UK Borders - Shaming

[Capot]

The immigration area at Gatwick (S) was, I thought, as bad as it gets outside a third world undeveloped State. Shoddy decor, low ceilings, bad lighting, constant rebuilding in progress, and long queues with surly Immigration staff sitting in front of notices saying that if you abuse them they'll lock you up.

(These notices are a way of saying to the public "This is a place where we will treat you so badly that you will eventually start shouting and swearing at us".)

But last night I had to come back through Heathrow T4, first time for some years.

ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! THE PEOPLE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE SHAMEFUL, DISGRACEFUL WAY THAT ARRIVING PASSENGERS ARE PROCESSED THROUGH UK BORDERS MUST BE SACKED!

4 staff on duty for UK and EU passports. 8-10 desks unused. A queue of hundreds of passengers from all over the world, extending for at least 100m down a long corridor, even before getting to the absurd maze that they put in front of the desks.

As a UK citizen, I was cringing in shame at the comments being made all around me. When I got to the desk, after 30 - 40 minutes, I asked who was in charge, fairly politely, and got the reply "Don't have a go at me, I'm only doing my job".

This sad, sick farce has got to be stopped. BAA and its Spanish owners don't give a damn of course; people arriving are not potential customers in their effing shops, apart from the stupid shop they make people walk through in the arrivals hall. But they are responsible for what happens in their airports, and should be going to the Prime Minister if necessary to force an imporvement.

I am sending photos of the chaos to the Press, and will post them here if I can get them off my mobile. They remind me of Russian airports before they improved things, and of Gulf airports in the 1970's when they were overwhelmed by their sudden traffic growths.

[T250]

BAA is not responsible for the staffing levels/operation of the UK borders at UK Airports.

They are: UK Border Agency | Home Page

[strake]

Try most of the major entry points to the USA. Mainly ill-educated, non -culturally aware staff, given uniforms and pistols and trained on the basis that: "You are the first line of defence against the evil hordes...."
I remember, just after 9/11 being agressively questioned by one of these people in Miami. When I said we were both on the same side, Miguel became quite perplexed.

Despite your bad experience, I think on the whole, the UK is much better. I have colleagues travel in from the US and Canada every week and they comment on how much more polite UK Border is compared to theirs..and they are citizens!

Me, I use IRIS which, if it is working, means I don't have to talk to anyone...

[Out Of Trim]

I was going to say; at least they don't make you stand just behind a yellow line and treat you like a member of Al Qaeda when it comes to be your turn for interrogation like they do in the good 'Ol US of A.

[Seat62K]

Capot,
What has "Spanish owners" got to do with it? Sounds like cheap xenophobia if you ask me.
By the way, BAA is owned by a consortium. Why not add French Canadians whilst you're at it? After all, they, too, own a chunk of BAA.

[manintheback]

Capot

I have to query how often you travel throught LHR and T4 in particular? What you you describe is the norm, has been since I complained in writing in 2001 - and I dare say long before that too.

However, much as BAA should be blamed for most things - Immigration and staffing is a government issue.

[Hartington]

To give Capot his due I read his post as saying that the BAA should be putting pressure on the Government department responsible for manning our borders to improve the number of people on duty.

To which I say "hear, hear".

BAA should be hanging their heads in shame over the decor and general maintenance of the area in which we have to wait and the immigration officers have to work. Actually, thinking about it, although my experience of regional airports is limited, maybe quite a few of our airport operators need to pull their socks up and if they all had a go at the government maybe things would improve.

[dubh12000]

You guys should try Dublin at the moment. The Gardai manning the desks are on a work to rule over losing a meal payment (or something of the sort). Its an absolute disgrace. At least 45minutes queing time.

[Capot]

BAA is not responsible for the staffing levels/operation of the UK borders

I know; but they are responsible for how things are done in their airports, as I was when I ran an airport. If I thought that any agency, public or private, was lowering the standards of treatment of passengers (= customers) in "my" airport I would go to the top of that organisation and raise hell until things improved.

Me, I use IRIS which, if it is working,

What I believe may have been an IRIS channel was closed. A few hopefuls did queue there, but were eventually sent to the back of the 100m queue. It was actually labelled "Groups", but it looked a bit like an IRIS channel.

