , we were allowed to go get the aircraft ourselves with an Engineering tug crew .....or even more bizarely we used to Taxi the aircraft back to the Hangar ( this is LGW , mind )...

Don't do this anymore .....it upsets the tuggies......:=

Sunfish,I hear what you are saying,but it's not rocket science were talking about here....the daily a/c fleet position sheet,(which is basically our guide to what arrives and when and what time it's due out again)is available to all ramp planners etc...these people also have an insight to any maintenance that a particular a/c is due and so a simple mistake,(if that is what this was),should not happen!
It's just not occurences like this one that tend to get the staff,(and to some extent our local managers),scratching thier heads in total dis-belief on a day to day basis......If anyone could explain to us why almost every hangar input my section handles,be it 747/777,the aircraft comes in with the cabin "dressed ready for service",...when everybody in the loop should know that we are going to have to inspect all the seating/ife.......We have no option but to place everything in the overhead bins only for the cleaners to do it all over again!!
In BA's new world,where it seems everybody has to be "tracked/monitored and directed" by computers etc,we seem to have lost the simple ability of communicating with each other! What,s wrong with the good old..."hey guys,park that a/c there......don,t bother dressing that one,as the engineers are going to rip it apart"!! This simple approach to communication has worked fine for hundreds of years...If it aint broken,why try and fix it!!

The cause of this Mr. Chinook, is that your management doesn't have detailed knowledge of that which they seek to manage. Therefore they design systems and procedures they way they think the system should work, not the way it actually works.

Any challenge by you will be dismissed as special pleading. Haven't you ever seen the knowing looks exchanged between managers when someone gets up and says "We've tried that before and it doesn't work"?

But it's worse than that. If you challenge their theoretical knowledge with practical experience, at best you are ignored, at worst you are fired for "being part of the problem." People with hands on knowledge are frequently seen as a threat to them by management who only have an MBA to hide behind. Please don't try and point out the absurdity of what is happening to management, you will not be thanked and may instead be marked for retribution for your temerity.

P.S. Of course I didn't mention that other addictive drug Managers dream about - total control and surveillance of all workplace activity. This is usually peddled by consultants who do wonderful presentations about how their systems allow you to "drill down" and see exactly who is doing what to whom and where and when during working hours. I call it keyboard voyeurism. They think it absolves them from the necessity of contacting lower forms of humanity to find out what they are actually doing. I'm amazed that you are not yet all issued a GPS suppository.

This is all very disappointing. Because as one of those
it is apparent that here were a group of guys, the engineers, the tug driver, etc, all actually wanting to do a good and sensible job, yet who were frustrated by the quite counter-intuitive "procedures" they had been told must be followed.

Now if I was designing it I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see, in advance, what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world. I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder, someone higher up the chain feeling that is all that is important.

And THAT is very much what I associate with the dreaded MBAs. They are AIUI taught that they don't NEED to know such things in order to manage. The craziest concept ever in my simple little mind.

Well, the people on the ground are usually the last people asked about how things should work. Because after all, all they'd want is for the system to continue working the way it does, inefficiency and all (not my words). That's one thing that has always frustrated me in a consultative role - Being prevented from talking to the people who are actually supposed to USE the system. Instead everything is streamlined to be as efficient as possible for backoffice or managerial staff instead of those who are exposed to it on the proverbial coalface. That's why several government projects have been utter fiascos - No input from the boys and girls working the phones and working in the offices, or, worse, input from them blatantly disregarded because after all "what do they know".

*UGH* :oh:

S.

Aren't you missing the point by blaming the IT systems? Would I be right in thinking that in the example given, at some point someone somewhere has input stand TA3 instead of TA4 into the system? In many ways the fact that it was an IT system is irrelevant, as it could have been hand written on a piece of paper.

The problem is that the managers of the tug drivers have hammered home to them (bullied?) that any deviation from the instructions they are given will result in a b*llocking, which the tug drivers naturally wish to avoid. The problem can only be solved by someone with the authority to change the stand in the system Chinooker's manager it seems), which then results in a revised instruction to the crew, which they are then happy to carry out.

