Sometimes private sector companies can be their own worst enemies. Two examples today show what contempt some of them have for their customers. British Airways have imposed a new policy whereby if you take two items of luggage for the hold instead of one they will charge you £120 for the pleasure, even if the combined weight is within the limit. Of course it's up to them if they want to do this but they haven't told any of their customers who have bought tickets about it. The new policy starts on Tuesday, so you can imagine some of arguments that will be going on at various check in desks. The world's favourite airline? I am afraid that our national carrier is increasingly becoming the world's least favourite airline.
And BT has announced that customers who continue to pay by cheque instead of direct debit will be charged a £6 a year fee. Quite astonishing. I don't do direct debits with BT because I don't trust them. I have had to query the charges on so many bills, which they have then admitted were wrong, that I am not willing to give them my bank account details.
43 comments:
Great post Iain. This is blatantly prejudicial towards older people who would benefit from carrying a bag in either hand, rather than one huge one - and what is worse, younger people who are carrying skis, golf clubs or surfboards get them carried free !!
Quite remarkable !! as David Coleman might have said. There was a good article by Marcel Berlins about this in the Guardian yesterday - he is a legal eagle, so he may be able to advise if this is 'age / disability discriminatory'.
This, like the BT 'surcharge' is sharp practice and needs to be exposed to the spotlight of public opinion before it is implemented.
BA seems to have a Public Relations department that has no idea how to avoid p!ss!ng off its customers.
The arrogance of some companies is astonishing. It would seem that they have forgotten what a seller/buyer (or master/servant) relationship is and believe themselves to be the masters. This cavalier won't pay BT or anyone else by direct debit for the same reasons as you.
Does this mean public sector operations are now better? I think we should be told.
I notice they've also dropped the domestic weight allowance from 32kg to 23kg (nice of them to leave the current policy up for comparison).
At 9kg per passenger, say 150 people in a 737 equates to 1350kg extra cargo capacity per flight with no increase in fuel cost - a nice little earner for BA, who already make huge profits from cargo.
Anyone know the current per kg business rates for domestic cargo so we can work out how much extra they're going to make per flight?
I have a card which you use at the post office etc so you can bung in cash when ever you feel like it. It is brilliant, you avoid getting large bills dropping through your letter box. I recommend it to all, especially pensioners and those on smaller incomes.
If one was feeling sadistic, one could put both bags in a black bin liner for checking in, thus saving the cost of paying for checking in two sturdy bags.
Of course, the bin bag won't survive handling by the baggage handlers, but by then both bags will be in the hold without the excess baggage tariff being charged..
Good to see that BA have managed to get such a positive story into the Top Five on the BBC website-again..
I can understand why BA need to do something when people take the mickey with regards to baggage, as the cost to them to fly a person + their baggage to a destination is dependent on one thing, the total weight to be carried.
HOWEVER I would have a major problem with being charged £120 for going a couple of ounces over the allowed baggage weight, because I am fairly light, surely they should allocate a certain weight for a Passenger + their luggage, therefore fat bastards would be able to take less baggage with them...
Useful tip to BA passengers - Always pack everything heavy in your carry on luggage, assuming you are still allowed to carry a bag onto a plane
(Remember the 'alleged' liquid bomb terror plot, for which as far as I can tell ALL of the charges have been dropped, although the public of this country are still suffering stupid restrictions about taking some frigging toothpaste on a plane)
Bonkers decision from BA to charge for more than one bag even if the total weight is within the allowance. Especially as, at the level of the proposed charges, it may be cheaper for the poor benighted passenger to buy a second ticket which will, presumbaly, entitle them to a second bag to be checked in as well as another seat so they can spread themselves out.
The mad Irishman (Walsh, not O'Leary, though its increasingly a close-run thing) seems to be looking for fights to pick. Time for him to move on, maybe?
I am baffled that anyone would fly BA. It is such a nasty airline.
Re direct debit, I don't pay anything by direct debit. You're counting on some little minimum wager keying in the correct amount to deduct from your account. And,I know from the experiences of more trusting friends, that once a mistake has been made, it takes a lot of time and energy to get it put right.
These two stories do illustrate,though, how large companies are placing themselves in a position of control over the customer.
I would strongly advise anyone to give BA a huge miss, especially in light of some of the world's better-run, pleasanter airlines.
Why do you use BT when OneTel does the same job cheaper ?
Totally agree about BT and they aren't the only ones who disgracefully abuse the direct debit system - many of the utilities wilfully and knowingly take too much money each month from pensioners like my mother and father, who I recently discovered have built up a 750-quid credit with you-guessed-it British Gas, with absolutely no indication on the "statements" they send that this was so.
Don't even start me on bank penalty charges!
