SQ vs UA: guess who wins?

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Greetiings, and apologies for being late on parade, so to speak. And thanks, TightSlot, for contributing as yourself: your experience makes those inputs extra valuable.

I'll just comment on a couple of those 'hanging chads'.

I agree entirely with TS's comments on the Singaporean culture. I lived and worked there for a few years, and 'impenetrable multi-cultural complexity' would be an understatement! Likewise the 'democracy' - Lee Kuan Yew allowed a degree of democracy only on the basis that nothing [but NOTHING] was going to damage the future prospects for Singapore. Any echoes with Willy Walsh there? But Singapore's success was built on everyone pulling together for the common good, and acceptance that life ain't ever going to be perfect.

TS also said "I bet that few of us from Euro/US cultures would embrace enforced early retirement, rigid discipline and dismissal for 'attitude' were it to apply to our chosen field of work?" I guess that's where I'm in the minority, after a career in the UK military! All those factors applied then, and still do. It is a disciplined workplace, where 100% delivery of 'management expectations' is the norm - and it still functions with today's British 'yoof', doing amazing things in nasty sandy places. And I'd do it all again from the beginning if I could! Since my slightly early retirement [voluntary redundancy offer I couldn't refuse] I've had to operate in the amorphous, unstructured and ill-disciplined world of 'civvy street', where even getting my email answered is regarded by me as a major success. In consequence, in many respects I'm less happy ... which takes us back to 'expectations', of course.

However, the sun is shining and I'm still alive!

[Final 3 Greens]

It is extremely difficult to achieve a high 'service' level within Euro/US culture these days - our society is simply not geared to produce the required results, and corporate culture simply reflects social culture.

In the case of airlines, it is driven by oversupply IMHO. Basket case airlines are bailed out and this builds the 'too big to be allowed to fail' complacency that can be seen in the sector.

Euro/US social culture is one where the value of an individual is perceived to be at least as important as the value of others, where individualism is encouraged and the rights of the individual are held to be paramount: Like it or not, many people confuse 'service' with 'subservience' - Not only when providing 'service', but also when consuming and assessing it.

Then how come McDonalds provide super service?

It is social, not corporate culture that sets the legal framework within which airlines operate. It is extremely difficult, legally, to dismiss somebody, or even sanction them: This can be demoralising for work colleagues when they have to watch a serial abuser of their employer apparently being permitted to 'get away with it'. Social culture also dictates equal opportunity, non-discrimination and ageism policy - not the employer.

Sorry, but this is typical British defeatist thinking. The legislation is a barrier, but it is by no means impossible to remove someone using a disciplinary process and this is a symptom of weak management. Some leadership is required.

I've already said that age is not important and so has Paxboy, it is competence (including the right attitude) that is the driver.

I had a lovely flight out to Atlanta, with Delta, a few years ago. I was travelling on a freebie ticket, so was in Y, the crew were 'mature' but utterly charming. Same thing recently with Swiss, three female CC in (guessing) their late 40s/early 50s, brilliant at their jobs.

Like Paxboy, I want service, not eye candy.

I accept your point about 'modelling' and expectations, but would argue that it is to some degree irrelevant. In fact, most of us have learned to assume that we are being marketed at (lied to?) by most kinds of companies providing most kinds of service. The fast food burger never looks like the image of itself on the wall; The call centre never supplies the promised level of support; The happy, smiling, sexy couple and their delightful children in the commercial simply don't exist - we've learned to ignore all this and manage our expectations accordingly.

Sorry, this is defeatist thinking. Go to Schnitzelwelt (fast food outlet) in Villach in Austria and the food looks exactly like the picture on the world, better in fact. Try Nando's, same experience, good chicken at reasonable prices, book a Premier Inn, always good vfm, I've stayed there hundreds of times, never had a bad experience.

In the airline sector, easyJet delivers what it promises in my experience and is good vfm. Air Malta usually provides good service, with the caveat that the delivery approach can vary from purser to purser, but it is still good.

Europe's biggest and most successful airline promises its' customers absolutely nothing except safe air transport, and prides itself on so doing - they set very low expectations and then meet their target - customers lap it up.

