Adding further shame to American Airlines, look who has revamped their website for full disclosure of fares and fees.

Spirit Airlines. Read the story HERE.

Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
3 Comments »

I’ve written on the subject of baggage fees a number of times before.  I feel that for any legacy carrier, indeed any carrier other than, perhaps, an Ultra Low Cost Carrier such as Spirit, to charge a fee for the first bag checked is wrong. 

WRONG, WRONG, WRONG.

When you are flying to a destination, that is called travel.  Travel is universally accepted to include the need to take along some belongings such as clothes, toothpaste and maybe a jacket, too.  Taking these items for a trip longer than an overnight or, perhaps, a casual 2 day trip, generally requires a bag that is larger than what airlines accept as carry-on baggage.   I can accept charging for a 2nd (or more) bag, but I refuse to go silently along with charging fees for a 1st bag and especially when an airline like Southwest Airlines refuses to charge for such a bag. 

Almost all airlines operating in the United States charge to check a bag now.  In fact, off the top of my head, Southwest is the only that doesn’t.   There was a rush to charge for this when we entered the Great Oil Crisis and the ancillary revenue has titillated both airline executives and financial analysts all over the country.  These fees were implemented and then they were even raised in many cases as the Great Oil Crisis eased off. 

My extreme chagrin originates in the fact that while everyone in The Business blesses these fees and likes to angle these new fees as “services”, they aren’t services.  This isn’t a charging for a Coca Cola, this is charging for a basic requirement (for most) when traveling.  A Coke is a much more optional item.   Furthermore, these fees subsidize giving these “services” to business class and/or frequent fliers for free. 

Regardless, they are here in our system.  So, if they’re going to be in our system, it would be nice to at least have some transparency both on the price of the fees as well as the requirements and restrictions governing these things.  In other words,  we should be able to see an “all in” price for our trip when we’re making the purchase and, by the way, that should be *before* we actually hand over our credit card number for this purchase.   This industry is somewhat unique in that there are “fees” being charged after the purchase that while styled as “optional”, really aren’t.  And the baggage fee is the epitome of that.

However, these fees have been around for 2+ years now and I don’t think they’re going away.  Because of my history with airlines and certainly because of this blog, I know about these fees and I just “handle it” when I’m traveling.  My own preferences towards airlines today lean towards LCC carriers such as Southwest and Airtran and on Airtran, I just pay my baggage fee online when doing my online check in and simmer down from my annoyance (which isn’t as great with Airtran since they charge a paltry $15 / bag instead of $25 like most legacy carriers.)

Consider this an open letter to American Airlines.

My daughter went to visit her uncle and grandparents yesterday.  Her grandparents paid for her ticket and they chose American Airlines.  Now, I should note that I haven’t flown AA since they instituted their bag fees primarily because I find American’s service product to be poor when compared to my other options.  In short, I fly other carriers now and I’ll point out that I live in the DFW area, location of AA’s biggest hub. 

Guess what I discovered?   American Airlines wouldn’t allow me to pre-pay my daughter’s checked bag fee(s) online.  There is absolutely no option for that anywhere on AA’s website.  None.  Zero. Nada. 

Really American Airlines?  Is that the best you’ve got?

After 2 years, you haven’t made a single accomodation on your website for the change in your business model?  And, yet, Airtran made it almost in real time. 

I get that you, as an airline, are a leviathan and that it’s difficult to change th direction of such a big ship.  I really do.  That means I’d have given you about 180 days to get that problem solved.  All I can conclude from your inability to implement this kind of stuff is that, as a company, you’re just damn lazy.

But if you had to change your ticket pricing model and accomodate that on your website, you would have that done in 30 days, wouldn’t you?  Sorry but a $24 Billion company should be able to get its act together a lot better than that.  In fact, I know it’s been pointed out that your website is outmoded already but it is remarkable that as somebody who has visited it regularly since it was in existence, it really hasn’t changed much at all. 

By the way, that means it still is a relatively large pain in the ass to get answers to my questions.

What’s more, when I discovered your egregious lack of accomodation for the inconveniences you inflict upon your customers, I phoned your company to see if this could be done on the phone.   After your voice recognition mangled my requests 4 or 5 times, I retreated to asking for “Agent” and “Operator”.  Imagine how aggravating it was for your system to actually say to me “I understand you want an agent but let me find out more about your needs before I connect you.”  Or words to that effect. 

Let me clue you in:  I’m an English speaking, native born US citizen who is actually known for not having an accent despite living in Texas for 40 years.  If your system can’t understand me, that’s *your* problem.  Not mine.  In fact, it wouldn’t be anyone’s problem because this is a prime example of why I find it distasteful to fly on your airline in the first place and it’s why I book myself away from your airline and have done so successfully now for over 2 years. 

It’s worth the extra time to connect in a different city on a different airline.  It just is a whole lot stressful than dealing with you, American Airlines.

Second, should I really be on the phone waiting to finally speak to an agent on this issue (which, by the way, isn’t addressed in your phone tree options as nearly as I can tell but I never did get far for all the voice recognition mistakes) for over 18 minutes on a Monday night?   In 2010, I should be waiting that long?  By the way, AA, I never did get through to an agent.  I mashed the “end” button my phone and got in my car and drove to my bank to withdraw extra money to give to my daughter so she could pay for your infuriating baggage fee when she got to the airport the next morning.   All because you, American, can’t answer your phone nor be bothered to update your website.