What has "Spanish owners" got to do with it? Sounds like cheap xenophobia

They control it, don't they? The point is not anti-Spanish, it's that foreign owners - by definition - don't give a toss about the fact that their airport shames the UK. If you want to include French-Canadians in that, be my guest, but watch your back.

I have to query how often you travel throught LHR and T4 in particular

I have to travel through one of the London airports, on average, about once a month, more frequently up to about 6 years ago; strangely not often through T4 since it was opened. Of course it's always been awful and getting worse, but the night before last I finally cracked.

You guys should try Dublin at the moment

I know, I've been there a lot in the last few weeks. But with all due respect to Dublin (hub for 4m people) , I would hope that the UK's main hub (for 70m people) would set its sights slightly higher!

[Load Toad]

The last time I entered UK through Heathrow (I'm a British Citizen) I was with a foreign visitor. This was two years ago.

It was a shambles and I was ashamed of it.

I go through Shanghai / Shenzhen apts quite often and through the borders 'tween China & HK every week. In comparison Heathrow is a disorganised appalling mess that herds people along like cattle at an abattoir. It's embarrassing.

If I go to UK now I try to go into MAN or such - at least it won't be so busy - but quite honestly in comparison to border controls in Asia then UK is getting very 'developing world' stylee.

[Seat62K]

Capot,

Three points:

You assume that before its sale to Airport Development and Investment Ltd. BAA was "British owned". I'm reasonably confident that like most privatisations, a considerable proportion of shares were in foreign hands.

What makes you convinced that before the sale, BAA was any more concerned about the degree to which its airports "shamed" the UK? Were Heathrow, Gatwick etc. markedly better before June, 2006? Of course not!

I think ADI's plans for the redevelopment of the "Central Area" (as well as modernising T4) show commitment to improving Heathrow. You could, therefore, equally argue that it's taken "Spanish ownership" to start to put things right. Now I know that Ferrovial does not own Barajas, but T4 there shows what a modern terminal should look like and I've no reason to doubt that the new terminal at El Prat will be similarly spectacular. The difference? Most Spanish airports (and all the major ones) are in the public sector.

I repeat, there was no legitimate reason to refer to BAA's "Spanish owners".

[Capot]

Seat62K

You're being disingenuous to an extreme; prior to the sale of BAA to Ferrovial etc etc, the company was not controlled by any one shareholder or group of shareholders acting together. Now it is.

BAA's Board prior to the sale was so focussed on retail so that no other aspect of the operation was of any interest to them. They were shopkeepers by trade and inclination, not airport operators. I experienced this regime. I would be the last to argue that the company's management then was better than now. But they were bad because of what they were, not because of where their national loyalites lay, for the most part.

But now there is the added factor that, because they are not British, the company's owners have no interest whatsoever in whether or not their airports are a credit to the UK. Why would they care tuppence if the first glimpse visitors have of the UK is a shambolic, badly run, "disorganised appalling mess that herds people along like cattle at an abattoir".

If you want to characterise that statement of fact as zenophobia, go right ahead. But it is not.

I just don't want to have to stand in a queue for 40 minutes again listening to people, in a number of languages that I understand and I suspect in many others that I don't, commenting, in effect, "God help the UK if this is what the rest of the country is like."

[Capot]

Interesting, this question of BAA ownership.

As most people know, BAA was bought by Airport Development Investment Ltd, which was in turn wholly owned by a company called FGP Topco Ltd, registered at the BAA address in Wilton Road, London.

It's actually FGP Topco Ltd which is owned and controlled by Gruppo Ferrovial (56%), and two other companies, one called Caisse de depot et Placement du Quebec (26%), and Baker Street Investment Pte Ltd (18%). (Figures rounded).

This was the situation at December last year, at least, and I'm indebted to the Competition Commission for confirming that.

Now either Companies House database is out of date, or neither ADI nor FGP Topco are UK-registered companies, although they claim London addresses.

A company called Baker Street Investment Ltd is registered in the North-East of the UK, but that's not exactly Baker Street Investment Pte Ltd.

