Con fused - BA LCY - EDI

[Munnyspinner]

BA (City Flyer) have announced that due to the loss of of an A/c due to a landing incident at LCY that they will now be permanently reducing the EDI LCY service with immediate effect.

I am confused as I understood that BA were to be dropping the 146 s from the autum to be replaced with Embraer 190. If this is the case, then surely the announcement of a permanent reduction in service based due to the damaged A/C is a bit of a lame excuse?

Apparently the damaged A/C is to be written off by insurers or the repairs cannot be undertaken during the remainder of the lease. If this is the case then surely BA have an insured loss that is recoverable and the reduction in service will now only impact on customers.

For the record. Air France operate a popular service on this route - which may explain BA's desire to remove unused capacity!

[elgnin]

Not only do Air France operate on the same route, they operate a far superior service! I have taken this routed 3 time with BA and every time there has been a problem, particularly with the return leg back to LCY. On one notable trip we landed at LCY at 22.29, a clear minute before it closed, following a 2 1/2 hour delay, so annoying. AF however have never let me down, better service, better food, pleasant crew and on time!

[13Alpha]

I suspect that profitability of the service at current levels is marginal - given the reliance on financial service industry pax - and the costs of leasing another plane - and keeping it flying through the summer - exceed those of making a bunch of people redundant and cutting the service. And that BA don't see pax numbers turning up any time soon.

As a regular pax on this route I don't like to see reductions in frequency (nor people losing their jobs) but I don't think there's anything more sinsister going on here than a straightforward business decision (other than a bit of spin to the media and BA are hardly alone amongst airlines in that).

As for comparing the BA service with Cityjet/Air France, well in my experience the - onboard - service with BA has always been very good but the flights are subject to delays and cancellations much more than, say, on the EDI-LGW route.

I'm flying CJ from LCY on Friday so let's see how they compare.

13Alpha

[Munnyspinner]

I think maybe that was my point. Honesty and BA are just uneasy bedfellows. Why not simply give the whole truth than some half baked C&B story.

I have shared your experience re reliability on th BA LCY route and agree that the LGW service tends to operare from EDI more or less on time ( less so I have notices since they strated the terminal extn at EDI. Outbound it is frequently delayed particularly in the evening.

EZY on the same route is a bit better and leaving form S. terminal is quicker to get to than BA if you are coming by train.

I have sampled the CJ service only a few times but it was V. reliable and seemed a bit slicker that BA Cityflyer. The last LCY BA flight I was on they had no coffee and a pretty cruddy Breakfast.3/10.

[Scumbag O'Riley]

Guess they don't need any more stories coming out which would affect market confidence in a negative way. They have enough on their plate as it is.

[Munnyspinner]

Nothing will affect market confidence more than if it looks like the management are trying to hide something.

Sad fact is that everything BA do and say makes it look like they have something to hide. Maybe things are worse that their results would suggest? I thought they had done pretty well to limit the loss.

The city generally respond well management that acts decisively in a crisis. Taking the LCY announcement as a case in point this is reactive to circumstance outwith management control - nor proactive, taking account of prevailing market conditions. I think had it been the latter BA would have been seen acting to stave off future losses. Using the excuse of a damaged aircraft makes it look very lame.

I will speculate now that Willie Walsh will be gone by the end of September which will be good news for shareholders. BUY.

[Skipness One Echo]

Munnyspinner I should explain is the Scottish Banker ( those men of fine judgement ) who having been denied access to a flight he couldn't make as he was late,, he now spends his days posting how he hates BA. Work must be quiet on the banking sector......

A beatiful sense of lack of irony here...Sad fact is that everything BA do and say makes it look like they have something to hide.

I will speculate now that Willie Walsh will be gone by the end of September which will be good news for shareholders. BUY.
Munnyspinner is online now Report Post Reply
ARE YOU SERIOUSLY GIVING FINANCIAL ADVICE??????

Just chill out and be more careful to make sure you arrive in a timely fashion and you will not spend so much time blaming the staff, the BAA and then launching a tirade at the carrier at every opportunity.

[Munnyspinner]

If you want Financial advice you'll need to pay for that. And, despite your ill informed opinion I am not a Banker.

Personal opinion, as you have expressed, is surely what this and other forums is about.