So, like everyone else, I’ll ask one more time:  Really?  Is that the best you’ve got?

Filed under: Airline Service by ajax
2 Comments »

And, no, jetBlue isn’t buying the 737.  I’ve found three interesting items to comment on involving the 737 and jetBlue and New York city separately.

First, Southwest Airlines COO and Exec VP Mike Van de Ven has made a statement that re-engined aircraft whether they are a 737 or A320 won’t offer enough improved performance to be attractive to Southwest.   And I think there is a message here, particularly to Boeing, about what SWA wants and may be willing to buy.  Southwest is a huge customer  for Boeing on the 737 and Southwest is just the kind of customer Boeing wants to kick-off with.  

I think Southwest wants a new 737 replacement from Boeing and I think they’re signaling that they would be willing to become the launch customer for the right aircraft.  COO Van de Ven said: 

“I believe that a new narrowbody aircraft will produce one of the single most significant steps toward meeting our economic challenges.”

If nothing else, it’s a message to Boeing saying “please don’t re-warm the 737 again, we need you to work on a new replacement and deliver that as soon as possible.”

The Fort Worth Star Telegram Sky Talk blog has THIS story about the DFW Airport Board and its recent retreat.  It’s notable that they mention that they’re trying to use incentives to get jetBlue to start service between DFW and Boston.  Currently, American Airlines is the only non-stop airline on that route and, no, the fares are not cheap.  Frankly, I don’t think jetBlue will cooperate given their recently announced interline agreement and slot swap with AA.

However, this points up my chief rant about my home town area.  We do not have enough competition at DFW airport and I believe that AA is challengeable on both  fares and service.   Delta has begun challenging American on the Chicago – NYC (La Guardia) route and American is responding, currently, with triple air miles awards to retain its customers. 

More significant is that Delta has decided to go head to head with American on a route that American has *owned* for decades.  The big worry is about mergers and reduced competition they might create in the US market.  To the contrary, I think the latest round of mergers is going to lead to 4 legacy carriers who are going to start looking at each other’s dominance at various airports and, in particular, who isn’t making money and cannot afford to indefinitely “buy” routes with low fares.

That would be American Airlines.  US Airways is a bit weak in its route system but they earn profits.  AA doesn’t and hasn’t in a long time.  Delta’s incursion on the NYC-Chicago route is novel and it may or may not work but Delta has enough financial staying power to sit on that effort for a long time in hopes of building the business.   What happens when someone like ContiUnited comes along decides that AA shouldn’t own DFW-LAX?  I think we’re going to see plenty of competition in the airline world.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

One of the biggest problems with how union leadership gets elected is, in my opinion, that those who do get elected generally do so on the platform that is most aggressive.  Whoever promises to fight for more than the other guy generally wins provided he or she can also appear to look aggressive too.   As a result, unions are led by the vocal minority and that leadership almost never represents a voice of reason.  Without a voice of reason, it’s extremely difficult to get an agreement in place.

American Airlines pilots have new union leadership.  Lloyd Hill is being replaced by David Bates and I got a look at what they’re promising. Mind you, union promises are like any other political promises.  No one expects all of them to come true but they are a gauge of just how much the elected has boxed himself into a corner.  Terry Maxon at the Dallas Morning News has written THIS aviation blog entry.  And here is a quote from the Dallas Morning News that is a quote of the Bates team:

Pay – Restoration, including retro plus annual raises plus permanent COLA raises after the amendable date. Scope – Protection and recapture of flying at both the top and bottom end of our fleet mix.

Stagnation – Mechanisms to deal with FO stagnation including a higher percentage of Captain’s pay.

Sequence Protection is the norm in the industry. Pilots should not be financially penalized because of marketing decisions, earth quakes, volcanoes, hurricanes or other planetary events.

Reserve – Our reserve system needs a complete overhaul. We need a system pilots can live with.

Vacation – Increased credit for vacation.

Sick – Enhanced sick provisions for pilots.

Pension – Pension protection for all pilots on the seniority list.

Profit Sharing – The economy is improving. APA should return to a profit sharing plan that mirrors the one management has for themselves.

 

NEVER . . . GOING . . . TO. . . HAPPEN.

In fact, if this is the negotiating position going into talks with AA, I foresee many more long talks taking place.  I think the pilots (or some other union) really wants a strike with AA.  They want a precedent for restoring that long lost pay and the pilots think they can set that precedent. 

AA cannot afford to give in on issues like that.  The productivity of pilots and flight crew compared to other airlines is already pretty bad.  Restoring that pay means the end of AA.  Management cannot meet those demands.  They cannot get close to meeting those demands.  To even arrive in the same state much less the same ballpark on those demands would mean the end of AA. 

Even worse, AA loses in any strike action that shuts down the airline.   I would guess that AA could survive, at most, 10 to 20 days of a strike and that’s it.  There are no resources available to assist them with keeping the airline in the air.  Not like British Airways has done (While BA seems like a “huge” airline, it’s actually a pretty small airline in terms of fleet size.  BA has about 250 aircraft total.  AA has considerably well over 600 aircraft.)