As has been said previously the management method generally in BA seems to be to robotize their workers as far as possible, which is probably why as soon as anything unusual happens (fog, snow, T5 etc) the whole thing falls apart, because those lower down the food chain aren't allowed to improvise.

Having read Gordon Bethune's book 'From Worst to First' it all sounds very similar to the dark days at Continental that he was instrumental in overturning - perhaps the BA board ought to give him a call and see what he is doing these days!

Things will never be perfect at a large company, as you will never get perfect top-to-bottom communication, but there are ways of making it a lot better than it seems to be in BA at present.

WHBM:

"I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see,"............

But no! Then they might challenge my authority!

"what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world...."

What errors? I don't make errors, if I did I'd hide them from you anyway! Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong.

"I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder,"

There is no way this project went to the lowest bidder...at least not when the variations and customisation is added tot he cost. I've watched the boys and girls from Accenture turn a low bid of $20 million into a $40 million project.

Vaffpax:

No, No, No, Vaffy, the people on the ground will only tell you how things work now, they won't tell you how things should work once we have had a bit of business process re-engineering in our fevered dreams. Only management can tell you that.

....Of course they don't have to make the system work in a rainstorm at 2.00 am in winter.

Curious:

I'm not blaming the IT systems. I'm blaming the prats who didn't test for the absurdity in the IT system that Chinook pointed out. Then there are the prats who established the business rules for the IT system concerned. If it was finger trouble by someone, somewhere, Why didn't the IT system flag the absurdity of an aircraft being required in two different places at the same time? That's what IT systems are good at.

The reason that these foul-ups always happen is always the same - managers viewing their staff as part of the problem and not part of the solution. Hence when they voice concerns or try and contribute their experience to the design of a new project it's regarded as "special pleading' and their input is then ignored.

How do I know this? Because as a young and impressionable MBA, I was hired as a Group General Manager for a reasonably large software solution provider because I had no experience of mainframe computer systems - and was not "contaminated" by mainframe/cobol ways of doing things - this was seen as a big plus by the Directors of the company!........Needless to say I was out of there in 18 months with my tail between my legs, when it became obvious to all that I hadn't the faintest idea what I was doing and the Directors view of what the business required was a fantasy..

Only double ? Gosh, when they were part of Arthur Andersen it would usually be four times at least. Lost their touch, I suppose.

Getting back on thread
 

WILLIE WALSH QUOTE: (FROM TELEGRAPH 3MAR2008)BA has exclusive use of T5 and it is the new terminal’s almost completely automated baggage system that has really engaged Walsh’s attention. His staff have been testing the system continuously since August 2006 and he admits to having “spent more time on the ramp-side looking at the baggage infrastructure than I did out here in the main terminal. Really, what we have here is an extremely sophisticated baggage system with a terminal built around it. Believe me, what we have is a big step forward.”

Get Willie Out
 

How can the CEO of a company say the above, 1 mth in advance of opening, and hope to keep hold of his job. He states he actually spent much time with the baggage system, that the staff are all well trained. He lied, pure and simple and must go..... Keep this on thread till he does.

The T5 fiasco,chopping of kirkwood and noyes,does the demise of those two sort the inherent problems of management within BA ? i think not.the whole structure needs a complete shake up,the airline needs a charismatic leader who can get the demotivated workforce back onside.for years employees have been treated as a cost which needs to be reduced,rather than a well trained,professional workforce,vital to the prosperity of the company and it's long term future.T5 is a shining example of replacing humans with self service machines,fine when things run smoothly,utterly useless when the operation falls apart,have you ever tried asking a machine for help or assistance ?the current leadership team has based it's whole strategy on cost cutting and technology,sadly the technology hasn't worked and the cost cutting left no backup when it was needed.that decision, to me should decide their fate.airlines are a people business,passengers expect to talk to people and be assisted by caring,well trained,professional employees,not stranded in a check-in hall with a machine for company.creating the climate for real success doesn't mean extra cost,just treat your workforce with respect,let them know they are valued and listen to the people that actually do the jobs day in and day out.it's so simple,yet BA seem to get it all so wrong.i wish i could run BA for 12 months,it would be a totally different operation!

