Comments

Hey, if they think they are worthy of LESS oversight and regulations and not MORE, let 'em prove it. Oh, yeah, they already DISPROVED that one, huh?

Let the customer be the judge. They'll spend their dollars elsewhere and you go out of business; however, if the same problem is rampant across the whole industry, then somebody NEEDS to step in and say "enough is enough." If governmental agencies (e.g., "public service commissions") can tighten the screws on utilities, et al, sooner or later, the airlines should expect tighter controls, too.

Posted by Dan Gunter at May 20, 2009 4:54 PM

How about a simple penalty system: 15 minutes grace, then $100-a-minute fine to the airline for every minute after that for planes stuck on the tarmac. This would soon add up to real money.

Posted by Mike L. at May 20, 2009 5:49 PM

Thoroughly in accordance with Tom. Too much talk of "customer service" with pervasive violations of the walk (services rendered in actuality).

Posted by Andres Agostini (Andy) at May 20, 2009 6:15 PM

Amen!

Posted by Judith Ellis at May 20, 2009 6:59 PM

Mike,

Sounds reasonable, but make it PER PASSENGER. I never confirmed it, but I was told (MANY years ago) that the railroads were fined something like $100 per car per minute for a train being late. It was actually a safety issue and not intended as a customer service issue. Before the computerized traffic systems they have now, if a train ran behind schedule, it posed a serious collision threat at switches and wherever two tracks intersected. There wasn't much margin for error and often the only way an engineer knew that another train was off schedule was when a collision or near-collision occurred.

If the railroads can do it for safety, why can't the airlines be held accountable in the same way in the name of good customer service? And it's probably a safety issue, too. When air traffic starts backing up, things get more hectic and more hazardous. Plus, you might have a frustrated flight crew, which is diametrically opposed to "optimal" mental state for flying a plane and being accountable for the lives of many people.

Posted by Dan Gunter at May 20, 2009 11:47 PM

Okay, but please beware of unintended consequences here. Taken to extreme, this creates a climate in which other things we care about, like safety, can/could/might get bumped for the all-important schedule. One bag doesn't get checked fully enough, one hatch is closed too quickly, one ATC doesn't hold an aircraft in its safety pocket long enough, or someone just doesn't scrape the ice completely, because WE CAN'T MISS that deadline. If you have one integrated system, like the Japanese railways, things can be joined up properly, but that just isn't the case with airlines, service teams, traffic systems and ground handling, let alone security, all of which can be run by different organisations, and any of which can have an effect on a schedule. Part of the issue here is the blame game and the dislocation of shared accountability, which isn't necessarily going to get solved by just fining airlines. They don't own all the solution.

Before its privatisation, British Rail used to get castigated for its poor performance (as in being a national joke). Post privatisation, which split the network up into separate profit (ho ho) centres, on-time perfomance is worse, ticket prices are sky-high (because actually its a route monopoly stuation, not a free market), taxpayer subsidies are even greater, and worst of all, the individual parts of the system don't work together. In the "bad old" days British Rail would routinely hold a train for five or ten minutes (there goes the schedule!) if an incoming connecting train was delayed. And they would tell people this was happening, and nobody minded too much because they could appreciate the benefit to connecting passengers. The system wasn't great, but it worked better than our current Thatcherite hands-off, market-forces public transport disaster. Today we have a triumph of dogma over pragma. It sounded good - to some at least - at the time, but they just hadn't thought it through.

Airlines take flak (and certainly deserve a lot of it) because they are the face of the customer's flying experience. If delays are their fault, then certainly give them a smack. But in my view they are one visible moving part among many less visible others who also need to be held just as accountable.

Posted by RobCH at May 21, 2009 1:38 AM

Why are we assuming this is all and exclusively the fault of the airlines?

Airports (certainly in the UK) are operated by a seperate authority. It's them who tell the aircraft to push back from the terminal, it's them who the aircraft to move around the airport. Very frequently, an aircraft is moved off the stand even though it isn't cleared for take-off because the airport operator needs a stand for an inbound flight. The aircraft must do what the airport operator tells it to do: he can't just push back and take off when he feels ready - and given the alternative, I'm happy that's the rule.

Airlines are far from blameless and many could do better. But let's not implement the punishment until we've thought though how the problem arises and where the blame lies. Or whether the punishment will bring about the sort of behaviour we want to see.

