Guest ECB Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Very good and interesting post. "My point is, instead of being defensive about AC's service, one should be looking at improving it." That is a good point for all of us, myself included. A while back I was flying to a station that wanted to adjust the push time to give them an ontime number. "our computer shows you pushed on time", they said (nudge nudge). At first I thought, Ok, no big deal, they do a great job and let it go, but its the same sort of thing, you can bury your head in the sand but in the end the only ones you're fooling is yourselves. After that, I insisted on actual times (from our GPS). You can't improve if you won't admit there's an issue. In A/C's case they seem a bit 'shell shocked' from all the negative events and press and in WestJet's case our enthusiasm can turn into a "how dare you say something negative" sort of atmosphere. For both airlines if the item is looked at as an oppurtunity to improve then it shouldn't be avoided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Terrier Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Low cost has nothing to do with it. The Air Canada product has been sub standard for many years - long before there was any pressure on them to reduce costs. The problem with the flight attendants is a systemic, cultural problem. They are just not service oriented individuals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest George Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Your point is exactly correct. Emirates and a lot of these other companies operate in labour envrionments that allow the company to hire and fire at will. They hire at 20 and fire them at 25. The people don't have time to burn out, they are young and enthusiastic. They either leave or are retired before they develop an attitude problem. Unfortunately (from the customer's point of view) they see the AC people who have direct contact with pax, as old, tired, rude and full of attitude, no not all but a significant minority that all get tainted with the same brush. Wait to see whether the North American LCCs have 50 and 60 year old FAs and CSSAs. I doubt it. People will move on. I think that an idea a colleage of mine told me about the other day was a good one. How about using "mystery passengers" ala the "mystery shoppers" that retail stores use. THey check all aspects of a retailer's customer service and grade the people on their work skills. Don't perform the job at an expected level and have it happen several times then we show you the door. There is no excuse for a customer service person with a poor attitude. If you have one (a poor attitude) then its time to leave! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest AME Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Darn, I always get the two mixed up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pull Up Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 "Making good tasting food does not cost more than making bad tasting food." Would you like peanut butter on your rice cake Mr. Kavafian, or would you prefer the Filet Mignon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 26, 2003 Share Posted August 26, 2003 Re: "I think it was an ex-CAIL aircraft." Gotta get your digs in eh Jacques? Funny thing... your hatred for that airline seems now to have been transferred to AC... I suppose that's because of the ex-CAIL people too eh? By the way... If they'd delayed that flight to take the time to fix that entertainment system, would you have been happy about that? Or would you just expect things never to need fixing? Must be inferior ex-CAIL equipment that needs fixing I suppose. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Hudson Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Terrier; Re "The problem with the flight attendants is a systemic, cultural problem. They are just not service oriented individuals." I've watched our F/A's for over 30 years now and I think this statement is too broad to be either helpful or meaningful, because its both true and false at the same time. I, and anyone who's flown any airline can point to unfortunate, embarrassing incidents and we can equally point to glowing, unsung work that goes well beyond what's required of the job. But I disagree with the last comment about not being service-oriented individuals. The are service-oriented professionals even as we may have individual exceptions as any airline will. I think your initial comment about low-cost has validity to it however. Service levels can vary, independant of whether someone is paid highly or at a so-called "low-cost" level. Cheers, Don Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Terminated Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 "How about using "mystery passengers" ala the "mystery shoppers" that retail stores use. THey check all aspects of a retailer's customer service and grade the people on their work skills." Hey,that's my idea! I've been pushing that for a while now, and have been surprised by the # of agents and FA's that think it's a good idea. It seems to be the good ones, the ones that know they have nothing to worry about, that want the ones that aren't so good to pull up their socks. And let's be clear, it is the minority that are the problem, and even then, a huge part of it is the culture that has developed that permits it. And that is the key----you don't have to go around firing the bad ones, but use it as a tool to change the culture and most of the 'bad seeds' will come around. And a huge key to this type of program---use it more for positive reinforcement, than punitive actions when problems are discovered. Reward some of the many acts of excellent service that go on every day, and the culture will tend to move in that direction. And just the awareness of potentially being watched will encourage the few that don't treat our passengers as well as they should to be a little more 'dedicated'. Just have to get the unions to be open minded to a unique approach. