Are airports ruining aviation?
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 1,948
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sikpupi
I don't know of any airports charging 'extra' charges for access airside and or through security?? Where is that happening?????
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The glasshouse, a stone's throw from you
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Airlines like Ryanair actually request that the number of security chekckers and the number of baggage handlers be cut down and use this as justifying reduced fees.
So if you are wondering why a 787-800 load of people trying to get though ONE lane of security now you know why... and what really gets my goat is that they blame the airport and call them names in their propaganda releases such as this one...
Ryanair - News : Ryanair calls for break up of DAA Monopoly as Gatwick is sold
"DAA Monopoly" is not a registered trading name of the Dublin Airport Authority, but then again we all call Ryanair something derogatory due to their "Would ja loike yer droive tarmacing" approach to business.
So if you are wondering why a 787-800 load of people trying to get though ONE lane of security now you know why... and what really gets my goat is that they blame the airport and call them names in their propaganda releases such as this one...
Ryanair - News : Ryanair calls for break up of DAA Monopoly as Gatwick is sold
"DAA Monopoly" is not a registered trading name of the Dublin Airport Authority, but then again we all call Ryanair something derogatory due to their "Would ja loike yer droive tarmacing" approach to business.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Tracey Island
Posts: 1,496
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: .where ever I lay my hat ..is my home.
Posts: 136
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Call100.....good reply!!!!
Seems they are playing the MOL Game....no more than "do you want to be the 1st to board the aircraft" - well thats £5 per person (man/woman or child!)
Bit of Pot/Kettle/ Black if complaints coming from FR. It is (as in their own words) 'Not Compulsory' and 'Discretionary' and the pax could avoid same by turning up on time for his flight!!
Am sure FR would charge for same if the security queue came unter their remit!!!!
Seems they are playing the MOL Game....no more than "do you want to be the 1st to board the aircraft" - well thats £5 per person (man/woman or child!)
Bit of Pot/Kettle/ Black if complaints coming from FR. It is (as in their own words) 'Not Compulsory' and 'Discretionary' and the pax could avoid same by turning up on time for his flight!!
Am sure FR would charge for same if the security queue came unter their remit!!!!
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where its at
Age: 40
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's not charging extra to get airside!!! That's just charging you extra if you decide you want to get there quicker...
Not too concerned when I have a checked bag and I know that the airlines would probably rather wait for me to pass security than offload my bags but its a different game altogether if you are traveling with hand-luggage only...
I did hear that Liverpool Airport actually intended to make it compulsory for everyone to pay for security, but backed down following pressure from Easyjet. Anyone know anything about this?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Ireland
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I posted originally, ironically I was not considering low cost airports, with low cost airline customers it was more the legacy type airports, and the topic is on the back of a lot of discussion among aircrew/passengers as previously stated.
pottwidler
Thanks for the comments, I don't do drag, and I don't have any association with FR. Suggest an anger management course, if ATC is casuing you so much stress. But in a way you have reinforced my point. The initial capital investment in Navigational infrastructure is well and truly offset by Eurocontrol, terminal nav and landing charges over the lifetime of the equipment. Yes, there are peripheral airports that are dominated by low cost airlines whose primary source of revenue is driven by non core activities. My point is not really relevant to those. It was more aimed at primary airports, and focuses on driving efficency and customer focus to directly reduce the cost to the customer (airline and passenger). These airports have a higer margin per pax than most airlines, and I believe that is wrong.
pottwidler
Thanks for the comments, I don't do drag, and I don't have any association with FR. Suggest an anger management course, if ATC is casuing you so much stress. But in a way you have reinforced my point. The initial capital investment in Navigational infrastructure is well and truly offset by Eurocontrol, terminal nav and landing charges over the lifetime of the equipment. Yes, there are peripheral airports that are dominated by low cost airlines whose primary source of revenue is driven by non core activities. My point is not really relevant to those. It was more aimed at primary airports, and focuses on driving efficency and customer focus to directly reduce the cost to the customer (airline and passenger). These airports have a higer margin per pax than most airlines, and I believe that is wrong.
Last edited by iwhak; 5th Nov 2009 at 18:33. Reason: spelling error
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: 2 DME
Age: 54
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anansis whilst the queues are sometimes long they move steadily and I have never heard of a pax taking anywhere near 1 1/2 hours to get through security - that sounds like one of the numerous urban 'myths' that were spread by a couple of individuals who had a grudge against the airport and the Fast Track principle. It certainly isn't the norm!