There are reasonable union leaders out there.  Delta’s Lee Moak is one.  Continental’s ALPA leader, Jay Pierce is pretty reasonable.  Those men have recognized the fundamental changes in the industry and they understand that a return to status quo not only isn’t going to happen, it isn’t in a pilot’s best interests to happen. 

And then we have Lloyd Hill giving way to David Bates & Team.  American Airlines let all of these talks go on for too long.   To have one union after another all lining up eager to be the one who “sticks” it to the airline is not a good position to be in.  To have so many labor contracts in talks at the same time is not a good position to be in.  AA is literally standing in a big hall staring at all the other unions who are each independently and cooperatively are determined to A) stick it to the current management team and B) win back  pay levels that were unsustainable 10 years ago and remain unsustainable today.  And those unions have both the power and, more importantly, the anger and fury to shut down the airline. 

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

 You can find a lot of aircraft videos but the 707 videos just seem to evoke a very special emotion in people.  Enjoy.

Early American Airlines turbo-jet 707’s

6 1/2 Hours of Magic

Canadian Armed Forces CC-137 Take-Off  (Dramatic)

The Famous Dash 80 (prototype 707) Barrell Roll

VH-XBA (ex-QANTAS) 707-138 (cousin to John Tavolta’s 707)

N707JT – John Travolta’s 707-138B  (ex-QANTAS, ex-Braniff)

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
2 Comments »

The United States and European Union concluded a new, expanded Open Skies agreement between the two parties which was expected after the initial agreement and was to allow for majority ownership of airlines in one country by an airline of another country.  This exists within the EU today but the US currently limits foreign ownership stakes to no more than 25% and the EU limits them to 49%. 

The next agreement was supposed to allow majority ownership and while this one does do that, there is a major hurdle still in the way.  The legislatures of both parties have to ratify this agreement.  Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood signed the agreement but I question whether or not this is really going to happen. 

Airlines are a hot topic in the US and both the US and EU have economies that are very different than they were in 2007 when the first agreement was made.  Governments on both sides of the Atlantic have become much more protective of their industries over the past 2 years and airlines are something of a pride thing for both governments.  Although this comes with a stamp of approval from President Obama’s administration, it is somewhat difficult to imagine the current Congress ratifying the agreement. 

I suspect that the present Congress will defer this until after our national elections in November and if there is a party control change, I’ll expect this doesn’t come before Congress before next summer.  A Republican controlled Senate might be more inclined towards this deal but only because the Senate is, after all, supposed to be the voice of reason in Congress. 

I don’t see this as a game changer on either side of the ocean.  In fact, while our big concern is over a major European airline taking control of a US airline, I actually think the opposite is more likely.  I can see someone like American Airlines or Delta wanting to take control of a European partner and I think they have a better chance of financing the deal.  Particularly in Delta’s case.  The new ContinUnited company is going to be busy for a few years getting its act in order but could be an interesting acquisition for Lufthansa.

All in all, there is a new agreement that isn’t in effect and won’t be for some time to come.  Even when it does come into effect, I think ownership across the ocean is much more likely to come in the form of LCCs on both sides taking an interest in each other.  Or a larger carrier taking an interest in acquiring a smaller carrier here. 

Perhaps Virgin Atlantic may want to take full control of Virgin America (not necessarily a bad thing either in my opinion since they have a bit more nerve when it comes to competing.  Or let me point out that Lufthansa already owns a stake in jetBlue and may want to acquire it in full.   Maybe this lets Ryanair form its international division by acquiring an LCC here to provide feed on both sides of the pond.  Whatever happens as a result, it isn’t likely to really occur for another 1 to 2 years.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

When Emirates announced its latest purchase of 30+ more A380 aircraft, a lot of carriers took notice, particularly in Europe.  The planned capacity increases that Emirates has put into place for the next 7 years is nothing short of baffling to most and it has made many airline CEOs wonder what they’re missing. 

Emirates operates on a model of being “hubbed” in the perfect place from traffic between Europe and India, Asia and Australia.  They compete with other international carriers on service and they compete with everyone with frequency and convenience.  Currently, many of those flights from Europe to those destinations require a fuel stop and Emirates uses Dubai for that fuel stop which allows them a big advantage on X things:  fuel is cheap, landing and taking off is cheap, Dubai is “on the way” to most of those destinations and isn’t much of a diversion for them, and they’re able to utilize their aircraft much more than some on a per day basis. 

That’s a powerful advantage.  Emirates has also kept many of the largest European governments (economies) from protesting much at all by being a huge customer of Airbus.  It’s very difficult for those governments to bite the hand that feeds their aerospace industry.  It’s notable that neither Canada nor the US have felt nearly as accomodating towards Emirates (and other UAE carriers) when it comes to access to their markets and in the case of the US, this is despite the fact that Emirates has also been a pretty good customer of Boeing’s. 

All of that scares the hell out of European international carriers.  Emirates also claims that these carriers are discovering that it takes an A380 to compete with an A380.   And then they went all in with their latest A380 order.   It’s very tough for those airlines to sit at the table and wonder if they can afford to go all in. 