Ryanair has a clear value proposition and it delivers it. Not my preference for business travel, but I do often use the company to demonstrate strategic positioning when running seminars and MOL is a strong leader.

It is an effectively managed company, unlike most airlines, thus the difference in performance.

It is also run purely for profit.

I admire SQ for what they do. They rule their crew with an iron hand and behave in a way that is acceptable within their culture. They also use sex as a marketing tool, albeit discretely.

Agreed. I got hammered on here a few years ago for having the termerity to suggest that some asian airlines sold seats via sex.

In doing so, they expose and exploit weaknesses within Euro/US service cultures since customers have little visibility of the processes involved, only of the end result - an attractive, smiling, young, diminutive Singapore girl bobbing gracefully through the cabin of an ultra-modern clean and quiet aircraft. The same is true of the middle-eastern carriers, which is largely why EK, EY & SQ are so dominant.

I've got news for you, customers buy on experience, not underlying process.

GF has a reputation for poor service and is struggling, so it is not just a regional degrees of freedom thing, you still have to gain competitive advantage.

I guess that all I'm saying is, be careful what you wish for. When a Euro/US carrier gets it right, I'd rather travel with them: Democracy, and all the messiness that goes with it, is not easy (and shouldn't be) but is, in my view, preferable. Democracy is also what is not available to the people of Singapore, or at least not as we would recognise it. As always, the Singapore face presented to the world masks something more complicated behind - but that's another story.

That statement has too many undertones of moral superiority for my liking.

Not every country wishes for or values democracy, many will argue that a benevolent dictator is a better model for them. Certainly your average Iraqi might.

I'll avoid going down the BA discussion route: Those militant crew members have done for the reputation of CC in general what Foot & Mouth did for dairy herds, and I don't propose to further promote them in here.

Not just the cabin crew or their unions. Management over the years must also answer for why this statet of affairs exists.

[TightSlot]

I don't see that expressing a preference for democracy demonstrates an undertone of moral superiority. I am personally, entirely comfortable with saying that in all cases democracy is preferable to other, less democratic processes. Indeed, your suggestion that others might benefit from such processes strikes me as unattractive in so many ways that I am, quite literally, lost for words.

I'm afraid that we shall have to courteously disagree, not only about this, but also about many of the rebuttals that you have raised above. I'm not certain that further discussion would change views on either side.

[Final 3 Greens]

TS

I am quite happy to agree to disagree.

If you spend some time in the middle east, preferably one of the more enlightened countries, you would understand my comment about the locals preferring another model to democracy.

I prefer democracy too, but am quite prepared to accept it is not a universal panacea.

These comments are not made to start off the thread again, simply to respond to your 'speechless' state and to provide some context.

[leewan]

Comparing SQ and UA is like comparing apples with oranges.
SQ is where it is today due to its governments wide ranging support in its early days. It still exists today, make no mistake about it, but in a subtle and discreet way.

SQ CCs go for a 4 to 5 months training course, which I've heard is the longest in the industry for cc training. Their interview and screening actually screens every part of their body for imperfection. And they are actually offered employment on 5 years contract, subject to renewal at the end of the 5 years. Which basically keeps them on their toes throughout their employment as their contract could be discontinued if they gave problems. And for all this, they are paid quite a handsome sum and given good benefits. They have auditors dropping in on their every now and then doing checks on their service quality making sure that service standards don't drop. For more info, you could try reading this book:
MEDIA REVIEW

Now to the political part, SQ is controlled by the government of SIN indirectly and SQ's pilot union actually has a tumultuous relationship, by SIN's standards, with its management. A political member actually revoked a pilot's immigration status due to his involvement in a particular issue.
Lee Kuan Yew and SIA

This is not the best of democracy, but at the end, $$$$ rolls in and that's what matters most.. Bear with it and you will be rewarded. That's the underlying message to the staff of SQ

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ leewan .. any memories of the SIN docker's strike in the 60's? Where LKY pointed out they would be severely damaging the SIN economy? they said they didn't care ... they were going to strike anyway.

At which point LKY said, "OK, basically that's treason. Visas and passports will be withdrawn, go away to another country." There was no strike.

