BA overbooking - a bad experience
in [Airline Travel]
|
Prev: Jews Strive To Restore Christmas Trees At Seattle Airport
Next: United Mileage Plus mystery terms
From: hummingbird on 27 Feb 2007 05:16 On 26 Feb 2007 16:52:42 -0800 'Tchiowa' posted this onto rec.travel.air: >> >"hummingbird" wrotenews:kvc5u2p2ll76bl7jmel6544t7gr2pflnpc(a)4ax.com... >> >> One hour later it became apparent from a BA memo circulating along >> >> the passenger queue that BA had overbooked this flight by 90 seats >> >> and were asking for BA passengers to accept an alternative travel >> >> package to London (overnight hotel in Bangkok, flight on China >> >> Airlines to Hong Kong [3h40m] the following morning and a flight from >> >> Hong Kong to London on BA the following evening - plus a card worth >> >> �250 which BA claimed could be used to w/d the cash in *many ATMs*. >> >[snip] >> >> We were scheduled to take off at 00.10am but eventually got airborn >> >> at 02.15am, arriving back at LHR at 07.30am instead of 05.50am local. >> >> A total of 15 hours on the plane plus 3.5 hours to get checked-in. >> >An obese guy sitting next to you can happen everywhere. Further, Ia delay of >> >1h40m is not that huge... The alternative offered for the overbooking isn't >> >that bad etiher; I think I would have taken it. I don't see what's the "bad >> >experience" at BA's fault here. You wrote you arrived 3h30m before scheduled >> >departure time to the check-in, so why you mention that again is beyond me. >> >> If you can't see the bad experience I described here, I'm sorry for >> you...perhaps you aren't aware of what a nightmare flying is becoming >> these days: 3-4 hours to check-in, ineffective security checks, shoes >> off at LHR, personal items in plastic bags, inadequate seating, flight >> delays, damaged luggage, lost luggage etc etc. >I disagree with you completely. Too bad. The world is full of defeatists who accept anything that's thrown at them. My original post was intended to generate some debate about how the airlines run their business as much as to complain about my recent experience with British Airways. IMHO it's long overdue that governments need to introduce some sort of passenger charter which defines the minimum standard of travel on airlines. Currently, airlines are a law unto themselves and get away with treating passengers like cash cows involved in a race to the bottom in order to increase passenger numbers and profits. >Thur was right. Not so. His comments were more defeatism. >For the record I fly >over 100,000 miles a year, every year and have for a couple of >decades. So I'm well aware of what flying is like. Yippy for you. I have also done *a lot* of flying in my life but I don't see what that's got to do with it. >I would *not* >describe it as a nightmare. I think you've over-reacted. IYO. You have obviously missed the points of my original post. >There was a cancelled flight. I never said that - only that cancellation was touted unofficially. British Airways in Bangkok made *no* mention of a cancelled flight. Recall that their Bangkok memo only mentioned *overbooking*. >That is going to create seating >problems. It's a reality in flying. It happens. Be prepared for it. I'm well aware that if there is a cancellation, it will cause some disruption. I'm usually interested to know what has caused the cancellation, whether it's for genuine tech reasons or some commercial reason (airlines sometimes cancel a flight for consolidation reasons). I'm also interested in how the airline deal with the problem. Again, recall that BA never mentioned cancellation, just overbooking. >Some of your complaints are "off the board". Examples: > >Inadequate seating: You asked for a small seat. You bargained for a >small seat. There are bigger seats available but you chose not to pay >for one. People have complained a long time about small seats in >Economy, but when given a choice between slightly larger seats at a >slightly higher cost in Economy the vast majority choose cost over >comfort. So you get what you pay for. Wrong. *I did not ask for a small seat*. The choices available to me at booking were economy, business or first. BA do not offer "slightly larger seats at a slightly higher cost in Economy" as you say. I would usually happily pay a premium on long haul flights for a larger seat with more space but this isn't available on most airlines. Business and first are way too expensive. It is my opinion that airlines cram too many seats into their planes to maximise numbers and profits. Again, you seem to be missing the points of my original post which are as much a criticism of many airlines as they are of BA ...seats and the space around them is frankly not adequate, and certainly for anybody who is slightly larger than average. This knocks onto other passengers, as in my case. It is *not* passengers who have created the current model of airline seating, it is the airlines themselves chasing numbers and profits. It's almost as though airlines are involved in a race to the bottom. >As