Posted by Mark JF at May 21, 2009 3:35 AM

Airlines, banks, credit card companies, what is the difference. None of them really care about customers except how it impacts their bottom line. As someone indicated earlier, talking the talk is one thing while walking the talk is a whole other ball game and too many American companies have forgotten the difference when it comes to customer service and customer satisfaction. One can only hope the recession may get their attention, but don't bet on it. It will be back to business as usual once the turnaround comes and they think they can push the customer service (or lack of it) envelope because we just can't do without them. Those suckers should all go out of business if that's what it takes to turn their attitudes around. But if they all keep getting bailed out and pampered they will never learn and will continue arrogantly believing we just can't do without them.

Posted by Steve at May 21, 2009 7:13 AM

Brilliant comment, RobCH.

Mark JF, I appreciate your thoughts too.

Very thoughtful both of you, Thank you.

Posted by Judith Ellis at May 21, 2009 7:24 AM

Oh, Steve! You are right on!

Posted by Judith Ellis at May 21, 2009 7:32 AM

Yes, yes and yes. It's one thing to keep us trapped in a plane for untold how many hours the worse part is the lying. Yes I belief the bastards lie about what they know and don't know. A few minutes is always at least twenty. Circle a bit in a holding pattern is an hour. And finally a ground stop simply means we aren't going anywhere, go grab a sandwich.

Posted by tony cole at May 21, 2009 8:45 AM

I just wonder, How can one institute true QUALITY ASSURANCE with insurmountable violations against integrity, morality, principles, ethics, JUSTICE? By the way & IF interested, ON ADVANCED QUALITY ASSURANCE (STATED BRIEFLY):
http://www.docstoc.com/docs/6220145/Mostly-Advanced-Quality-Assurance-by-ANDY!-By-Copyright-2009-Andres-Agostini-(Andy)-Arlington-Virginia-USA-at-wwwAgostiniWorksblogspotcom

Posted by Andres Agostini (Andy) at May 21, 2009 4:16 PM

Andy, it's not easy by any means, but you start by rebuilding the culture so that the "violations against integrity, morality, principles, ethics, JUSTICE" can be dealt with. You have to, because trying to implement any form of quality assurance would crumble before it got started if built on such a poor substrate.

Quite often, that is the exact problem that companies run into when trying to implement such programs. It's like trying to legislate morality.

"When mores are sufficient, laws are unnecessary. When mores are insufficient, laws are unenforceable." -- Emile Durkheim.

In a culture and environment at the opposite end of the spectrum from what you describe, Q.A. ends up being more of a natural extension of what people are already striving to do.

In a culture at the extreme you describe, formal Q.A. attempts -- especially if mandated by some outside force such as a governmental entity or accrediting body -- are useless academics and often just worsen the situation as more problems are exposed and more feathers get ruffled. In such cases, sometimes the best solution is to pack up and find a change of scenery. If it's really that far gone, then it probably should be gone period and most likely will be... sooner rather than later.

Posted by Dan Gunter at May 22, 2009 8:06 PM

I must admit I am surpised about the comments about train timing being a safety issue. I don't know about US trains but in the UK systems like that were ironed out (due to accidents) in the Victorian age. Most train companies have operated block signaling (it's almost physically impossible to signal for a train to enter a section of track until it's clear) for most of their history.

One of the problems of airlines and the market deciding is that on some routes (Heathrow to Frankfurt on a Monday morning) the bulk of passengers are business type people. Most companies have travel policies that regulate price and time over quality of service. Most business people (certainly the unwashed minions like me) don't get much choice over which airline they choose. A rubbish airline who is cheap on a busy route can in stay in business a long time......

Posted by PaulH at May 23, 2009 4:44 AM

PaulH, I was given that information a LONG time ago, as I said. I honestly have no idea what the modern version of it might be. It would be interesting in a way to think of the U.S. Government / regulatory agencies implement something similar for airlines some ??? years after the railroads. You would think that the airlines would be light years ahead of the railroads in technology and especially in the successful application thereof, but seeing regulations such as Tom and I are talking about get enacted against the airlines decades later would seem to indicate differently, wouldn't it?

Posted by Dan Gunter at May 24, 2009 6:56 AM

Why don't we get this upset about traffic jams?
Way more people get stuck in traffic than get
stuck on the tarmac. Oh, I forgot, Tom doesn't have a job that gets him caught in rush hour traffic each day, so why discuss it?