Bermuda, you have to start with changing the Board, because no "charismatic leader" is going to work for that shower unless he has a free hand, and that won't be forthcoming.

Observer Newspaper article
 

* Business
* British Airways

Walsh hits heavy turbulence

T5 is not the only problem facing BA's beleaguered chief - his staff are angry and his competitors threatening. Tim Webb reports

* Tim Webb
* The Observer,
* Sunday April 20 2008
* Article history

About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday April 20 2008 on p6 of the Business news & features section. It was last updated at 00:03 on April 20 2008.

Not many chief executives have a computer game named after them, but players of 'Wee Willie Walsh' can manoeuvre the beleaguered boss of British Airways around a baggage carousel, scoring points by getting him to place bags on to the conveyor belt safely. The creators of the online game insist they are fans and say Walsh is going a 'great job turning round the problems he inherited'.

Walsh, who has endured a torrid few weeks since the shambolic opening of BA's flagship Terminal 5 at Heathrow, might not appreciate being the laughing stock of the online gaming world, but he needs all the support he can get. A mountain of problems - and not just the thousands of lost bags - are piling up for him. Unions are threatening to strike, the airline's fuel bill is rocketing and the economic downturn is hitting bookings.

Competition with rival carriers is also hotting up with the opening-up of flights last month between Heathrow and the US, a route BA has traditionally dominated. These same rivals are getting bigger - and more powerful - through mergers and takeovers. But Walsh's attempts to do the same have been frustrated by protectionism and his rivals. It all paints a bleak picture. Is BA, like Terminal 5, broken? And can Willie fix it?

To recap, more than 350 flights have been cancelled since Terminal 5 opened at the end of March. BA has lost an estimated 19,000 bags, most of which were driven to Milan for sorting. Many have yet to be returned to their owners.

The terminal is now running more smoothly, though BA is anxious not to tempt fate and pronounce the baggage system fixed. But the disruption is set to continue, with BA admitting that the transfer of most of its long-haul services from Terminal 4 to the new building may not be complete until October. It is fair to say that, among passengers, BA is currently not, as its Nineties' slogan told everyone, 'The world's favourite airline'.

BA has estimated the cost of the Terminal 5 shambles at £16m in lost revenue and compensation. But the damage to its brand - and popularity - is already worrying the City. Morgan Stanley analysts estimate total costs could be more like £150m.

The first indications of how badly the Terminal 5 chaos has affected BA's bookings will be revealed in its April traffic figures next month. One top 10 shareholder says: 'If this goes on too long it would damage the franchise and the value of the brand. If the transfer of the rest of flights from Terminal 4 to 5 is a complete horlicks, you may get people saying "I will not fly with BA".'

Walsh has come in for criticism for his handling of the chaos. Last week, Gareth Kirkwood, BA's director of operations and David Noyes, its director of customer services, were fired. This was despite Walsh, a day after the opening of Terminal 5, insisting: 'I am not going to start trying to find someone else to point the finger at ... The buck stops with me.'

Peter Knapp, a creative director specialising in aviation at branding and design agency Landor Associates, says the damage to BA's brand will 'linger for a long time', and believes that executives need to be seen to be doing more to sort out the mess. 'The public's impression is that BA is sorting out the problems with Terminal 5 from a distance and in an aloof way. Executives should go meet passengers on the ground to apologise to them personally as a gesture of commitment to the problem.'

Like many of his predecessors, Walsh also faces another battle on the union front. Pilots' association Balpa is going to the High Court next month for the right to strike over BA's plans to set up a new airline this summer.