Yes, I have grave concerns about the performance and future of BA, perhaps heightened by a petty bureaucratic F88K up earlier this year. Since then I have earned a silver diamond card with BMI on domestic and have just returned form a very pleasant trip with VS to California. I have switched allegiance away from BA and have discovered that I am not alone in my views about BA. However, birds of a feather and all that probably means that the extra VX premium Pax are all disaffected T5 late arrivals - they're not!
SOE - take a long hard look at your airline. It's not nearly as good as you think!

But, yes, I think the share price is now sufficiently low that it can probably only go one way over the next few months.

Oh, and by the way, I found this little jem from the past - I don't think much has changed at the world's favorite airline since then - do you.


BA overmanaged. Fact.

Why not let them go? No really I want to know.
Is it illegal? If you are overmanned in management by 100% then fire half of them.
This seems to be the consensus, so can someone honestly tell me why BA are having a hard job in doing it? They seem to have no qualms about firing other staff.

Are they delibaratley trying to destroy what so many people care about?
This might sound callous but the poor sod who fell from the car park, the IT director ought to have been worried. BA is an airline, not a software house. Their IT department is a joke, poorly run and overpaid. The web site is overly complex for what it should be doing, direct selling at competitive prices! IT should be outsourced to someone like CSC, and no I don't work for them but they do our IT better than we ever did.(BAE.)
An airline is to serve the public, not a bunch of career minded self obsessed pointless paper shufflers.

end of rant.

Tel me why they can't be fired? Someone? Skipness One echo echo echo

[Skipness One Echo]

If you want Financial advice you'll need to pay for that.

You just gave me it to me for free! Hope you manage your clients billing a little better. Now I don't work for BA and certainly know thay have faults I just see you posting a lot of "I don't like BA" stuff which is disheartening as I am always keen to see what people have to say, just so long as I think it is remotely balanced. I think you are getting personal which makes for a poor read. That's all it is, really. Your attitiude to rules and procedures just boggles my mind.

Someone who ( apparently ) used to work in aviation ought to know better than :
I used to occasionally use my airside pass to shop before a trip - leave my purchases landside then go back though security for duty. It was handy where electonic items were on special offer and I didn't want to cart them from pillar to post on a trip or rely on BAA's super efficient buy and collect service - don't know if this is still available either. Can't say whether I was breaking any rules or not and was never challenged - I once had the same conversation with the same security operative at LHR about 40 mins apart -

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/370946-lhr-new-security-dictat-7.html

http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/366999-t5-conformance-rant.html
Found it!

[GroundedSLF]

Munneyspinner - I was fortunate enough to partake in a tour of T5 hosted by BA a couple of weeks ago - very informative.

I actually posed the question regarding your initial upset at having not met conformance to one of the terminal duty managers, and his response was along the lines of:

Punctuality is a huge focus now for BA, we have invested heavily in the terminal and its facilities. No matter if it is a gold card holder who arrives late, or a "normal" passenger - both are now treated the same. They will not be allowed on the flight. Why should we risk upsetting the other hundreds of passengers who have all managed to arrive in time for their flight by risking a delay by allowing a late passenger?
Our punctuality figures are now regularly above 95%, and this is something that we have not seen at BA in years.

That attitude seems quite a reasonable one to me - I know I would not be happy at being delayed because a passenger couldnt get to the aircraft on time, and I doubt if you would be too.

[Scumbag O'Riley]

Our punctuality figures are now regularly above 95%, If he is talking about "punctuality" (14 minutes late is considered on time :yuk: ) of aircraft arrivals and departures then this is logged and available on the CAA website. Looking at the data he is completely wrong, not even close in fact, so he is obviously talking about punctuality of something else. Maybe the checkin desks closing on time?

[13Alpha]

For once I have to side with BA, and even agree with Skipness One Echo :eek:. Yes this story was spun to the media, but all airlines' PR people spin - look at Virgin's recent results which turn out not to have been quite as good as sold at first, or Ryanair's blame game every time they ground planes in the winter - "it was the airport's fault for raising landing charges". Yeah right.

As I said before, the LCY-EDI service relies heavily on financial services pax. The state of that industry means there are fewer of those pax flying* -> less demand for Cityflyer's flights. Who's to say that the services weren't going to be cut anyway and the damage to the plane just forced the decision on BA ?

As for BA's punctuality, on the LGW - EDI route which is the one I use most often, it has significantly improved in recent months, in fact I can't remember the last flight on that route which was late, and I tend to favour those flights over LCY ones now. I guess LGW being practically empty now does help. Can't speak for LHR flights though since I avoid that place whenever humanly possible.