This whole area of all-powerful corporations abusing their customers would be a wonderfully fertile political ground for the Conservatives to get into - can you not persuade them Iain? Many of these companies are effectively monopolies or acting like them.
Beggars belief doesn't it - glad I travel in a cage, and wear the same clothes all the time...
Verity - many people have no effective choice but BA on a lot of routes, at least if you want to fly direct. Monopolistic abuses arise from monopolistic operators. Try travelling on any of our beloved railways if you want proof.
The answer to BA's arrogance is simple.
A proper market in take off and landing slots, would remove BA's unfair advantage at all UK airports. Other airlines could much more easily replace them.
They would actually have to stop treating people like cattle.
(an added advantage would be the environmental benefits of charging airlines properly for this finite property right)
I would suspect that if you have already booked,BA's new requirements constitute a breach of contract on their part.One for Trading Standards Dept serving Heathrow(don't know which-I'm not a Londoner).Diabolical decision by BT-I was thinking of changing to NTL anyway and this has clinched it.
Verity "some little minimum wager"
I'm surprised with an attitude like this you have "trusting friends"
Really.
It is a mystery why BA appointed Willie Walsh as their MD. He followed the competent Rod Eddington, who although he didn't have a strong strategy, was an improvement over the NuLab apparatchik Ayling, who rose without trace through the company secretariat after a stint in the civil service.
Walsh was appointed after 4 years running Aer Lingus and turning it into a low cost carrier, and that was preceeded by a brief stint as COO which in turn was preceeded by running their charter business. Aer Lingus became a low cost carrier because it was losing £2m a day.
Running a tight ship is a limited skill, and most of it involves rubbing people up the wrong way, which is why the BA cabin staff nearly went on strike. Walsh backed down and the crew gaot their pay rise, but BA lost a lot of business. Now it looks as though Walsh is trying it on with the passengers.
The reason that I am surprised the BA board appointed Walsh was that he propoed an MBO of state-owned assets, which was quickly rejected by Ahern the Irish PM. I have no problems with privatisations because they can free up the company to raise additional equity or debt (and airlines are highly geared), but MBO's are usually different. Unless the management have many millions that they intend to invest in the company, it is more likely that the managment intend to strip out a lot of cash for themselves. Fine on an arms length sale between consenting parties, but in the case of state owned assets that looks like ripping off the tax payer. Hence the BA board should have been more wary about whether Walsh would be a good custodian of the company's assets.
Cable Telewest - now apparently Virgin Media run a good service.
anonimo - I have absolutely no idea what your post means. I assume it is meant to be insulting.
Iain
I am no fan of BA - but for your information, this new 'baggage' charging was announced last year, then delayed because of the 'liquid' bomb threats. It has been posted on the BA website for months.
The problem with 'bad service' on BA comes through the lack of competition on many routes because of the system of restricted 'slots' at airports.
Perhaps that is where you should direct your venom!!!!!!
you got an admission from BT that a charge on your bill was wrong? That's an amazing achievement...!
I won't set up DD's over the phone because half the time someone will nick your bank details and sell them on to fraudsters. They get really shirty when you insist they send you a form.
As Ernie Bevan said when some suggested that Herbert Morrison was his own worst enemy... not while I'm alive he's not!
Bob Piper - Sorry. Wrong again. That was Dorothy Parker about Alexander Woolcott in the 20s. Someone at the Algonquin Round Table said he was his own worst enemy and Parker said, "Not while I'm alive."
Our great privatised corporations like BA, BT, BG, the Labour Party, etc, are the finest institutions this country of ours has ever possessed. (Macmillan voice, 633 squadron music, smug smile as Blair turns his face to the good side). Now stop it all of you - how can efficient capitalism prosper without wholesale cash removal by theft from poor deluded working people, er, I mean, sensible direct debit arrangements. Thank you for staying in Britain to assist the mega-wealthy over-class in becoming even richer. All calls will be recorded. Your bank account may be removed if you do not keep up payments. Failure to keep enough money in your British Gas account is an offence punishable in law. All government contractors reserve the power of arrest. David Cameron loves us too. And so do we.
anonimo - How does one "direct" venom?
Parker knew that brevity is the soul of wit and would never have weakened her comment by adding "he's not".
I won't pay anything by direct debit, I pay all bills by BACS with online banking. It's not a cheque, but possibly BT will find a way to penalise customers who prefer to retain control of their payments.
Care to share how you "get control" of BT bills by not paying DD? If you fail to pay any part of one of their bills, the usual reaction is disconnection and immediate court action for recovery. My impression is they never listen and ignore all complaints. Not that any human being has ever survived the insensate ratlike maze of their call centres to actually file a complaint.