Called Open Skies and flying between Paris and New York, the carrier is BA's way of trying to embrace the competition forced upon it by the liberalisation of the market in flights to the US. The airline wants to recruit new, non-unionised pilots, whom Balpa believes will be paid less, leading to an eventual deterioration of conditions for mainstream BA pilots. BA argues the subsidiary would not be economic if the new pilots had the same terms and conditions as Balpa's members. It claims that European legislation prevents Balpa striking over this issue.

If Balpa wins the court case, Walsh would be left with an impossible situation. After Terminal 5, he can't afford a mass walk-out that would bring more disruption and cancelled flights this summer. Neither can BA, already being squeezed by a soaring fuel bill and low-cost competitors, afford to cave in.

Relations between pilots and management appear to be at an all-time low. According to Jim McAuslan, Balpa general secretary, pilots are very unhappy with BA: 'Balpa has not sought to capitalise on the T5 chaos. But they are deeply ashamed of this debacle and what their airline is becoming.'

He adds that pilots are becoming disenchanted with what they perceive as wider, deep-rooted management failings. 'BA is no longer focused on its core business - getting customer care right. There is a feeling among staff that the only thing that matters is the margin. You get a feeling that the company is more aggressively run. Maybe this is required to be more competitive, but it has gone too far.'

He also suggests that the management culture has made it difficult for employees to speak up. 'There is a climate of fear. We are no longer prepared to stay silent, like the senior managers who kept silent about the impending disaster in the run-up to the opening of Terminal 5.'

The City is not enamoured with BA either: shares are down by almost a third since February. Last month, BA warned that fuel costs would rise by about a fifth in the current financial year because of soaring oil prices. As a result, Morgan Stanley has downgraded BA's earnings estimates for the year by almost half.

Analysts also say the airline is more exposed than most to the credit crunch. Passengers travelling in first and business class generate about half its revenues, but about half of these passengers work in the financial sector, making them among the worst hit by the crunch. Such corporate customers are the most likely to start cutting back on flights.

Because of Open Skies, airlines - including BA - are increasing flights to the US in the race for market share on the new transatlantic routes. With the economic downturn, they could not have chosen a worse moment. Andrew Lobbenberg, an analyst at ABN Amro, says: 'Demand on North Atlantic routes is softening for economy class and holding up for premium class. It's not clear for how long this can continue.'

A lot of BA's woes are not of its - nor Walsh's - making and are common to other airlines. The former pilot, who became chief executive in 2005, has got a great deal right: he has ditched the loss-making short-haul subsidiary BA Connect, halved the pension deficit, started to modernise the fleet, and slashed levels of debt. But whatever the outcome of its current travails, in the longer term the future for the airline is uncertain. Joe Gill of stockbroker Goodbody says: 'The big question for BA and Willie Walsh is: where will the airline be in five-to-10 years' time? Will it scale up, or will it get gobbled up by another carrier?'

The Open Skies agreement and the worsening economic climate have triggered a wave of consolidation by airlines. Scaling up gives an airline greater operational efficiency and more clout in bulk-ordering aircraft. So far this has passed BA by; there are not many airlines it can buy. Lufthansa already holds a blocking stake in BMI, BA's most likely takeover candidate. Competition issues would prevent a takeover of Virgin Atlantic, while the Spanish government seems to have put paid to its attempts to buy Iberia. The much-rumoured merger with American Airlines also seems unlikely to happen, as long as American protectionist sentiment holds sway.

Walsh may not attract much sympathy from passengers still waiting for their lost bags to be returned, but calls for his resignation are premature. Shareholders and Balpa have made clear they do not want his head on a plate. None the less, patience - and goodwill - is evaporating fast. As Gill says: 'If Terminal 5 is in the headlines for three weeks, it's not a problem. But if it is still in the headlines in June or July, Walsh has a problem - and it could cost him his job.'

I have yet to see an article which does not talk about OpenLies pilots and similar Ts and Cs to those enjoyed at BA Mainline. It has been repeated at every opportunity by BALPA and BA Mainline pilots that Ts and Cs at OpenLies is NOT the issue.