As for S1E's comment


I think you are getting personal which makes for a poor read.


talk about the pot calling the kettle black ! Your constant anti-Scottish rhetoric and stereotyping on PPRUNE make for a poor read and detracts from what else you have to say - how about giving it a rest ?

13Alpha

* - my experience as a supplier to one of the main corporate customers of BA Cityflyer suggests that it's about time fewer of their people were flying between Edinburgh and London. Just how many people do you need at a meeting ??? Haven't you heard of email, teleconferencing or videoconferencing ???? :ugh:

[Skipness One Echo]

Your constant anti-Scottish rhetoric and stereotyping on PPRuNe make for a poor read and detracts from what else you have to say - how about giving it a rest ?

Read closer. I'm Scottish, I just choose not to live there as there are more lucrative opportunities elsewhere in the UK. Essentially where I don't get that "I kent yer faither" mentality.
As for the rhetoric and stereotypes, I'm lost as to your point. Can't have been that bad / racist / offensive / inaccurate as the mods are generally quite good at ppruning. Anyhoo enough said.

[Munnyspinner]

S1e, and your point is?

Yes, was flight crew many years ago before drifting into the corporate world which, is why I was gobsmacked by the pettiness of the conformance thingy and yes - apparently at BA, 14 minutes late is actually on time! I missed the confomance threshold by a whisker and I think I have had more than my penny's worth following that debacle. I did resolve things amicably with BA and I have done what I said I would do- Avoid T5 and LHR generally -I am only one passenger and you cannot be suggesting that I am responsible for the downturn in BA's premium pax - gold card now in bin.

What I have done is try the alternatives. Different airlines, different airports and other means of travel. BA is allegedly the dominant UK carrier but all I am seeing is bad news, staff disaffection, pension deficits, failed mergers and takeovers, anti-competitive behaviour and provisons for fines - not a happy ship.

Some serious questions have to be asked - I am obviously now no fan of BA but, I used to be! In fact, as a gold card exec club member I was one of their many commercially important passengers. So why the change? - not as a restult of a F88k up at T5 but, my analysis of their overall business. This may have been prompted by the above event which I felt was evidence of a customer facing business actually missing the point.

Yes, if BA can deliver the Iberia/American tie up that may make a difference but to do the first they need to get pension pot sorted and to do that they need the staff and unions on board. How long will this actually continue to stumble along before someone realises that it ain't going to work?

Punctuality is hardly the issue today -whereas it may have been two years ago. And it's pretty easy to esnure an empty aircraft leaves on time or, in the case of BA, 14 minutes late!

[Globaliser]

... apparently at BA, 14 minutes late is actually on time! ...As it generally is for all airlines, everywhere. So no news there.

[Munnyspinner]

Grounded ,

I'll never get this point across to you but ,at T5 its double jeopardy.

If you don't make it through security ( into security) by a certain time you can't fly. And, if you do but, don't get to the gate, you can't fly.

My point, which I am now completely fed up making is that there is no opportunity to try to get to the gate even when you are a few minutes behind the conformance cut off. If BA can deny travel because you haven't made the gate that's OK and is industry standard. Failing to get through secuity by the witching hour and not making the gate cut off time are actually two different events. I know I can wayfind through any airport fairly quickly and have done so for many years, operating on tight schedules.

In response to BA I said - OK, I don't like your rules which I will now avoid. I can accept that and I'm sure they can too. Fact is I'm not the only premium passenger that is a bit fed up with BA. In a customer reliant business you need to keep most of the people happy most of the time.

[Munnyspinner]

But not for pax.

[13Alpha]

As for the rhetoric and stereotypes, I'm lost as to your point. Can't have been that bad / racist / offensive / inaccurate as the mods are generally quite good at ppruning.


Implying that all Scottish bankers lack judgement was inaccurate. It's about as accurate as saying all English bankers lack judgement because of what Adam Applegarth did to Northern Rock, what James Crosby and Andy Hornby did to HBOS and what Steven Crawshaw did to Bradford and Bingley.

It's just a trashy comment and using it to imply Munnyspinner lacked judgement because he is also, you presume, Scottish WAS offensive. You were making a negative judgement about him based on his nationality.

The fact that you're Scottish too is irrelevant.

But anyway, as you say, that's for the mods to decide.

13Alpha

[Munnyspinner]

Well said. A very balanced view.