Strikes are a blunt instrument, that can actually go head-on against democracy. Several thousand people against a nation, causing massive damage for a selfish [and I mean that in the literal sense] cause. What price the company, or the people, or the Nation?

As many others have said, if you don't like the job and T&Cs, go and get a different one. I had 30 happy years working for a 'company' that demanded 100% obedience. In return it gave me job security, promotion prospects and a decent pension at the end. It seemed like a good deal to me, and it still does to this day.

[PAXboy]

Slightly off topic and at serious risk ...
There are many peoples in the world who do NOT want democracy in the Western 'ideal'. (Ideal, given that democracy at this stage of the Western world is fairly impure!) There are many countries that will use the front of democracy to establish the old methods of ruling. If their process is 'reset' by the West and they continue to revert to their old method - and the population let them - then there is some indication that they all like what they are used to.

Not saying it's good.
Not saying I'm thrilled about UK democracy (or USA for that matter) but I have chosen to stay in the UK.
Not saying we are better but western democracy is a much overated commodity, as Bush and Blair found out the hard way.

[liteswap]

As the OP, I'm with PAXboy on the democracy issue: we in the West think it's great but that doesn't necessarily apply elsewhere, and I certainly don't want my government spending my money forcing it down the throats of other nations.

Back on topic: I just got back from the US (LHR-ORD-DEN-BIS then BIS-ORD-LHR) all on United. The CC were in the main brisk and professional, although events that stick in the mind are one of them cruising up and down the aisle asking if anyone had chocolates for the cabin crew, a bellowed 'seatbelts, seatbelts!' as landing time approached, as if we were naughty schoolchildren rather than customers, but also the sheer delight in the eyes of a small boy, about six I'd guess, who after being ushered up to the cockpit of the Canadair regional jet on the BIS-ORD leg to talk to the pilots before take-off, came back with a badge. Can't imagine that happening on BA...

But the food was (as I noted) universally grim. Maybe I'm just picky about the quality of what I eat but fix that and the demands for money for anything outside the (very) basics, and UA could go some way towards rescuing its image.

[AirborneSoon]

SQ's success comes down to many things not just the age of the cc. The company obviously spends the money where it counts, catering, aircraft fitouts, uniforms, training etc. Everything about the airline is first class even in economy. When you've got a great product it's so much easier to find a sense of pride in what you do as well. Clearly SQ girls think they have a job worth hanging onto to jump through the hoops in order to keep it.

What's increasingly occuring in the west though is cost cutting down to the wire and the introduction of hard management. Nothing there to attract and keep good people beyond their own "living the dream" concept which is soon beaten out of them. It's hard to maintain impeccable service when you're serving up something you'd be embarassed to offer anyone and working in an aircraft that appears to be held together with duct tape.

I agree that airlines need to get more from their crew but cutting t&c's until they can hardly get a decent applicant isn't the way to do it. They often market the FA lifestyle as being a drawcard into the industry. But new FAs soon discover that the much touted lifestyle doesn't exist anymore. It flew out the window with the rest of the glory days. They either need to offer good money and ask a lot for it, or offer low money but have other drawcards like decent layovers, career progression or some other compensation.

Many airlines also leave the service training to an afterthought. If you want seamless, consistent service you have to create it, then teach it. Not leave it up to the individual to figure out on the job or invent it themselves. If it only takes 5-6 weeks to train a FA in safety procedures then clearly SQ are spending 14 weeks on service standards in their much touted 5 month training course. No wonder everyone knows what to do, when to do it and delivers it flawlessly.

I very much doubt SQ are subscribers to the churn and burn strategies so popular with crewing departments these days. When it costs the company a 5 month investment in training a new crew member alone you can bet they are hanging onto their trained staff to get value for money. To do that they must be offering a lifestyle or wage of value to their people.

[Wannabe Flyer]

Its not about SQ and UA its about the country!

Its about the law of the land.

Singapore permits a get married get fired approach, Singapore permits a get fat get fired approach, Singapore permits a get old (26) please retire policy.

Net result is there is constant fresh eager blood at such airlines that are willing to work longer, for less and better as they have chosen this career as a pit stop on their way to something else and not a place where they will grow old. Fresh blood, eager hands = better service amongst other things.