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: STN BHX EMA
Age: 42
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"BOAC... I don't know of any airports charging 'extra' charges for access airside and or through security?? Where is that happening?????"
Well, Sikpupi many Airports now charge a pax to bypass a security queue and actively sell this service to people whilst in the queue, whether it be directly or through 'in your face' advertising, I am not an expert on every UK station but know this to be the case at LPL, EMA, MAN and I think BOH and HUY along with a few London Airports I think. Nevertheless, it does exist and is a growing trend, and only an example whereby the Airport are in my opinion completely wrong to follow the example of the 'low cost' model, Airports should act more responsibly than that, as stated before "Two wrongs do not make a right".
Well, Sikpupi many Airports now charge a pax to bypass a security queue and actively sell this service to people whilst in the queue, whether it be directly or through 'in your face' advertising, I am not an expert on every UK station but know this to be the case at LPL, EMA, MAN and I think BOH and HUY along with a few London Airports I think. Nevertheless, it does exist and is a growing trend, and only an example whereby the Airport are in my opinion completely wrong to follow the example of the 'low cost' model, Airports should act more responsibly than that, as stated before "Two wrongs do not make a right".
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Manchester
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Security Charges
No additional charges for Security at MAN. Just a new 14 lane search area at T1, costing several millions to transfer pax passengers airside quickly and easily. Over 80% of pax are through in less than 8 mins to 'enjoy' the shopping experience which is where airport revenues now come from.
Airports today, most, understand the low-cost airline model, but has been expressed here before, some are not prepared to 'trash the market', and will provide a realistic product to their airline customers.
To some lo-cos, airports are being asked, like a Sainsbury's customer when taking a pack of minced beef to the check-out saying, "I want a steak for the price of this, otherwise I'll go to Lidl".
Airports today, most, understand the low-cost airline model, but has been expressed here before, some are not prepared to 'trash the market', and will provide a realistic product to their airline customers.
To some lo-cos, airports are being asked, like a Sainsbury's customer when taking a pack of minced beef to the check-out saying, "I want a steak for the price of this, otherwise I'll go to Lidl".
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Where its at
Age: 40
Posts: 228
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anansis whilst the queues are sometimes long they move steadily and I have never heard of a pax taking anywhere near 1 1/2 hours to get through security - that sounds like one of the numerous urban 'myths' that were spread by a couple of individuals who had a grudge against the airport and the Fast Track principle. It certainly isn't the norm!
I Have Control
Join Date: May 2004
Location: North-West England
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'd happily queue for an hour and a half to get out of Liverpool and its dreadful airport. (And Manchester, come to think of it).
Incidentally, how are retail sales progressing at the "malls" at LPL and MAN? Both seem remarkably quiet. Idiots have managed these 2 airports for years, and the financial results are certain to be dreadful.
Incidentally, how are retail sales progressing at the "malls" at LPL and MAN? Both seem remarkably quiet. Idiots have managed these 2 airports for years, and the financial results are certain to be dreadful.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: no
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the last 5 years I have used lpl early am in July and have had no problem with sercurity. One time had a free fast lane voucher from the airport for using the car park but never had to use it. Maybe it is a urban myth.
Oh, Hudd, could you quantify what you mean by " a dredfull airport" (lpl & man) ?
Oh, Hudd, could you quantify what you mean by " a dredfull airport" (lpl & man) ?
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Northwest
Age: 64
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At Liverpool they have a priority lane for security that you have to pay to use see the link below;
Liverpool Airports Fast Lane Service
It's like priority boarding with lo-co's;except that I believe that this doesn't work all the time.
Liverpool Airports Fast Lane Service
It's like priority boarding with lo-co's;except that I believe that this doesn't work all the time.
Paxing All Over The World
Sorry to bust the happy thread line of "It's security" and "It's the LoCos wot dunnit" I think it is neither of them, although they are symptoms of the problem. Once again, I am going to be the Voice of Doom ...
Without going into a lecture on the history of human commercial endeavour and the way in which men constantly reinvent the wheel and make the same mistakes ...
A change in management style swept across commercial life in the second half of the 1980s. The theme was to 'empower' individual departments to make their own decisions and (to a limited degree) control their own budget but to a greater degree instruct them to control making more money.