[ILoadMyself]

Implying that all Scottish bankers lack judgement was inaccurate. It's about as accurate as saying all English bankers lack judgement because of what Adam Applegarth did to Northern Rock, what James Crosby and Andy Hornby did to HBOS and what Steven Crawshaw did to Bradford and Bingley.You forgot to add Sir Fud the Turd's contribution to the demise of RoyScot.

BA should just admit that The Suits from Shreddieburn don't get to fly up at the pointy end unless there is a strong business case anymore.

The madness will only be over when that snowflake is finally removed from the hideous bridge over the Glasgow Road. Make It Happen!

For the record, Shreddie is a lawyer by qualification. He decided that Chartered Accountancy was far more lucrative - how hard can it be to count beans?

G-RBSG (http://www.airliners.net/search/photo.search?regsearch=G-RBSG) - vanity registration gone mental - word on the street is that Shreddie wanted his own private road to the check-in desk! How sad that the papparazzi forced him to park the bird at Orly!

IT Consultants? They created Y2K! Yo, ho, ho! It cost a fortune to "enforce" compliance - nothing-at-all happened at 2000_01_01_00:00:01 .

I'll leave it to the Mods.

[ILoadMyself]

In response to BA I said - OK, I don't like your rules which I will now avoid. I can accept that and I'm sure they can too. Fact is I'm not the only premium passenger that is a bit fed up with BA.

"Premium Passenger"?

WTF does that mean?

Is a "Premium Passenger" special?

More money than brains?

Read the papers, pal.

Aristocracy has had its day.

The peasants are revolting.

[Final 3 Greens]

ILoadMyself

Do I detect a touch of the green eyed monster in your posts?

Let's face it, people who pay the airlines lots of money get better treatment and if they do not, they vote with their feet.

I don't use British Airways very often (still enough to have a silver card) and I will not do until the airline gets its act together and delivers more consistent service, in line with the competition.

Munnyspinner is probably more militant in view than me, but the reality is that many passengers who used to fly British Airways now do not, because we get better treatment elsewhere.

From personal experience, I have received far superior treatment from easyJet on a wx cancelation than from BA when travelling on a business class ticket - that is insane. Insane because both airlines followed their policies, not because I got special treatment.

The conformance that Munnyspinner describes is an example of how to irritate your better contributing customers, frankly who cares if the majority of the economy pax are pissed off because a high paying regular customer arrives a few minutes late?

Most of those passengers will buy on price and change airlines at the drop of a hat, whereas the regular premium client will keep coming back due to tie in on FQTV schemes.

So Mr I,<whatever>myself, why don't you just move on down to row #31 like a good little person and let the high rollers get on the front in peace and quiet without your Wolfie Smith impersonation :}

[GroundedSLF]

F3G - Aside from the totally selfish attitude in your remark about "who cares if economy pax are pis*ed off if one high payer arrives a few minutes late", those few minutes may well lead to the flight picking up a delay, which may lead to huge inconvieniance and cost for the airline (especially at a busy airport like LHR) - it could push the crew over hours, mean a delay for the next sector - anything really.

I am not a huge fan of BA per se, but I do see that they are trying to turn around their performance.

I just cant see the problem - if you arrive late you dont board, solution? Dont arrive late.

[Final 3 Greens]

GroundedSLF

My remark about 'who cares' was somewhat tongue in cheek and not meant from the perspective of a premium customer, but from the perspective of the airline.

The reality is that most airlines don't really care about their Y pax, although they do care about the costs incurred by missing slots and the knock on effects of delays, so my point is that the airline is doing this for its own reason and the line about doing it for the benefit of ther pax is not the main dirver, IMHO.

However, seriously, my other point is that conformance is not an intelligent way to behave, especially in a downturm.

Now, I wouldn't cut things as fine as Munnyspinner, but a sensible airline would try to proactively get someone with a long premium history onto a flight, not just to chop them. This latter action rings true, because it aligns with my treatement when BA canx my flight 4 hours in advance and told me I was on my own (club ticket, silver card holder.)

BA is losing customers at the moment.

I'm in Paris today and happy to take BA to T5 (for a short hop, BA was cheaper than AF and I want to stay near LHR, otherwise I would have choses U2), but tomorrow I fly to the middle east on a J class ticket, with * Alliance, to a destination served by BA.

I don't need to do business with an airline who cannot persuade its service provider to run a fast track system properly, in a terminal where it is the only airline.