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Terrier Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Yes, there are exceptions. Unfortunately, the good ones are the exceptions. I have flown Air Canada on more occasions than I care to remember and believe me the good ones are few and far between. There doesn't seem to be any reward for good service nor discipline for bad. I hate to blame that on a unionized environment as philosophically I am pro-union. But something must have done the damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pull Up Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Excellent suggestion. If you haven't already put it forward in some format to the powers that be I hope you will. It only takes a bit of a carrot for good performance to get the majority on the band wagon. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagger Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 The vast majority of the flights I have taken have had good crews, or crews that did nothing to get noticed by me. I like the latter most of all because I don't want a crew that puts on a Vaudeville act while I am trying to read/work/sleep. Just come around and serve me, than pick up the empty glass/cup/tray. Anything else is obtrusive and unwanted. By this standard, most of my AC experiences have been very good. Terrier, your bias is well known and it wouldn't surprise me if you telegraph your hostility to the people you encounter when you fly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkavafian Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Sorry about that. I mentioned ex-CAIL aircraft because it was not a -400 combi and if I remember correctly, CAIL had gotten the absolute basic 747-400 with the most minimal options you can think of. By the way, I never hated or liked CAIL. I couldn't care less. My thoughts were that the company would never survive and the shares would eventually be worthless. The stock went from an adjusted $480 to $2. I think I made a good call on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkavafian Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 "By the way... If they'd delayed that flight to take the time to fix that entertainment system, would you have been happy about that? Or would you just expect things never to need fixing? Must be inferior ex-CAIL equipment that needs fixing I suppose." As a customer I don't care what goes on behind the scenes. I just want the system to work on a long flight. Here is an example of someone making excuses for the poor service instead of saying "I am sorry, we will fix it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Thanks for clarifying. It may be that I'm a little too quick to get defensive when it comes to past efforts... but you have been rather hard on old Blue in the past. I'm thinking though that your "adjusted $480 to $2" sounds just a wee bit misleading... Those $2 shares were never worth $480. I'd remember that since I was one of the saps forced to buy them at $16. But yep, I guess you did call that one right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Now you're dead wrong. First off, I speak to you here as just another internet forum user to another, not as employee to customer. So don't be trying to hang me out as an example of rotten service. And I'm not making any excuses, I'm telling you that it takes time to fix things that go wrong and I'm willing to bet you and the majority of other passengers on that flight would rather leave on time than sit and wait an hour or two while someone tried to fix the entertainment system. My comments sounded harsh simply because you sounded to me to be throwing another (of many from you) dig at CAIL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkavafian Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Mitch, The $16 shares you are talking about were after a 20 for 1 consolidation. The shares were worth 80 cents when the company consolidated meaning they gave you one share for every that you owned and the share then became $16. If you adjust for this consolidation, which you must do if you look at it from a historical point of view, the $16 shares would be the equivalent of $320. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 Jacques? Are you sure you're not multiplying when you should be dividing?? Seems to me that the consolidation that multiplied .8 cents by 20 to create a 16 dollar share, if adjusted for, would result in that same .8, ...not multiply the 16 by 20 again...?? Is that why I'm broke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jkavafian Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 The shares that were worth $20 in 1989 had declined to 80 cents or under by 1996 or 1997 I forget when. So if you owned 1000 shares at $20, for a total investment of $20,000 and those shares were consolidated 20 for 1, now you only own 50 shares. Your cost was $20,000 so the adjusted cost of your shares is $400. If there is a share split, you have to devide the number to get the adjusted value. In this case, there was a consolidation because CAIL had ended up with some 800 million shares outstanding that were trading for pennies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Terrier Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 You have been a lucky man dagger. I hope it continues for you. As for the rest of us we will just continue to take a deep breath, keep quiet and hope we don't get picked on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mitch Cronin Posted August 27, 2003 Share Posted August 27, 2003 I'd forgotten those 80c shares were once worth $20. ...sigh Selective memory in action? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.