The idea was that, if each department in a company/organisation tried to make more money and see themselves as contributing directly - rather than just as part of a large company - that they would bring in more for the company. Bonus' were offered.
Bring in more money - give better service - get bonus - get promoted. It seemed like a win-win. All well and good until human nature takes it's usual lead!! Departments that had been working harmoniously with each other to provide a united product of the company - now started competing with each other for the attention of the senior mgmt. Slowly, across the next 15/20 years, the focus changed and departments were not so keen to help their neighbouring department by lending staff and support (for an hour/week) or having meeting to solve the collective problem of helping their customers. No, they wanted to charge more money to the client/customer, cut their staff, outsource their staff, cut back on documenting the changes and decisions after all, if it's not written down - no one can argue it. Then appear to be the good guys by showing dubious customer satisfaction surveys.
In cutting staff, it was particularly important to cut the older staff, who had seen it all before and could point out the error of their ways. This is not a rant about young managers as many have great ideas but against the old mgmt for installing them (they were cheap and appeared to have good ideas) but when you throw out the staff who have been dealing with your customers for 30 years, you throw away your corporate memory, and much else besides.
Senior mgmt had then delegated so much that they could easily fire people (they had after all, taken responsibility) and the CEO and Directors never had to resign, unless there was a criminal investigation.
Does any of this sound familiar?
I saw this start in 1989 when I was working in the City of London for an American Merchant Bank. During the early 1990s, I saw it spread to almost every large company. In the late 1990s, I saw this spread to govt. The Tories did it well and the Labour party did it supremely well.
Now we have companies and govt that are fractured and broken up into little pieces. It's going to be a long time before it knits back together again and will have to get a LOT worse before there is enough pressure to do so. Probably 50 years and a lot of civil unrest.
So, griping about an airport/LCC is pointless!! Have a nice day.
Without going into a lecture on the history of human commercial endeavour and the way in which men constantly reinvent the wheel and make the same mistakes ...
A change in management style swept across commercial life in the second half of the 1980s. The theme was to 'empower' individual departments to make their own decisions and (to a limited degree) control their own budget but to a greater degree instruct them to control making more money.
The idea was that, if each department in a company/organisation tried to make more money and see themselves as contributing directly - rather than just as part of a large company - that they would bring in more for the company. Bonus' were offered.
Bring in more money - give better service - get bonus - get promoted. It seemed like a win-win. All well and good until human nature takes it's usual lead!! Departments that had been working harmoniously with each other to provide a united product of the company - now started competing with each other for the attention of the senior mgmt. Slowly, across the next 15/20 years, the focus changed and departments were not so keen to help their neighbouring department by lending staff and support (for an hour/week) or having meeting to solve the collective problem of helping their customers. No, they wanted to charge more money to the client/customer, cut their staff, outsource their staff, cut back on documenting the changes and decisions after all, if it's not written down - no one can argue it. Then appear to be the good guys by showing dubious customer satisfaction surveys.
In cutting staff, it was particularly important to cut the older staff, who had seen it all before and could point out the error of their ways. This is not a rant about young managers as many have great ideas but against the old mgmt for installing them (they were cheap and appeared to have good ideas) but when you throw out the staff who have been dealing with your customers for 30 years, you throw away your corporate memory, and much else besides.
Senior mgmt had then delegated so much that they could easily fire people (they had after all, taken responsibility) and the CEO and Directors never had to resign, unless there was a criminal investigation.
Does any of this sound familiar?
I saw this start in 1989 when I was working in the City of London for an American Merchant Bank. During the early 1990s, I saw it spread to almost every large company. In the late 1990s, I saw this spread to govt. The Tories did it well and the Labour party did it supremely well.
Now we have companies and govt that are fractured and broken up into little pieces. It's going to be a long time before it knits back together again and will have to get a LOT worse before there is enough pressure to do so. Probably 50 years and a lot of civil unrest.
So, griping about an airport/LCC is pointless!! Have a nice day.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Germany
Age: 52
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of being slightly off-topic, I can say that what PAXboy describes does sound familar, because I have seen it happening in academia too.
Mid-noughties, I was working at a research institute at a major UK university. We were leading in our field, and had worked on several industrial projects, which meant that the institute had some money in the bank (some of which came from work for a large UK airline). This should have helped us through a transition phase, when the focus of research changed and we had fewer industry projects. However, the rector, who had been CEO at a multinational, decided that all departments should work as independent business units, but that all profits would be skimmed away by the university to fund the administration. So we first lost our savings, then were told that we apparently didn't have enough funding to carry on, and the institute was closed down.