I don’t think it takes an A380 to compete with an A380.  I think it takes an A380 to compete with an A380 on a few trunk routes and I think Emirates’ model crumbles with the 777LR, 787 and A350 for much of the destinations it serves.  

Right now, I think there is an attraction to the A380 on those routes for 2 reasons.  First, it’s the latest and greatest in long range aircraft.  Second, it has the freshest service product installed as a function of it being introduced by airlines for only the past 2 years.  Over time, the “newness” of the aircraft will go away (just as it did with other new aircraft introduced) and the service product will be matched by others on other aircraft. 

Right now, a lot of those legacy international carriers that are so worried are trying to compete with Emirates using 20 year old 747-400 aircraft with a service product that is, in many cases, a generation out of date.   If it isn’t a 747-400, it’s a 777-200/300 with a service product that was “copied” from the 747.  See where I’m going here?

Since we don’t have much visibility into the real financial picture of Emirates, a lot of analysis of them is speculative.  We don’t know where their financing comes from and at what terms.  We don’t know what their fuel prices are and we don’t know what their labor costs are either. 

That said, I don’t believe it is impossible to compete effectively with Emirates now and particularly in the future.   I believe those long, high capacity trunk routes that Emirates works so well are going to fracture with the next generation of jets. 

It’s already possible to use a 777LR to reach all of Asia from Europe and the 777-300ER will serve 90+% of Asia and do it point to point.  While Europe has traditionally been the transit point between Africa and the Americas, that’s already changing.  US airlines are now serving Africa more and more with smaller equipment that fits those long, thin routes pretty well.  South American airlines are initiating services to several parts of Africa with similar equipment.    and it only gets better as the 787 comes on line. 

So Emirates may capture some traffic for a while from the US but it is unlikely to dominate particularly in the future.  The magic routes to Singapore, Indonesia, Australia and New Zealand are likely to remain an Emirates strength but take note that those same international carriers in Europe who are freaked out right now are also now taking delivery of their own A380s.  Air France has them, Lufthansa just took delivery of its first and British Airways has them on order.   They will have the aircraft to compete with Emirates.

Frankly, I don’t understand why someone such as British Airways doesn’t explore setting up a Dubai base to compete directly with Emirates.  Or any of the others, for that matter. 

Regardless, this belief that huge trunk routes will remain is, in my opinion, false.  Those trunk routes will fracture into more and more “point to point” routes that are longer and thinner than ever before and the airlines serving those will be the preferred airlines for that travel.  People just don’t like connections when they can go non-stop.  If they can’t go non-stop, they still prefer the fewest connections.  It’s the time saver and saving time is why we fly.

Frankly, I can see Emirates becoming a bigger player in its region of the Middle East/India/Northern Africa/South East Asia but I see them contracting over the next 15 to 20 years on those trunk routes provided those other international carriers step up and get to work on their fleet and service planning.

There isn’t anything magical about Emirates  and despite their potential advantages from being Dubai owned and based, that doesn’t make them the carrier that can’t be beat.  It takes work, investment and planning but it can be done.

The last thing those airlines want is their own governments becoming more restrictive of access to markets.  It’s a world where that game is tit for tat and that works to no one’s advantage.  They can all survive and prosper with the right combination of leadership, management, planning and investment.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

and I say big deal.  A Virgin Atlantic flight from the UK to Newark (NYC) had to land at Bradley International Airport in Connecticut on Tuesday because of severe weather in the New York City area.   People were kept on board for 4 hours and some reports claim people were overheated and “passing out”.  The plane was described as “dark and hot” during the 4 hours it sat on the ground. 

I am somewhat skeptical of the drama myself.  4 hours is a long time but no one dies from sitting on an aircraft for 4 hours because of weather.  If they did die during such a time, it wasn’t because of the airplane or conditions.  All the stories I’ve read so far have that sensationalistic hint of excess in them. 

What about the 3 Hour Rule?  Well, Virgin Atlantic isn’t currently subject to that because this was an international flight and they are a foreign carrier.  I’ll note that the FAA wants to extend that rule to such flights and I don’t disagree with that.

Was this “wrong”?  Yeah, I do think so.  It’s customary for flights to land at that airport to wait out storms but that airport really isn’t capable of handling large international flights with customs and immigration needs.  The typical flight lands there, refuels and waits for the weather to clear enough for them to proceed.  Bradley International is very close to NYC and it is relatively cheap for a flight to land there and wait.   As a legal diversion airport, it is attractive to airlines for just those reasons.

However, is it the appropriate airport?  No, not really.  Lack of facilities to deal with large, widebody aircraft holding hundreds of passengers who need customs and immigrations processing make it a far less than ideal airport.  It’s acceptable as a diversion for an emergency, it is unacceptable as a diversion for weather, in my opinion.  There are plenty of airports in that general area who can deal with the passenger volumes and their international needs.   Airports such as Philadelphia, Baltimore and Boston.   I would point out that there are not one but 3 airports in the NYC area capable of handling that aircraft as well. 

Certainly the passengers have a right to be annoyed and feel inconvenienced (most were bussed to Newark and that would *really* annoy me) but to act as if this was a human rights violation is carrying it over the line.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

British Airways flight crew union, Unite, has signaled that it will ballot its members for another strike action against British Airways.  The date and conditions of the latest work action, if approved, are not yet determined and BA itself has no comment since it has not yet received the ballot notice.