Welcome to the swamp
 

As a PAX I watch the BA T5 fiasco with a certain amount of detachment, but not as much detachment as I'm comfortable with, and when names like Accenture are mentioned and MBAs I get a sense of deja vu. I work for the NHS which is a less regulated but structurally more complex organisation and the morass where the NHS is now looks to be where BA is heading.

I was involved in the NHS cock up with Accenture (with others too) and thier set of assorted letters and numbers in random order that was presented as a computer system for the NHS. Blaming computer systems is old hat... as a user of that system you should make sure it (censored) well works otherwise throw it back at the company that supplied it.. and test it first! There is a problem, however, and that is if a manager's meteoric career depends on the system working and hasnt worked with the people that are going to use it. Cognitive dissonance can be deafening when things arent going smoothly.

NHS management is not there to manage (ie run an organisation that works smoothly and to be fit for purpose) but to advance thier own careers and shareholder/stakeholder/Government interests. The division between the two standpoints is widening and absorbing resources as well as compromising safety. I can expand on this ad nauseam but I dont think its necessary as I beleive that most posters here understand the parallels between the NHS and BA.

This mangement/workforce division is a long way from the mliitancy of the union workforce of the 1970s. Many of the comments I hear on this site are reflected in the comments from my own organisation in the terms of "We would love to do a first class job but we cannot due to management" With the NHS things are so bad that I cannot see them ever being recitifed. I fear that BA is headed that way too.

As SLF could I also comment about MOL and Ryanair? I am not a business account traveller and therefore cost is important. I know I'm gonna be treated like shyte but I pay less for the flight from a local airport than than i ever could with BA by a huge margin so it means I can go places by air - I simply cant afford to travel BA as I have to go to London (expensive and hassle - baggage problems and T5 aside)

Ryanair, (BMI and Easyjet too for that matter) gets to where I want to go safely and competently. I can put up with being livestock for 2 hours or so. I'm not so sure about long haul but I use European routes about 5 times a year to long haul about once every two years.

For all of BA's present management troubles I don’t think it's anything like as bad as the NHS. :eek: At least BA isn’t killing its customers (at least not yet), losing their bags maybe but no ones leaving with C-Diff or MRSA. The big difference of course is that BA is a private company and will eventually go bust if it doesn’t deliver. It will be punished by the market. The NHS is in the public sector, can’t go bust and just gets propped up by the Government and hosed down with ever more public cash. I don’t expect anytime soon to here that Rose Gibb is the new BA Customer Service Manager.:eek: Now that would be a nightmare.;)

They're trying though. Try doing a "Pan Pan" into LHR with a medical emergency. Speedbird Airport Centre, or "55" as they're known, would seem to be incapable of organising a suitable reception committee without a significant wait. If I were you, I'd divert.

I had cause to pass through T5 last night following a diversion to LGW and a brief, but very pleasant stroll in the sunshine following our evacuation on TWY E.

Coach chartered to take us to LHR (T5). On leaving the M25, where do we go? No signs to indicate the correct route for coaches (i.e. we were not a scheduled service) but plenty saying don't go this way (height restrictions). Our driver followed a National Express coach on the premise that if he could fit, so could we!

Parked, and a very "nice" man told us to move on. No discussion, no advice, just move! Eventually after much pleading we were told to leave the airport and come back in and park in another place. He suggested upstairs at pax drop-off. He may well have been correct, but all the signs we saw for upstairs mentioned height restrictions and therefore decapitation for coach drivers and their pax. He also said we could park in bay 17 in another bus lane which is what we eventually did.

Got to bay 17 - no baggage trollies.

Went inside T5 and took the lift to the departure level. V. few staff and most positions closed. Those staff that were there were helpful, but gave conflicting advice so we were bounced from customer service to check-in to customer service.

Through to security. This was very disappointing. A brand new terminal and no "lessons learnt" seem to have been applied to security screening. Very cramped and inefficient, And where may I unpack my laptop, take my belt, and jacket and shoes off and then where do I go to reverse this process? Easy, just leave all my bits on the conveyor belt until I get round to them thus blocking the flow of pax. Great! I do wish more airport operators would see how this is managed at Brussels National (BRU).