Thur points out, obese passengers are a fact of life. I sympathize >with you. Qantas should make people pay for 2 seats if they can't fit >into one. Yes, obese people are a fact of life but it is the responsibility of the airlines to deal with that issue. They *choose* not to and instead dump the problem onto other passengers who end up not even getting the small seat and tight space they have paid for. That is unacceptable IMHO. >Agent information: You complained that your "agent" (Expedia) didn't >give you enough information. I mentioned that it was "too bad" Expedia don't provide this information. I have also mentioned it to Expedia directly via e-mail. They may look into it to improve customer satisfaction. >Expedia is *not* a travel agency. People >use Expedia so they can save the cost of travel agents. I never said Expedia were a *travel* agency. I use Expedia because it's a convenient Internet based agent that I've used many times before without a problem in terms of buying tickets. >You chose to >do that then complain because they didn't give you the service that >you chose not to pay for. Doesn't make much sense, does it? That is a rubbish distortion of my comments. I simply said that it would be helpful if Expedia indicated on their website where a flight originates from as it might affect a person's choice when booking. Expedia already indicate where a flight is by a partner airline. Adding the flight origin wouldn't be too difficult but I suspect it's a piece of information that airlines try hard not to reveal for commercial reasons. >Flight delays: Come on. 1 1/2 hours on what amounts to a 24 hour >flight (roughly). 3 continents, 2 days. You don't think that's a bit >of an over-reaction? Not at all ... and I don't know where you get the idea that it's roughly a 24hr flight. Bangkok to London non-stop is about 13hrs ....unless you are sitting on the plane for an additional 2hrs before take-off as I was. If you study my original post, I did not complain about the arrival delay but the various problems which preceded it. >Lost or damaged bags: In 3 million miles of air travel the worst >damage to my luggage was a couple of broken handles. In each case it >was cheap luggage. Never lost a bag. A couple of times there were >delays, but no losses. Yippy for you. I have had bags slashed by box cutters, lost baggage, delayed baggage and damaged baggage over the years. Recent fiascos at London Heathrow T4 with BA baggage is testimony that airlines need to upgrade their handling of passenger baggage. >Yes it does happen sometime. But considering the volume of luggage >it's pretty rare. Agreed but that doesn't excuse the poor management which occurs. >3-4 hours check-in: I just don't get that. It rarely takes me more >than 15 minutes. But I can see that some flights do get long lines at >check-in. No where near 3-4 hours, but an hour at least. However >that's in the Economy line. Again, this is a choice you made. You pay >for reduced service, you get reduced service, what is the complaint? If you read my original post, you might notice that 3hrs to check-in was caused by the fact that BA were not checking people in for reasons which were not immediately apparent until they came out and revealed that the flight had been overbooked. I agree that 3hrs is unusual but I have rarely checked-in in 15mins as you describe. That sounds like pure fantasy. FYI - when I started that trip I flew from London to Hong Kong and checked-in online with BA 24hrs before my flight as they encourage. The BA website informed me to drop my check-in bag at the 'Fast Bag Drop Off' counter. This looked like a great idea but when I arrived at the airport, it was clear to me that there was no FBDO counter and I had to queue at the regular counter. What time did I save? Nothing. I queued for 45mins. Also FYI - I checked-in at Phuket Thailand later for an internal flight to Bangkok and it took me 20mins while I waited for *one* female passenger to check-in and flaff around. How you manage to check-in in 15mins for your flights is a mystery. >> Yes, I arrived 3.5hrs before my flight time but *not* to stand in >> a queue waiting for BA to get their act together. > >Many airlines don't open their check-in counters more than 2 or 2 1/2 >hours before flight time. So you did, in fact, ask for an extra hour >or more wait time. I ask for nothing except to be checked-in as quickly as possible. In the UK we are told to arrive at least 3-4 hours before our flights to go through security etc but it's clear to me that the real reason is to stand in check-in queues. >In my opinion it's worth it. I always try to get to the airport early. >Don't like surprises. But if you get there early plan on accepting the >fact that you are there early (!) and thus will have to kill some >time. It was my intention to arrive at Bangkok airport early so I had time to look around at the new Suvarnabhumi airport after check-in. Sadly, this extra time was spent in a BA queue and sitting on a plane for 2hrs before take-off.