Now, ADI and FGP Topco operate in the UK, and would pay tax on their BAA-derived income less their costs. I wonder how much of those costs is "Consultancy fees", "administrative services" and the like, invoiced by these companies' Head Offices overseas, and washed through the books to BAA itself, to remove tax revenue from the UK?

[LH2]

I don't see what's so wrong with having third world immigration desks. They are just setting the tone so that visitors will know what to expect should they decide to go past them.

Incidentally, the man who denies to hate Zenon ("it is not zenophobia", he claims) is failing to grasp the small detail that customs and immigration are not the airport's responsibility. The airport provides the facilities as required, if then the Home Office decides not to use them, that's hardly the airport's fault. Complain to the Home Secretary, if you know how to write a letter.

[qwertyplop]

Capot - interesting points but why so angry all the time? I'm surprised you've not keeled over yet from a heart attack.

Did nobody stop you taking photographs in that area? A quick review of schedule 2 of the Immigration Act seems to allow the immigration officer to set the conditions under which they implement and run an immigration control, my experience is that they usually insist you don't use phones or camera's near them. Mostly on the basis that private conversations and interactions could be recorded as a consequence of usage. Not sure that they would be too happy either being identified doing the work they do. I read somewhere that such staff have been identified and attacked outside of the workplace. I also think that the same act requires a port operator to provide certain facilities to the Immigration Service, so what you see at most ports is all they would appear to be entitled to.

Immigration staff have recently had to take on extra screening duties on behalf of customs, with whom they were recently merged. This has had the effect of making the transaction time ergo the queues, longer. Not sure you'll find too many Immigration Officers all that happy about it either.

HM Government insist that all arriving traffic is screened against wash lists, this has changed the nature and speed of such work too, they did this without increasing the staffing either. These controls operate 24/7, peaks and troughs will exist all day and every day. Most operational managers would happily invite you to make your comments known to senior management, they might listen to you I've heard.

Without the cow pen system in the hall that you've alluded to, your queue would have ended in Crawley by the sounds of it. Be happy that it was there, you were provided with some theatre by the sounds of it.

Most here would happily queue an hour for a theme park ride at Alton Towers yet they won't queue to cross a border so some checks can be done - can't say it has ever bothered me - the old refrain that 'I live here' won't do either as it would seem they can speak to Brit's now to do the customs checks. I've never been treated rudely or inappropriately by anyone from immigration, the job can't be easy and they're looking for wrong un's not Joe Schmoo coming back from Alicante. I choose to make it easy when I go through and not draw attention to myself because of some indignant mistaken belief that I can behave how I wish. That's not aimed at you but at the drunken idiot in front of me who fell over in the queue in Birmingham a few months ago and wet himself. Would I go into his place of work and behave in the same way? No.

Try getting into America whether you are an American or not. Then you'll know what pain is.

[multycpl]

JEEEEEZZZZ
Talk about shoot the mesenger.
I think s/he was only pointing out that things could be done a little bit better.

Ps. It seems that all(most) every goverment office in the UK is just short of being a slum.

[backseatjock]

A little off thread but just to add that it's not much better on the outward leg either. T5 security early Saturday morning is just unacceptable and I note, with interest, that we don't see any happy ads playing up how quickly you can transit through security, these days.

For pax who are FF trying to navigate your way to the Farse track (sorry Fastrack) lane is a challenge and it ain't that fast anymore. Yesterday, passengers were being prevented from going through security unless their flights were due to depart in 90 mins or less. If you wanted lounge access that was a debate you had to have with the duty security personnel.

Makes a mockery of the fact airlines suggest you turn up 2-3hrs before a long haul departure as there is not exactly much to occupy your mind until airside!

As always, we see a sloping of shoulders when it comes to accountability. BA which trumpets its 'new home' when things go well, blames BAA when things do not. And BAA which is mighty proud of the T5 success, blames UK Border and Security whenever it suits. Once again, those who pay out for tickets are those who loose out.

[Capot]

the man .... is failing to grasp .. that customs and immigration are not the airport's responsibility... if .... the Home Office decides not to use them, that's hardly the airport's fault.