It is akin to one leasing an automobile so that they get a fresh and new one every 24 to 39 months. Off course you wont have any issues with the latest and freshest technological marvels, off course your old jalopy will give you groans creaks and moans over a period of time and off course it will not be able to compare in performance to a newer model.

So I guess it boils down to having a gripe with the labor laws in individual countries that tie down the hands of many operators.

[leewan]

I wasn't even born when this incident happened in the 60s, TTB But I do remember watching a video of it in my history class during my schooling years.

Now as much as I'm against strikes, there are times I feel they should occur. The lack of strikes or the law against them has, I feel, has actually emboldened some companies to force half-baked, ill-thought, lop-sided policies down employees throats. And they do this in the comfort that there's nothing much the workers can do. I mean, what's the worst that can happen for the company.The most they can do is go to court which SIA's Pilots union has gone to many times. And the court will actually hammer out a deal or come to a compromise between the two parties. AFAIK, it has never ruled in total favour of the workers. It doesn't punish the company for any policies, no matter how detrimental it would be to the workers. And so this, I feel, encourages the company to come up with as many evil plots as possible and see which can go through.

Having said that, the end users are the actual innocent victims in this cross fire between workers and employer. And in the case of SQ, all the reputation that they built up over the years will go up in smoke if a strike were to occur in SQ. And if the disgruntled pax take their business elsewhere, then there will be no business for SQ and staff will have to go, making the idea of a strike self-defeating. End of the day, there must be total trust and transparency between the company and workers. The workers do not want to be taken for fools or second class citizens as in the case where a company makes money, gives its management a healthy paycheck and good dividends to its shareholders, but does not want to share with its staff or even worse, squeezes them further.

Here'e a gem of a video I found on YT on this whole issue including bits of SQ cc training, enjoy :

YouTube - History Of Singapore ?????? (III) Part 2

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ leewan ... Selamat datang, Inche, terimah kasseh.
Sorry, I never did Mandarin!!

The basic principle everyone should try to follow is that "We are all in the same boat". Your point on education is critical - people do not have a right to say how the company should operate, and the company does not have a right to make unreasonable impositions. With a sensible approach from BOTH ends, sensible people will eventually arrive in the middle.

And, ahhh ... the customer.
Often forgotten, and thus a great risk to ANY company.

[Rush2112]

My 2p worth:

SQ actually goes against general Singaporean culture - it is NOT a service-based mindset. Shop assistants treat you like a nuisance, they'll be on the phone while taking your money. If you go to one with a size L shirt and ask do you have this in XL, it'll be "No". They won't say "No, but we have an XL in this (different) colour". "Are there restrooms on this floor?" gets "No", not "No, they are the next floor." Taxi drivers won't pick you up in the rain, they don't know where anywhere is and don't care, I could go on and on.

I'm the regional COO for an insurance company and the hardest thing I have here is getting them to answer the phone properly - "Good morning, thank you for calling XYZ Company, <name> speaking, how can I help you?" is a phrase beyond all of them naturally and it takes constant training to try and instill it!

[Bigmouth]

I'll take SQ service over UA/AA/DL/BA/LH anyday.
But if a flock of geese have it in for us or a volcano decides to send an ash cloud our way, I'll change my mind in heart beat.

[EastMids]

Four long haul sectors on UA this year - LHR-LAX, LAX-LHR, LHR-SFO, SFO-LHR - and two on SQ - LHR-SIN, SIN-LHR - for me. Clearly the hard product isn't as good on UA as it is on SQ - although I don't find anything much to complain about with UA's newer business class seat, IFE etc, and if I have to travel in Y I'd take UA's economy plus over SQ economy every time. But based on my this-year experiences, as far as the crew were concerned I'd also take UA over SQ. Whilst SQ crews are undoubtedly efficient, its all a bit too clinical and detatched for me - whereas UA crews have been friendly, helpful and pleasant. Maybe its because I don't expect the cabin crew to jump everytime I ding the call bell (I'd rather get up, go to the galley and ask for another drink there rather than expect to be waited upon, even in business class), but I find that UA trans-Atlantic crews have always been good particularly if you make an effort too.

Andy