From: hummingbird on 27 Feb 2007 05:18 On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 13:16:33 +1100 'ant' posted this onto rec.travel.air: >hummingbird wrote: >> On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 13:30:39 GMT 'Bobs your uncle' >> posted this onto rec.travel.air: > >> > Stick to Qantas, give BA the flick I say! >> >> I suspect that my personal experience is not unique to BA these days. >> I hear that overbooking flights is quite common in the US. > >It is *very* common. Whenever I catch a US domestic connection, there's a >mild riot at the gate as anxious people line up hoping for a seat, or they >ask for volunteers to let their seats go. The compensation is miserable, >too. It is only worth taking if you live in the town as there's no offer of >accommodation or anything. Thanks for that info. It's further evidence that airlines are running their business to suit themselves, not in the customer interests. >If they tried that in Australia, there'd be an explosion.
From: hummingbird on 27 Feb 2007 05:19 On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:06:36 GMT 'Jim Ley' posted this onto rec.travel.air: >On 26 Feb 2007 16:52:42 -0800, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > >>Inadequate seating: You asked for a small seat. You bargained for a >>small seat. There are bigger seats available but you chose not to pay >>for one. People have complained a long time about small seats in >>Economy, but when given a choice between slightly larger seats at a >>slightly higher cost in Economy the vast majority choose cost over >>comfort. So you get what you pay for. > >Especially as it was a BA long haul flight, so there was going to be >an Economy Plus seat available without paying the full Business class >fare. I was not offered a seat of that description when booking. The only airline I know who offer that to Asia is Eva.
From: Jim Ley on 27 Feb 2007 05:34 On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:19:49 +0000, hummingbird <RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote: >On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:06:36 GMT 'Jim Ley' >posted this onto rec.travel.air: > >>On 26 Feb 2007 16:52:42 -0800, "Tchiowa" <tchiowa2(a)hotmail.com> wrote: >> >>>Inadequate seating: You asked for a small seat. You bargained for a >>>small seat. There are bigger seats available but you chose not to pay >>>for one. People have complained a long time about small seats in >>>Economy, but when given a choice between slightly larger seats at a >>>slightly higher cost in Economy the vast majority choose cost over >>>comfort. So you get what you pay for. >> >>Especially as it was a BA long haul flight, so there was going to be >>an Economy Plus seat available without paying the full Business class >>fare. > >I was not offered a seat of that description when booking. >The only airline I know who offer that to Asia is Eva. I think in future, you should definately get yourself a travel agent as you don't appear to be able to sort out travel yourself without the problems you've described. BA0010 definately has a World Traveller Plus cabin and a travel agent would've found it (quite how you managed to not find it is a surprise to me) Jim.
From: Jim Ley on 27 Feb 2007 05:39
On Tue, 27 Feb 2007 10:16:00 +0000, hummingbird <RHBIYDTNPPAX(a)spammotel.com> wrote: >Wrong. *I did not ask for a small seat*. >The choices available to me at booking were economy, business or >first. BA do not offer "slightly larger seats at a slightly higher >cost in Economy" as you say. Yes they do "World Traveller Plus" and it's available on BA0010, just do a search on the BA website, your incompetence in finding this is a good illustration of why many of the problems you found were down to your mistake in not getting a travel agent when not capable of doing the research yourself. http://www.britishairways.com/travel/pop_cabininfo/public/en_gb Jim. |