This is a dangerous path for both the airline and the union leadership.  So far, the strike actions haven’t had nearly the impact that Unite would desire.  On the other hand, the sticking point(s) seem to revolve around union membership who lost travel benefits by participating in the strike.   BA offered to restore those privileges before the last go around but only at “entry level”. 

I have to say that while this strike action by Unite has struck me as ill-timed and poorly led over the issues, BA’s position over the travel benefits is senseless at this point.  It punishes membership (i.e. employees) instead of having an effect on the union leadership itself and it is the one thing that seems both petty and punitive at this point.  CEO Willie Walsh would be well advised to put full benefit restoration back on the table if only to assist in closing a deal and to avoid any more damage to morale.  It’s a small point and if Unite wants to crow about it, let them.  At the end of the day, any sensible person will realize who “won” in this fight.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

It was reported last week that Virgin America is now considering flights to Mexico as their next move and I’m now officially at the point of asking “What the hell?”

The original transcontinental flights kind of made sense to me.  The service product they offer is very attractive for transcontinental flights whether you’re in business class or economy.  And they’re clearly working for VA.

But then we see flights being added to Fort Lauderdale, Orlando and Las Vegas.  Even Las Vegas I kind of get because it allows a bit more utilization for the aircraft between transcon flights.  But West Coast to Fort Lauderdale and Orlando?  Even if they do make money, is that really the best use of VA’s time at this point?

There has been a lot of words from CEO David Cush about access to airports such as Chicago O’Hare and Newark and I get that it is expensive to enter those airports.  That happens in big cities dominated by large carriers.  However, other airlines have made them work, why hasn’t VA?

Access exists and being continually afraid of it is getting old.  I’ve pointed out in previous posts that there are *plenty* of destinations in the middle of the US who would love to enjoy VA’s service.  Airports in places such as Dallas / Fort Worth, Denver, St. Louis (with a big aerospace connection to both Seattle and Los Angeles which are existing VA destinations), Kansas City, Austin (big connections to the SF Bay area) , San Antonio (another aerospace connection) and I suspect that even Atlanta might welcome VA. 

But, no, the next vision is Mexico where competition from California is fierce and many other entrenched carriers are revisiting their business.  Perhaps it is to, again, increase utilization but all I’m seeing are primarily leisure destinations and/or convention destinations.  Not exactly the places where your yield is great and your service product is appreciated by high paying business class customers. 

David Cush says they’ll be profitable next quarter.  Great.  My question is, are you really viable as a choice 3 years from now? 

When does VA begin investing in the routes/businesses that its service product was designed for?  When do we see them willing to compete with established airlines (most particularly AA)?  Don’t tell me it can’t be done because I’ll point to jetBlue which started at JFK airport.  Don’t tell me most of those destinations aren’t LCC friendly because I’ll point to Southwest and Airtran.

Filed under: Airline News, Airline Service by ajax
No Comments »

A close friend of mine is with a touring Broadway show (crew) and has been for over 2 years. As a result, he’s flown some major miles week by week and many of those were on Delta or Northwest Airlines.  Nonetheless, he’s a mid-miles accumulator with them and he decided to use some of those miles to fly his girlfriend from Lansing, Michigan to Los Angeles to visit. 

It was a bad day for that flight from Detroit to LAX.  Held on the ground for over 45 minutes in Detroit, the pilot managed to make up some time on the 4 hour flight but when they arrived, they were held on the ground again for about an hour.  It is notable that weather wasn’t the source for these delays.  In fact, the hold in LAX was because there were no gates available. 

Personally, lack of gates when there is no weather delay and late at night to boot is just bad, bad, bad.  The airline knows the flight is coming in and knows it is a 767-300 and knows they need gate space to accomodate it.  No gate is just one of the worst reasons to be delayed short of really bad weather.

Now, because this friend is crew on this Broadway show, he works every night and a good portion of the weekends on these shows and because of that, he couldn’t pick up his girlfriend at LAX.  So he arranged for a SuperShuttle trip.  The problem is, because of the delays she missed *her* SuperShuttle and had to take one that was much later (way past 12 midnight arrival in the Hollyweird area) and that was the final straw for him.

So he wrote them an email.  He first said:

” I booked passage for my girlfriend on DAL1819 from DTW to LAX on June 10, 2010.  The flight was 46 minutes late leaving DTW, and then once it had landed in Los Angeles, it was detained on the tarmac for *fifty minutes* at LAX, due to lack of an open gate. This, I’m afraid, is totally unacceptable after a four-plus hour trans-continental flight.”

and

” Need I remind you that you are in a SERVICE industry.  I suggest you re-evaluate your definition of the word “service.”  And quickly, if you want any more business from me.  In this economic climate, I am not required to pay money to companies who do not provide adequate SERVICE.”

I’ll be honest.  If he had asked me in advance, I would have advised him to complain because I don’t think things ever get fixed until people do complain but I also would have advised him not to expect any real response either.  In fact, I would have predicted a canned response only tangentially relevant and not much else.