Managers should realise that in any enterprise, the whole must be more than just the sum of the parts. But I fear that this is not taught at MBA schools.
Mid-noughties, I was working at a research institute at a major UK university. We were leading in our field, and had worked on several industrial projects, which meant that the institute had some money in the bank (some of which came from work for a large UK airline). This should have helped us through a transition phase, when the focus of research changed and we had fewer industry projects. However, the rector, who had been CEO at a multinational, decided that all departments should work as independent business units, but that all profits would be skimmed away by the university to fund the administration. So we first lost our savings, then were told that we apparently didn't have enough funding to carry on, and the institute was closed down.
Managers should realise that in any enterprise, the whole must be more than just the sum of the parts. But I fear that this is not taught at MBA schools.
Paxing All Over The World
Interesting, TJW and as it happens, in the course of my regular work this week, I have found two other examples of the significant change in management approach, I shall be brief but include them to show, I think, that the problems we see in airports and carriers are no different to the rest of the modern world (so called!)
Here is part of the story of Drexel Burnham Lambert, an American financial company that crashed in 1990. One of their employees was Michael Milken. I quote from Wikipedia. Drexel Burnham Lambert - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Organizationally, the firm was considered the definition of a meritocracy. Divisions received bonuses based on their individual performance rather than the performance of the firm as a whole. This often led to acrimony between individual departments, who sometimes acted like independent companies rather than small parts of a larger one.
According to Dan Stone, a former Drexel executive, the firm's aggressive culture led many Drexel employees to stray into unethical, and sometimes illegal, conduct. Milken himself viewed the securities laws, rules and regulations with some degree of contempt, and often condoned unethical and illegal behavior by his colleagues at Drexel's operation in Beverly Hills.
Then there is a report this week in the UK paper The Independent,
City pay culture has spread to charities, union says - Home News, UK - The Independent
Research shows that more than 50 bosses earn in excess of £100,000
By Robert Verkaik and Eleanor Harding
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
The leaders of Britain's charities face accusations that their six-figure pay packets are excessive and part of a culture of greed polluting the voluntary sector.
Research seen by The Independent shows that more than 50 charity chief executives received between £100,000 and £210,000 last year. In one case, a charity paid its chief executive nearly £400,000. Unite, the union which represents 60,000 charity workers, said too many charity bosses were paying themselves more than the Prime Minister's salary of £197,000.
So ... twenty years ago, the financial companies were full of shenanigans and paying themselves too much and now our MPs have been up to the shenanigans with their expenses and the charities are paying themselves too much. So, if everyone is doing it, then it must be normal???
Here is part of the story of Drexel Burnham Lambert, an American financial company that crashed in 1990. One of their employees was Michael Milken. I quote from Wikipedia. Drexel Burnham Lambert - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Organizationally, the firm was considered the definition of a meritocracy. Divisions received bonuses based on their individual performance rather than the performance of the firm as a whole. This often led to acrimony between individual departments, who sometimes acted like independent companies rather than small parts of a larger one.
According to Dan Stone, a former Drexel executive, the firm's aggressive culture led many Drexel employees to stray into unethical, and sometimes illegal, conduct. Milken himself viewed the securities laws, rules and regulations with some degree of contempt, and often condoned unethical and illegal behavior by his colleagues at Drexel's operation in Beverly Hills.
Then there is a report this week in the UK paper The Independent,
City pay culture has spread to charities, union says - Home News, UK - The Independent
Research shows that more than 50 bosses earn in excess of £100,000
By Robert Verkaik and Eleanor Harding
Tuesday, 10 November 2009
The leaders of Britain's charities face accusations that their six-figure pay packets are excessive and part of a culture of greed polluting the voluntary sector.
Research seen by The Independent shows that more than 50 charity chief executives received between £100,000 and £210,000 last year. In one case, a charity paid its chief executive nearly £400,000. Unite, the union which represents 60,000 charity workers, said too many charity bosses were paying themselves more than the Prime Minister's salary of £197,000.
So ... twenty years ago, the financial companies were full of shenanigans and paying themselves too much and now our MPs have been up to the shenanigans with their expenses and the charities are paying themselves too much. So, if everyone is doing it, then it must be normal???