Once through security I had time to visit the gents. I turned right after security, walked for 5-10 metres, then started to look for signs to the toilets. None to be seen. But did soon find toilets on the right. So, T5 has been open for 4 weeks and hopefully nice and shiny new toilets? No chance! The toilets and floors were dirty. It was obvious from the general dust and fluff from clothes/the atomsphere that clung to the porcelain (to say nothing of other.... I'll leave it to your imagination) that they had not been cleaned for some considerable time. Five, or was it six handbasins? No soap in any of the dispensers.

The colour of the floors in T5 seems a bad choice. The tan coloured tiles naturally look dirty. Mind you, they are! On every level and in every area, the floors were scuffed, dirty and covered in rubbish. Sweet wrappings, screwed up baggage labels, etc. To me it was impossible to believe this "show case" facility is just one month old. And when all the longhaul flights are eventually transferred? I do hope arrangements are set in place to ensure basic cleanliness and hygenic conditions exist. As for the present, they most certainly do not!

And finally, our flight had a minor (<20mins) delay. So time for a snack. Went to the Giraffe??? fast food outlet. Lovely staff. However, bearing in mind no soap in the toilets (and some people's complete antipathy to washing their hands at any time) I was not impressed by the fact that each table had a pot with cutlery jammed in to it and just the very tips of the "business" end protruding. So grubby hands have to root around selecting the knives, forks, spoons......How can this be allowed? Surely basic common sense and hygene should prohibit this?

This month I've flown 9 sectors. And what stands out? My stroll in the sunshine at LGW? No. Just a feeling of depression and sorrow at just how poorly T5 was presented to me/everyone yesterday evening. Shabby, dirty and unhygenic.

Oh dear!

The above is mostly a commentary on BAA rather than BA.

Having said that, Willie Walsh should be down there looking at every aspect their supplier (for that is all BAA are to them, just as much as Airbus or Shell are) is providing, or not. And raising the roof if things are not perfect.

Where on earth are the press statements from the top of BA that what is being provided a T5 is "disgraceful, an insult to Britain", etc. If said they would be on the front page in a moment.

I can only conclude that BAA have managed to get compromising photographs of the whole of the BA board to keep them quiet. There seems no other logical explanation.

taking the p***
 

Just received an email from BA titled:

Get ready for an altogether unique shopping experience

Yes, really !! They are flogging the 'shopping experience' at T5 !!

Actually, this is turning into a case study for all these fabulastic MBAs:

HOW TO LOSE CLIENTS !!

Dave BlokeSpeaking as Pax and PPRuNer, everything I have ever heard in here is that the British staff are brilliant. We hear many folks saying that the London people are in the top five of the world and that, when declaring a Pan or Mayday, everything works for them. You might like to find the appropriate forum to discuss this issue.

The fact though is that all the materials trumpet T5 as a BA experience, not BAA (even though BAA owns it), and that the lowly SLF can't be blamed for lapping up all that marketing palaver and believing that this is a BA fiasco.

I saw something similar on Monday inbound from BCN. I take the Oxford Airline bus to Oxford from LHR, and inbound it drops people off at T5 and then Central, then outbound picks people up at Central and returns to T5 before hitting the M25 for Oxford.

While stopped at T5, two very confused foreign arrivals approached our bus asking how to get to Central because they had to continue their journey from T2. They were apparently told by staff in T5 to take a bus. Which one they were not told. Our bus driver politely told them to go back into the terminal and look for the 'Trains' sign to take the Tube or the next Heathrow Connect to Central. Why ground staff in the terminal couldn't do that is beyond me.

A disinterested staff member stood a few yards away but didn't lift a finger to help.

S.

The above is mostly a commentary on BAA rather than BA.
 