I fly constantly and never willingly use BA. They are largely staffed by rude chavs (or is that just the check-in staff at Manchester Airport?), provide utterly foul food (even in business class), their planes are dirty (how many weeks did they fly around with easily washed-away polonium?) and they have the Elf n Safety, workers' first attitude which characterises Blair's Britain. Their "F*** you, you're just a customer" attitudes would be a disgrace to a state airline. They are doomed to bankruptcy and if this PR foul-up accelerates the process, so much the better.
An interesting article about customer service. Some quotes:
9 out of 10 senior executives are not in touch with their customers.
Customers are seen as transactions to be processed.
Inside-out thinking rather than outside-in thinking.
Who said this? A former BT director!
I find it difficult to argue my bills because I rarely understand them (my water meter bill is the worst one - baffling).
Part of the problem is the dogma of "shareholder value" which treats the shareholder as more important than the customer, employees, the environment, everything.
This is a big disadvantage of the free market but at least with the free market there is the possibility that competitors will emerge to improve choice and kick the incumbents into shape.
With BA's propensity to lose luggage, passengers have to take two suitcases - just to ensure a shirt and change of undies is available at the other end.
I travel with BA fairly often plus other airlines and I don't share many of the anti-BA views expressed here, apart from maybe cleanliness of aircraft. On the whole, I have always found BA staff to be friendlier and more helpful than on many other european and international airlines. All cabin staff are harassed nowadays but BA tend to have a relaxed attitude. I would say they do pretty well on that front. I have not found their check-in staff to be ruder than other airlines. In fact, the worst experiences I have had flying have been with other european carriers, not BA.
"And BT has announced that customers who continue to pay by cheque instead of direct debit will be charged a £6 a year fee."
I approve. People who pay by cheque get on my nerves. They hold up the queue and need to learn what "credit card" means.
Well, the "charge a fee to pay by cheque" is new - in years gone by, it was free to pay by cheque, but you got a discount if you paid by direct debit...
(Possibly not the woefully inefficient BT, but certainly Gas and 'leccy companies.)
Verity, I'm afraid it is you that is wrong. Bevan did say it about Morrison... and that's all I claimed.
BA is a constant source of case studies of dreadful management for my business and leadership programes. They are sometimes the most appalling cretins. Seldom has a management team been so utterly unaware of the damage to its public image of policies it imposes and the way it introduces them. This one will make it very unpopular with many many people, - like the disabled who can't mange a single big case.
try BG!
I had a letter from them telling me my DD had been revised in the light of my lower gas useage. It hadn't. When I looked they were planning actually to take MORE off me and then ( I guess if I complained) let me have it back a year later. Less the interest, naturally.
Anon 7:37, true, BA are better than most. They also happen to have the best safety record of any major airline, another good reason to use them. Would you trust your kids to Ryanair with it's proven record of emergency landings, pilots who have nervous breakdowns in the air because of the tough schedules and management-pressure and a boss who orders the staff to break safety regulations and has caused dozens of over-runs at airports? You get what you pay for with airlines. The bad aspect of BA is staff relations but it is so big and so unionised compared to others that this is perhaps inevitable.
Unfortunately BA under the stewardship of the awfull Willie Walsh, a man who's tenure at Aer Lingus left it so weakened that it is about to be gobbled up by Ryanair, seem to have decided to adopt the very worst of the ultra budget airline practices without the budget pricing.
Firstly they c**p on their staff and now they are doing the same to their passengers. BA have completely forgotten that, as British Caledonian used to say, you have a choice.
I for one will be taking my business, which is normally 13 people flying around 30 or 40 times a year, often in Business Class, elsewhere to an airline that still thinks passengers are important.
BA have reverted to their old nationalised arrogance and contempt for customers and deserve to suffer serious consequences as a result.za
I largely pay by cash, even bills in the hundreds. It is of course hugely inconvenient but I do so in order to minimise intrusions into my privacy.
I'm angry enough about nulab's erosion of my privacy and civil liberties to refuse to collude with their corporate pals by giving them my personal information if I don't have to. Will be just as bloody minded when/if ID cards are introduced and will refuse to have one, will go to prison if need be - I'd welcome the opportunity to slow down and, say, write a book.
I have a few DDs set up before nulab came to power and I'll use cheques when I'm forced to, but refuse to pay online in any shape or form, don't use pin numbers or credit cards and avoid dealings with organisations unwilling to accommodate my payment choices and idiosyncrasies.
Just as well I'm not with BT, would change company if so, and have changed my mind about BA, I shan't fly with them again - though I don't fly now anyway :)
I am beginning to detect a deliberate anti-BA campaign here. Is BA really worse than Easyjet, Ryanair, etc? I think not!
Post a Comment