Well, Delta, you surprised me.  Not only did you respond promptly, you responded in a way that left no doubt that you actually read the complaint, followed up on it (possibly even escalated it to the station manager in LAX) and then delivered a flight credit for the inconvenience and delivered it very promptly.   It doesn’t get better than that.  I’m impressed with the context of the response, the speed and, frankly, I’m impressed that it was a responsed that was neither an under nor an over reaction to the customer complaint.  Here is their response (with names redacted):

Thank you for sharing your concerns regarding irregular flight operations while your girlfriend traveling with us.  On behalf of everyone at Delta Air Lines, I sincerely apologize for the inconvenience
 caused to your girlfriend due to delay of our flight #### on June 10, 2010.

 I am truly sorry for the inconvenience caused when our flight #### was delayed on the tarmac waiting for an available gate.  Be assured I will be sharing your comments with our Operations Control Center and Airport Customer Service leadership teams for their internal follow up.  We want to make every effort to deplane all passengers in a timely manner,especially those passengers with a connecting flight.

 To demonstrate our commitment to customer service and as a gesture of apology for the irregular flight operations, I have issued an Electronic Transportation Credit Voucher (eTCV) in the amount of $75.00 for Ms. <name redacted>.  Please note the voucher number and associated Terms and Conditions will be arriving in a separate email.  Please keep the voucher number and the Terms and Conditions since the number is required for redemption.  It is also important for me to mention that no charge is assessed for reservations confirmed online at delta.com.

 As a loyal SkyMiles member since August 30, 2008, you are an integral part of our customer base and we are always interested in your feedback. I hope I have been able to resolve any concerns you have about irregular flight operations.  Your business is important to us and given the opportunity of serving you in the future, I am confident Delta will not only meet but exceed your expectations.

 Sincerely,

 Yousef M. Sequeira
 Coordinator, Customer Care
 Delta Air Lines/KLM Royal Dutch Airlines

Mr. Sequeira, your response was the epitome of what good airline service should be with respect to a legitimate complaint.  You were responsive without being a doormat. 

Everyone should hear the good as well as the bad.  This is another good story and let’s hope I keep hearing about more good ones.

Filed under: Airline Service by ajax
1 Comment »

This Sunday, amusing airline commercials from around the world.

Braathens SAFE

Gol (Brazil)

Indian Airlines

1985 Air Cal commercial

Silverjet (and I think I know why they went out of business)

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

With the DoT proposing changes to rules for airlines that include how denied boarding compensation should be handled, I thought this might be a good time to remind and/or inform folks about what they’re actually entitled to but are rarely aware of.

First, let’s take care of some definitions.  Denied boarding comes in two basic forms.  Voluntary and Involuntary.  Voluntary is when the airline, for some reason unrelated to weather and/or equipment failure or other events that prevent the airline from boarding the aircraft, has overbooked the flight and needs seats to accomodate everyone.  They’ll ask for volunteers and generally offer a travel voucher and guaranteed space on another flight.  How much that travel voucher is worth generally depends on how badly they need the space and how much it takes to get a volunteer. 

For the record, I’ve only volunteered a couple of timese because I prefer to reach my destinations when I originally planned and because I find travel vouchers for the general sum of $200 credit to have little worth to me.  I don’t know when I’ll fly next and I don’t know that it will be on the same airline when I do fly.  The times I have volunteered, the voucher values were considerably higher than $200 and on airlines that did go to most destinations I frequent.

There is no requirement that the airline give you money for volunteering to take a later flight.  A volunteer negotiates for the compensation and makes the best deal they can or just takes what they’re offering.

Then there is involuntary denied boarding.  That happens when the airline is unable (or unwilling) to get volunteers to give up their seats and simply says you don’t get to go on that flight.  Now, the airlines are obligated to offer you either a travel voucher *or* cash compensation (in the form of cash or check) up to a certain value which is dependent upon how long it will take them to get you onto another flight.  The rub is, most people are unaware that the airlines have to give you that compensation in cash (in cash or check form) if you so wish.  In fact, most gate agents leave off that little nugget of information in hopes you’ll simply take what they’re offering as a voucher.  And most do.

Why do they offer travel vouchers?  Because history shows that a certain percentage of those vouchers are never claimed.  They come with expiration dates and the airlines ferverently hope you’ll forget to claim the travel before the expiration date.  (To be fair, I do know of two airlines who have in the past reinstated a credit that wasn’t too far past its expiration date.)  So, if an airline manages to issue $10,000,000.00 in credit over one year and 10% never claim that credit, they’ve just saved $1,000,000.00.  A very tidy sum.

What should you do?  Unless that travel voucher is worth twice what the cash compensation should be, I would take the cash every time (and have.)  Why?  For several reasons.  First, you never know what other costs an impact to your schedule such as that is going to generate.  Why not have the cash available in case you end up incurring more costs. 

Second, a dollar in your hand today is worth far more than a potential dollar in credit a year later.  That dollar can go into your bank account.  It can be used to buy travel on another airline or pay for a hotel stay on a different trip.  It’s flexible and can accomodate you in a variety of ways.  A travel voucher has to be spent on the airline. 

Third, I like punishing an airline.  How are they punished by accepting cash instead of a voucher?  The voucher goes towards the price of the ticket but the airline’s *costs* for the trip you’re purchasing with that voucher are considerably less in most cases.  In other words, it costs the airline a lot less if you accept that voucher than it does to give you currency.   I like punishing airlines who’ve overbooked. 