A small thing, but there is a lot of competition out there.

[Skipness One Echo]

BA canx my flight 4 hours in advance and told me I was on my own

What was the time of day and re-booking options offered?
I assume they offered to rebook at the very least and did not literally say "You're on your own". Just curious.

Ta

[Final 3 Greens]

Time of day 3pm.

My comment about 'on my own'really refered to their refusal to provide hotac or even assist in getting hotac.

Just a point blank 'we are not providing accomodation assistance for London joiners', even though the airline are aware I live abroad.

'Go away and come back back tomorrow morning.'

[strake]

While the leaders of airline businesses and airport authorities will swear on their lives that "the customer comes first" and they will be supported in this assertation by various PR and marketing types, the reality is that the majority of the airline/airport employees have you well down on their personal priority list.
They don't care where you live, who you are (unless you're their boss of course), how much you spend or how long you've been flying with them. They don't care if you foam at the mouth and tell them that never again will you fly with their cursed airline! Further, you have absolutely no chance of winning an argument at an airport, indeed, you could end up being nicked for just raising your voice in a way that .."upset my colleague..". The only outlet for your frustration is a letter to the chief executive or venting your spleen here on Pprune.
However, neither of those will change anything either.
My advice? Either rise above it all or take every opportunity to stick-it to the guy next down in line from you in the pecking order....

[Munnyspinner]

Premium is the term used by BA and other airlines. They mean, Commercially ( (more) Important Passengers (CIP) /Frequent flyers and those who require a higher quality of service for which the airline can charge a permium over an above cattle class - which presumably, is where the revolting peasants sit next to those with more brains than money.

As regards the old conformance rant - Will this ever go away?

I flew to EDI this morning very reluctantly via LHR courtesy of BA ( its OK I'm back on BMI next week). As I was staying at the Sofitel last night I was not dogged by a late arrival. However, I did have to wait 20 minutes at the gate before anyone form BA showed even the remotest interest in boarding the flight. We departed on time but then taxied for 20minutes before take off. Arrival was punctual but, of course it would be because the scheduled flight time is now 1hr 20 whereas it used to be a block to block time of 55 minutes ( in the old days!).

In comparison with BMI last week, from Hex to gate took less than 10 minutes and the flight was just boarding when I arrived. No late arrivals, no delays 10 minutes max from pushback to take off 3 minutes early on arrival. LHR to EDI. To do the same with BA would take me at least 25 - 30minutes longer ( allowing for 10 minutes through security - although block to block times would be more or less equal. If you start adding this all together, Journey to paddington, Hex (15 +14 minutes worst case)+ 35 + 1.20 - I'm almost better taking atrain.

I have never delayed a flight once but have caught flights that have been delayed where airline staff have been awake to the possibility of filling an empty seat at the last minute to open a seat on a later ( busier) service. That behaviuor will increase load factors, improve yield and increase profit. Unfortunately, conformance either inhibits or restrict such opportunism.

The stats will show that T5 departures operate consistently on time but I don't think this is actually down to conformance. Pre T5 there was a shortage of stands at LHR which often meant inbound A/C were delayed by late departure of the preceeding flight. Now this situation has been alleviated by T5 and the knowck on effect removed.

The delays I have experienced have often been caused by transfer pax whose luggage has overtaken them or they get lost. How does conformance deal with BA pax making a flight connection where pax are delayed at immigration but their bags get onloaded onto a connecting internal flight?

[Munnyspinner]

GSLF,

Your remarks about BA remind me of a bus company whose revenues on a particular route started to falter. The FD asked the Ops director to look into things. He came back and sid he couldn't understand why there was problem. The buses were new, clean and operated toa very strict schedule.

Not satisfied, the FD decided to do a bit of his own reseach and joined a bus queue on that route. After two buses sailed past form his own company he ened up taking a rival service. The ops director was questioned and the drivers brought in to answer for themselves. The answer they gave solved the mystery - "If we stopped at every stop we wouldn't be able to keep to the timetable!"

BA may become the world's most punctual airline yet - if only they could unburden themselves of the self loading freight! I may have militant views but, the more I read on these pages and hear from others I am not alone in my belief that BA have lost the plot and that T5 conformanace is only the tip of a customer unfriendly iceberg ( ironic as I was once told the project name to move BA into T5 was - Snowball!)