Posted by dan at May 25, 2009 8:51 PM

Well Dan, I think you'll find a lot of people do get very upset indeed about traffic jams. Probably Tom too, although he just hadn't mentioned it in this post, which was about planes. In answer to your question, I propose that there are two things which makes flight delays (on tarmac) so particularly frustrating.

One is the fact that the air travel system likes to give the impression of everything working with dependable split-second precision and efficiency. If we passengers are ever out of synch with it (late, wrong place, confused, carrying the wrong size of liquids etc) we are treated, often with patronising discourtesy, as problems. The unspoken contract is: if you "civilians" just do your simple bit properly as passengers, we professionals can do our bit too, to the second, in a well-ordered fashion. Put yourselves in our capable hands. So when a plane is delayed on tarmac for an hour or more, that contract looks just a teensy bit hollow. The passengers have delivered their part of the deal; the professionals conspicuously have not.

Then there are the particular circumstances of being stuck on tarmac in a plane. Unlike being stuck in traffic, you are not in your own micro-climate and personal space. You are subject to all the constraints of a plane about to take off - no ipod or mobile phone, your seat-belt is on and backrest upright, no food, no entertainment, probably not much of a view, infants are squealing, toilets are out of bounds. You can't wind the window down, and if you start expressing your irritation to the crew, someone will probably zap you with a stun gun. It's cramped, claustrophobic and horrible and there's nothing to take your mind off your situation. Other planes are taking off apparently without any problem while yours is still stuck, again unlike your usual traffic jam on the roads where the pain is at least shared equally.

It's a peculiarly intense type of helplessness, and unsurprisingly it generates a disproportionate amount of resentment from passengers, quite apart from the actual delay to their own schedules. In the same way that one plane crash is a lot more newsworthy than a month of road fatalities, one plane stuck on tarmac will p*ss off those passengers far more than all the traffic delays they experience in a year.

Posted by RobCH at May 26, 2009 1:38 AM

Great comments Rob thanks. Telling people WHY the delay is happening helps – there is nothing worse than sitting on a plane or in a train and not knowing WHY the delay. I am just an occasional flier so am not that experienced or qualified to talk of the air travel culture. I am however a very regular train traveller and the same issues apply. I have been very irritated occasionally when my train suddenly stops somewhere miles from civilisation way out in the countryside and there is no announcement. Compare that with a prompt efficient announcement followed up with regular updates about WHY the delay and it ‘feels’ better and it seems like the time passes quicker – or is that just me?

I’m glad dan mentions traffic delays because I agree with him they are really infuriating. Once more it is the helplessness of not knowing why the delay and the lack of control.

Turns out much of this is probably about communication ... or lack of ….. now why am I not surprised by that?

Have a great week Rob – life is good – up with the lark at 5 am this fine May morning in the great county of (maybe) the great Bard :- )

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 26, 2009 2:06 AM

Trevor, I was once caught in a huge traffic jam on the motorway to Cambridge for a final job interview. I was down to the last two and looking good to get the job, but I had to call to say I wouldn't be able to make the interview and so that was that. I was chewing the dashboard in frustration. In retrospect though, that traffic jam was one of the best things that has ever happened to me. The job would have been awful - I could have done it but I would have absolutely hated it. And within days I was approached to take on the role I have now, which is uniquely fulfilling. So sometimes these things do turn out for the best.

Posted by RobCH at May 26, 2009 2:26 AM

Rob – Great story and interesting how these things turn out in the long haul. I have my own thoughts about why these events turn out the way they do. I reckon you were never destined to have that job. On a lighter note, a few weeks ago I drove to see my beloved Man United play Portsmouth at Old Trafford. I allowed plenty of time to get to Old Trafford but got caught in the most horrendous jam. I can relate to your comment about chewing the dashboard – I ate half the engine as well. Anyway I managed to make it to the Stadium about 5 minutes after kick off and the moment I got to my seat Wayne Rooney scored to put United 1-0 ahead. I said the to the guy sitting next to me – ‘It was good of Wayne to wait until I got here.’

God definitely has a sense of perfect timing as well as a great sense of humour :-)

Posted by Trevor Gay at May 26, 2009 3:13 AM