So, if you are involuntarily denied boarding, make sure the gate agent spells out *all* of our options including the cash you’re entitled to before you make a decision.  Remember that a voucher is worth about 60% of its face value in real world use so if they *really* want to give you a voucher, ask them for more than the cash compensation you’re entitled to.  If they won’t do that, take the cash and the booking on the next available flight and then go find a bar and celebrate beating the airline with a cocktail.

Filed under: Travel Hints by ajax
1 Comment »

USA Today’s Today in the Sky blog reported on an American Airlines flight attendant who stepped in as a First Officer on a 767 flight when the regular First Officer was suddenly afflicted with severe stomach flu-like symptoms.  You can read the story HERE.

According to American Airlines, protocol is to search for off-duty AA pilots first and then the next best alternative.  Flight attendant Patti DeLuna (61) was qualified as a commercial pilot some time ago and while her pilot’s license wasn’t current, she was able to help fill in for the ill first officer.  The plane landed without incident.

American points out that it is perfectly possible to land the 767 with one pilot and I’m sure that Ms. Fagan helped the captain of the flight with his checklists and monitored speed and altitude during the landing.   American Flight 1612 was flying from San Francisco to Chicago on Monday, June 14th.

It really is just like something out of the movies.

Filed under: Airline News, Trivia by ajax
1 Comment »

Southwest Airlines discovered dozens of human heads being shipped by someone at their Little Rock, Arkansas operation and seized them.  Southwest contacted local authorities, including the county coroner who are investigating.  The heads were being shipped to a local firm in the DFW area.  You can read the MSNBC.Com story HERE. 

I can only imagine the reaction of the cargo handlers when they discovered what was in the package(s).

Filed under: Trivia by ajax
No Comments »

AA CEO Gerard Arpey has been getting somewhat loud in his refusal to acknowledge that there may be value in a merger between AA and US Airways.   His argument is that once you have scale, adding scale doesn’t bring much to the table.  Further, he doesn’t think that US Airways brings AA much considering the hubs that AA is focusing on (Dallas, Chicago, NYC, Los Angeles).  You can read more HERE.

Arpey was responding to analysts who pointed out that AA bought TWA to maintain its dominance when United was going to merge with US Airways and why wouldn’t AA want that now. 

The thing is, no, it doesn’t fit within their current 4 hub/cornerstone strategy.  However, that strategy isn’t showing much potential in returning AA to profit either.  AA is the only legacy airline not projected to earn a profit for this year.  I’ve said it in previous posts and I’ll say it once more.  AA and its executive team doesn’t know how to do merger and doesn’t know how to integrate another airline and, more importantly, doesn’t want a merger because it will, most likely spell the end of some of their careers at AA. 

I don’t think Doug Parker would lead such a merger but suddenly he looks like a decent successor to Arpey, doesn’t he?  Particularly if Arpey wasn’t leading a merger very well.  Consider that US Airways, by far the weakest of legacy airlines, is going to earn a profit this year and they’re doing it despite labor issues and their 2nd tier hub system.  That’s remarkable.  American’s team could learn a few things from US Airways, I suspect. 

There is a message here from analysts.  That message is: “Do something.  Perform.  Show us the money.  You don’t have an unlimited amount of time to perform.”  

It is significant that analysts are now putting the heat on and show no inclination to let up on American.  To the contrary, they’re now openly questioning the potential for success in Arpey’s strategy for the airline going forward.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

The Wall Street Journal is reporting that the two pilots of the Northwest Airlines jet who allowed their flight to fly past its destination last year will not get their jobs back.  You can read the story HERE.  Captain Timothy Cheney has chosen to retire in lieu of fighting for his job and First Officer Richard Cole is reported as “no longer with the company”.  Northwest Airlines is now owned by Delta.

Both pilots had their licenses revoked after the incident but reached an agreement with the FAA a few months ago that would conceivably allow them to have their licenses reinstated after certain requirements were met. 

Apparently those requirements won’t be met while working for Delta and I couldn’t be happier.  There was agregious negligence involved in what happened and neither pilot has satisfactorily explained the event.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
1 Comment »

Continental Airlines has announced the second 787 route that it will initiate with the arrival of the Boeing 787.  The first was from Houston to Auckland, NZ.  This time, it’s Houston to Lagos, Nigeria and I’m seeing a trend here. 

Continental is clearly intending to make Houston much more of a international gateway city and that makes some sense to me.  Houston Intercontinental Airport isn’t overcrowded, has excellent feed to it domestically and the new 787 makes a lot of long, thin routes not only possible but profitable. 

It doesn’t hurt that there is a fair bit of oil business in Nigeria too. 

This flight will be subject to a fair bit of regulatory approval and planning on the part of ContiUnited but it is both sensible and doable.  It’s clear that the 787 will be used to expand opportunities rather than simply replace existing aircraft, at least by ContiUnited anyways. 

It’s also further proof that very large aircraft flying hub to hub (hello A380 and B747) as a model for international travel is going to be reduced as these new, next generation widebody aircraft come online.

Filed under: Airline Fleets, Airline News, Airports by ajax
No Comments »

 Update (16:30 CDT):  Spirit has now cancelled flights through Thursday.  No signs of any reconciliation between the pilots and the company.