[GroundedSLF]

F3G - Your point regarding being "left on your own" by BA, which you later clarified to mean they did not offer you hotel accom in London when they canx the flight, can I ask if you were on a "through ticket" via LHR, or were you just a LHR departure on your return to Paris (I think you said you live in Paris, so were presumably here in the UK on some kind of visit).

If they did - then you have a very strong case against BA providing costs for your enforced overnight stay. The fact that BA cancelled the flight (presumably for reason within their control as it was 4 hours in advance) and could/did not put you onto an alternative flight, either with themselves or others the same day makes them liable.

BA contracted to get you from point A to point B on a set date - they have to do this via whatever reasonable means, or provide you with accomodation and or meal vouchers depending on the length of the delay.

[GroundedSLF]

MS - Sorry, I dont understand your point in relation to my posts and thinking BA is like a bus company...however, if you want to use the example of the bus company, your anology totally misses the point.

"The FD watched 2 of his busses sail by, so caught a rival firms bus"...

What?

More accurate would be..."FD was on his way to the bus stop, and saw the bus sitting at the stop, with a couple of people boarding, the FD ran to try and catch the bus, but the bus departed, as it was time for it to do so. The FD was really angry, and after a few minutes another passenger joined him at the bus stop, the FD proceeded to tell him all about how unfair it was that the bus didnt wait for him, but the man just said "Why should it wait, you were not on time, if your not on time you have to wait for the next bus"

[Globaliser]

However, seriously, my other point is that conformance is not an intelligent way to behave, especially in a downturm.

Now, I wouldn't cut things as fine as Munnyspinner, but a sensible airline would try to proactively get someone with a long premium history onto a flight, not just to chop them.Actually, I think BA does do this for some truly valuable passengers, for whom conformance will be waived. But different people have different ideas about what defines a "truly valuable passenger".

[Michael SWS]

I did have to wait 20 minutes at the gate before anyone from BA showed even the remotest interest in boarding the flight. We departed on time...So perhaps boarding began on time too?

Arrival was punctual but, of course it would be because the scheduled flight time is now 1hr 20...And the flight time with BMI is also between 1hr 20 and 1hr 30.

Your irrational hatred of BA, apparently simply on the grounds that they do not schedule their operations solely around you, is laughable.

[Munnyspinner]

The BMI block to block times are the same - I agree. The difference is that you have some leeway as to when you arrive at the gate Provided you getto the gate on time - no problem. At BA conformance adds an extra 15 minutes to waiting times ( at the very least) and if you don't make conformance you get bumped regardless.

Interesting that BA will waive conformance for some pax - it will make the rest of us feel even more disadvantaged.

I have no hatred of BA but a loathing of petty bureaucracy that is ruining what was once a great company.

[clareprop]

Strake

Amusing, but absolutely true...:ok:

[Munnyspinner]

Grounded,

I know you can be slow sometimes but....

The analogy was meant to highlight the fact that the bus company had not managed to convey to its staff what really mattered to the customers. Punctuality was everything to the extent that the buses didn't even stop for the pax. Irony - geddit?

If conformance works then to abandon conformance would certainly result in delays? - I don't belive that it would. I think conformance is an idea that was introduced to assist BA in the early stages of T5 when wayfinding was not established ( actually, I think it is still confusing compared with some other airports but has improved - maybe its just me?).

The punctuality push went much further than simply conformanace and BA can now point to much better stats. However, I think the results have been achieved due to the combination of factors. Slavishly hanging onto conformance means that we will never find out if this is the key to improved punctuality or not. But, I know that I am not the only passenger that feels it is overkill.

If BA want to discriminate between different tiers in the exec club that might be a start.

[Skipness One Echo]

At the end of the day, we have heard your opinions on numerous anti BA threads that you have started. A lot of people don't mind obeying the conformance rules that allow the punctuality to improve. You disagree and have offered opinions as to why this is the case.

Not a single metric, no qualtifiable data as to this. ( sure you're not a Scottish banker ? ) That's fine as this is hardly a court, but you are really coming over as boorishly anti-BA and you are not listening to many of the good points poeple have made. It's beginning to look like you have an agenda all on your own here.

You have started FOUR anti British Airways threads recently. All because you failed to arrive on time for a flight.

http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/375535-why-i-love-british-airways.html
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/375316-con-fused-ba-lcy-edi.html
http://www.pprune.org/airlines-airports-routes/375381-virgin-results-vs-ba.html
http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/366999-t5-conformance-rant.html

For God's sake man, just grow up and buy a bloody watch! You make some good points but they drown in the bile! As former cabin crew you ought to know better than

Then I remember how you view other peoples rules...