This may be technically correct. But T5 is the "LHR home" for BA. Irrespective of who owns, manages and cleans T5 if I was BA I would ensure that resources and programmes were in place to present the image that I want.

T5 yesterday evening was a disgrace. Why can't BA/BAA see this? And sort it; rocket science it is not!

Oh dear!

Sounds like all of us Exec Club members got this one.

For the benefit of the BA management members who read this board, can you please, over your Lattes at Waterworld, tell Sarah Keyes ("Exec Club Manager"), who signed this one, to just get a grip ! What an idiotic thing to send out.

The e-mail tells us that we will find "all our travel essentials" in T5. Presumably we are having to shop for these because BA lost our baggage on the inbound.

BAA are keeping quiet because they know that anything they say will be blasted across the papers. Whilst there has been criticism of them in all media outlets, they have not been shown stammering apologies in front of Jeremy Paxman. In other words, an extremely sensible approach. Despicable - but sensible.

Fortunately, the break up of BAA is now inevitable. Yet another monopoly turned commercial and maintained by the Conservatives that has failed to deliver long term value to the UK.

I flew out of T5 to Joburg last Tuesday afternoon and back Saturday morning.

Had previously arranged valet parking - this was reasonably signposted and I stopped in the marked bays only to be told I couldn't park there :ugh:. Anyway, that was sorted soon enough but not a great start :=

Went to an automated checkin - all done in 2 mins with no fuss. Had taken hand luggage only due to the anticipated problems. A shortish queue for passport check only to be told I had to go back to a BA desk to get my passport checked (summat to do with visas). Then queued at the "passport check" BA desk, where the BA staff took a quick glance at my passport before sending back to the by now longer passport queue.

No issues at all with security - impressed that we no longer have to remove laptops. (still frustrated with the silly liquids rule but I digress)

Through security to see the BA lounge on my right. However this was the Concorde room (1st Class) and I was only travelling business. The business lounge is on the 3rd floor, directly above. However, to get there, you have walk towards the centre of the terminal to decend from floor 2 (entry level) to floor 1, then walk back to the right side, go back up to 2, then walk across the 1st class lounge lobby, then take another escalator up to floor 3 :ugh: Signs were not particularly clear and there were loads of confused business class pax wandering around looking for the way in :ugh:

The flight boarded on time, but we were 30 mins late off stand due to "baggage irregularities". No matter, we made up the time and the in-flight service was as good as ever :D

Came back 1st Class, again with hand baggage only. Excellent in flight service again. Arrived on stand exactly on time, but then had to wait 20mins for the air bridge to be connected :ugh:

Got no more then 1/2 way up the airbridge before finding myself in a scrum behind a locked glass door. Took a further 20 minutes before someone came and opened the door.

Longish walk through to passport control, noting en route that half the escalators were already marked off unservicable, but the terminal was quiet and I got through without undue further delay to the baggage hall, by now 50 minutes after the aircraft's arrival.

Having only hand baggage I walltzed through an almost deserted baggage hall, but noted in passing that the baggage info for my flight was showing "wait in hall" :ugh:

Overall, not a complete disaster by any means, but so far short of what it should have been :=

This is a Heathrow speciality (and the walkways as well).

I recently was on the walkway from the Central Underground station to T1 in the early morning. Ahead, an overloaded baggage trolley jammed at the end of the walkway, those following it started to trip over it, then it overturned. I was close to the emergency stop and pressed it (just as well).

Coming home in the evening I noticed it was still stopped, and a distinctive paint mark I had noticed in the morning showed it was still stopped exactly where it had stopped it. In 8 hours and tens of thousands of passengers nobody had bothered to come round, see the stoppage, and restart it.

Incroyable... *shakes head*

:oh:

S.

I have heard that BA wanted all business lounge punters to be able to use the door nearest security if they wished, but no, BAA said they couldn't do that as they wanted the other passengers to go the long way round, and thus through the shopping mall!!

Would be good if BAA were consistant on this, sometimes shoes off, othertimes shoes can stay on. Also belt off sometimes and not others! Useless!