Spirit Airlines pilots went on strike starting with flights on Saturday and the latest news says that flights are cancelled at least through Wednesday.  So far,  I cannot discern that any resolution is imminent either.  Since Spirit serve a very small portion of the US and since manyof its flights are Caribbean and Latin American in nature, the President will not be calling an end to this strike and bring both parties to a table. 

This has got to be hurting Spirit badly financially and from what I hear, they don’t have a whole lot of cash on hand to withstand the strike.  In addition, Spirit made some noise in the days leading up to the strike that they would try to cotinue as many flights as possible using either management pilots or through hiring other airlines to fly their routes.  Not only did that not happen, it doesn’t appear as if there were any plan of any kind to do this.  It isn’t good to lead your customers on like that.

The pilots wants a “fair” contract and, in this case, fair is what the other guy is earning.   But who is the other guy?  Is it a Delta pilot or an Airtran pilot?  A Southwest pilot or a jetBlue pilot?  The current offer on the table brings Spirit pilots to about par with Airtran and they still don’t like that.  It is notable that Airtran pilots aren’t even happy with that anymore as they’ve had a strike authorization vote recently themselves. 

In addition, another part of the offer gives these pilots a minimum 0f 4 days between trips and that is kind of unprecedented as a part of a contract and, to me, seems to be a huge quality of life gain.  At the end of the day, I can’t figure out what would make the pilots happy (they sure aren’t talking specifics in the public media) and I’m beginning to think that Spirit’s management can’t figure it out either.  Unless it’s just a whole lot more money than on the table right now.

If so, then I think there are going to be two losers in this strike.  Spirit is privately owned and while they’ve made a profit, the owners aren’t interested in pumping more money into the airline than they already have.  These are venture capitalists and those guys know that sometimes its best to pull the plug and find something else to do with the assets.  Spirit’s management doesn’t have anything to lose by remaining steadfast with their current offer.  If they offer more, they’ll likely become unprofitable (this airline really is an Ultra Low Cost Carrier) since part of their model is keeping costs like labor and fuel as low as possible.  If they become unprofitable, the owners will likely pull the plug there too.

Spirit pilots are high risk for losing their jobs . . . permanently.  There are only so many days that Spirit can survive before it declares bankruptcy.  Once it does, it isn’t likely to come back in some form and that means those pilots now have to restart their careers somewhere else.  It is notable that there isn’t a whole lot of hiring going on among airlines these days.   To a certain extent, you have to accept that when you work for a LCC or ULCC, you’re not going to earn premium salaries no matter who you are and no matter what is happening elsewhere in the industry.  Rising to Airtran standards seems not too bad all in all particularly when consider the quality of life issues that are also getting addressed.

Yes, the pilots have been trying to amend their contract for over 3 years.  Yes, that seems like a long time.  No, it really isn’t a long time when you look at pilots and their negotiations at other airlines.   Is it fair to take so long? No, not in my opinion but that is the fault of the Railway Labor Act, not the airline(s). 

In this situation, I think a bird in the hand is a whole lot better than a pink slip and I think that pink slip could arrive as early as this coming Friday.  Spirit has some cash but the owners are wise enough, I suspect, to realize that preserving that cash is a better idea than it is to hold out against a long strike.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »

American Airlines recently announced the retirement of the current CEO at American Eagle and then announced that Dan Garton, current EVP of Marketing at AA will become CEO of American Eagle (while initially retaining his duties as EVP.)  Then they announced their intention to revisit the sale of American Eagle.

I can understand why since American Eagle is probably undervalued presently as a business and its sale would refill the coffers at American nicely.  Analysts and shareholders want to see some financial action at American and this is a good way to provide it.

However, it might be a bit of folly too.  Just because it is undervalued doesn’t mean it doesn’t have value at American in its present form.  I wouldn’t be a bit surprised to learn that it is bringing a nice load of cash in the form of operating profits that AA isn’t seeing elsewhere.  I wonder if the one time gain is worth the long term loss. 

Operationally, American Eagle is a pretty well run airline and provides a great deal of stability for AA’s regional routes.  Giving that up in favor of potential savings from low bidding regional airlines might have made sense 5 years ago but now I’m not so sure.  It is another case of AA being a bit slow to react and make adjustments to the markets.  If they had went ahead with bankruptcy, quite a few cost issues would be settled and they would be much better positioned against their competition from the SuperLegacies.  If they had sold American Eagle a few years ago, they would have benefited much more from cheaper contracts on regional flying from independent regional airlines. 

Now even independent regional airlines are working hard to raise their revenues from contracts with legacies and the regional routes are becoming more and more competitive.  Keeping American Eagle in house may let them respond better to changes at this point.  Or, at the least, it seems the lesser of two evils. 

Even if they do rid themselves of American Eagle, American Airlines still has fairly restrictive scope clauses in its contract with pilots and that needs to be amended before they can contract to fly larger aircraft on longer routes via any regional airline.  Keeping American Eagle in house and allowing pilots to “flow” between AE and AA might make those scope changes easier to obtain in negotiations and I think that has a lot of value for the future.

Filed under: Airline News by ajax
No Comments »