I used to occasionally use my airside pass to shop before a trip - leave my purchases landside then go back though security for duty. It was handy where electonic items were on special offer and I didn't want to cart them from pillar to post on a trip or rely on BAA's super efficient buy and collect service - don't know if this is still available either. Can't say whether I was breaking any rules or not and was never challenged - I once had the same conversation with the same security operative at LHR about 40 mins apart -

[Munnyspinner]

Skipness,

I will say nothing more about conformance - don't need to , it's been done to death. But I'm not alone in my views. And, in fairness to BA they did sort everything out quite fairly and I have no axe to grind over that incident any more. I have no disrespect for those who wish to adhere to rules which I may regard as silly and, if I chose to avoid being bound by the same rules, that is my call.

Yes, I started one thread because I was bumped off a flight because I arrived 33 minutes before departure. The definition of late was BA's not mine. In 33 minutes I could travel from T1 to Paddington and Back by HEX. Please read the whole thread as you will see that I did thank those at BA for sorting things out.

The other threads were not overtly or deliberately anti BA but seem to have developed that way. I have no agenda and people like you will always seek to defend BA whatever - which only encourages further debate. I would refer you to some of the other postings that are objectively critical of BA. And I will repeat, I used to be a BA fan but see too much wrong with the company to remain silent. And, no, not soley because I was bumped off a flight - that would be petty. No doubt, you will draw you own misguided conclusions.


Rules need to be tested form time to time as occasionally they are absurd. Did I break any rules using my airside pass to go shopping - you tell me! But, I am pretty sure I didn't.

As regards bile, I have tried to represent my extreme views and make some good points as politely as possible without boorish, racist and abusive comment and will continue to do so. If this causes you offence then so much the better. Keep taking the pills.

[ILoadMyself]

Do I detect a touch of the green eyed monster in your posts?

No, only the desire to give you a slap and invite you to wake up and smell the coffee.

[Final 3 Greens]

Ah ha

A naive realist, I see,

[Skipness One Echo]

Did I break any rules using my airside pass to go shopping - you tell me!
Unless your presence airside was a necessary part of carrying out your duties you know fine well you did. I don't intend to keep engaging you on this as you seem to be glorying in the attention.

You think rules are for everyone but yourself and you challenge the ones you don't like. I do that too, however I don't always blame the other guy once it has been explained to me by numerous informed people why the way things are the way they are. I get it wrong on occasion, yet I have never missed a flight in over a decade of flying. Buy a watch and stop railing at the world, you'l live longer.

[GroundedSLF]

MS - Play the ball, not the man...

As others have said, you really are coming across as a BA hater, and from your posts, the starting point seems to be when you were not allowed to take a flight because you arrived "late" - as per the terms quite clearly laid out in the BA website, in bold font no less.

You may think that I am "slow" - you are entitled to your opinion - but all I was trying to do was to try and highlight the stupidness of your arguments.

Should have known better - no matter how many posts disagree with your viewpoint, backed with facts, and posted by those with more knowledge of real time operational performance than you, you will never be swayed from your original opinion.

So, I for one will now stop trying, and bow to your far, far superior intelect and reasoning.

[Munnyspinner]

GSLF & S1E,

Thanks. I would remind you that I did accept that I was late and I was not permitted to travel. I will not make that mistake again and have taken steps to reduce the risk to me by reducing my travel with BA to (almost) zero. I am entitled to do this and, as I have already pointed out, in fairness to BA, they did sort things out.

If I think rules are silly then I am surely entitled to that opinion. Some rules can be bent without hurt or harm and some cannnot. This thread was not meant to be a further rant about conformance nor a rail against BA but you and S1E seem hell bent on turning it into one.

As I can choose to avoid the rules BA impose on pax at T5 you can choose to ignore this and earlier comments - why don't you?

The original point of the thread , I think was to question whether BA in giving reasons for reducing the EDI -LCY service were using the damaged aircraft as an excuse when it would appear that economic drivers were far more likley to be the reason for the reduction in service. Please feel free to debate that.

And Finally, Skipness - perhaps you might consider, in light of your earlier vitriolic, racist and ascerbic comments about your fellow countrymen - who is the one that needs to calm down.

[TightSlot]

Ego's on parade...

Think we've seen enough now.