At the risk of being repetitive, but necessarily, it IS the airport's responsibility to make sure that everything that happens under its roof is as good as it can be. In the unlikely event that you are interested, I know that because I have done it, when managing an airport in the UK. It is not the passengers' job to "write to the Home Office", it is the airport manager's job to do something a lot more effective than that.

why so angry all the time?

Not all the time; only when I see people being treated like cattle by a bunch of other people who don't care a damn about what they do and how they do it.

Edit

PS The only other place I've seen those "cow pens" like the ones at Heathrow and Gatwick, was at the Erez crossing into Gaza; they were reserved by the Israelis for Palestinians using the crossing, as a deliberate method of ritual humiliation. Other nationalities did not receive this treatment at Erez, so BAA is less discriminating; we all get treated like that. Take a PC bow, BAA!

Did nobody stop you taking photographs in that area

I was waiting for that one! The answer is no, no-one took me to task. When you are at the far end of a very slow queue over 100m long you could make a film without anyone noticing, if you want to.

The comparison with queues for theme park attractions and so on is false. The point about the immigration queues, and awful facilities, is that it does not have to be like that, and is like that only because someone is not doing their job properly and does not care that tens of thousands of people are messed about as a result.

Bu***r, now I've got worked up, again. I'll have to kick the cat. Again.



But you're right......I'll have to become one of the stupid cattle and take no notice, for my own health. I'll learn to say things like "He's only doing his job, dear", "'twas ever thus", and "it'll be alright, they're well-intentioned, dear",and lie down peacefully with my paws in the air, like the other 99% of the UK's population seem happy to do when they are treated so badly by Banks, Government and waiters.

[qwertyplop]

Capot, in your rush to get a response in you've overlooked the fact that I agree with you mostly.

What I cannot agree with, and never will, is an uninformed opinion masquerading as FACT. What is the solution to the queues? More staff? Yes, possibly but they'll never invest in staff now they are committed to electronic clearance with the e-Borders scheme, chances are in a few years and providing they can get the IT solution to work, you'll never see an immigration officer again. Good thing or a bad thing? I don't think there's a substitute for a Mark 1 eyeball but I'm old school. Other countries generally employ a police force to do border control, the UK does not and maintains border controls outside of most of Europe's rules, it therefore follows that more people who come through will be subject to more scrutiny and as you failed to acknowledge, they are now doing customs profiling work too. Political decisions that have a bearing on operational capacity usually mean that no increase in resource is ever forthcoming. Sad but true but the disconnect is further up the chain and not within the gift of the officer doing the line work in front of you.

They could turn a blind eye to everyone coming in and wave them through - politically and in terms of security - not really an option.

And the comparison for a theme park is not false as you imply. Perhaps people are corralled for a reason, perhaps it assists with profiling, perhaps it allows a camera to have a look, perhaps it's down to the fact that the airports sell every spare inch of space for shops rather than for your comfort and dignity, perhaps it's a bit of everything I've mentioned. Perhaps it allows other agencies to take a look at you as well, after all the police work quite closely with the UKBA too.

When your blood pressure calms down perhaps you will understand that this one small part of the international travellers experience is not about customer service but rather about law enforcement and that any choice you think you do have in such matters can only be exercised before you embark on your journey, that is, you choose not to travel because I suspect that your notion of customer service is not a concept that applies to this area of an airports operations. You simply comply with immigration and customs requirements as these are not negotiable - if you feel you cannot do that then it might be expedient for the health of your cat and you, if you avoid the places that are so distasteful to you. Our expectations in this area are not something that concern the powers that be I suspect, as long as no-one was rude to you or applied legal powers towards you inappropriately, what's the issue? The officers will be no happier working in an area that causes stress and makes interaction problematic will they?

And I mean that with no malice or sarcasm.

[qwertyplop]

JEEEEEZZZZ
Talk about shoot the mesenger.
I think s/he was only pointing out that things could be done a little bit better.

Ps. It seems that all(most) every goverment office in the UK is just short of being a slum.

Perhaps we just don't pay enough tax to ensure their upkeep?