I can't help thinking to myself that the airlines are using the recent dreadful events for their own selfish gain.

Begging for money for the years of management cockups. Terrorist fault...ehh..NO

Now they are stopping food service on all domestic flights...for the safety of passengers of for their own financial gain !

Laying people off.....Again years of mismanagement.

And I am sure many more to come...

I find the airlines quite despicable for what they are doing, With one exception (southwest).

I guess the next thing is huge price hikes..., what's really needed here is a good sort out...let them fight for the business and let some go under, the strong will survive and out of it will come some very good airlines with very good service and more importantly GOOD ETHICS AND INTEGRITY.

Ferrari: Why are you complaining so much lately? Maybe you can be more specific your statement and not use "media style" posting? The only related news I heard about this today is that AA is stopping meal service on domestic flights under 2 hours. This is a big difference from what you've said: ALL domestic flights. I think this is not a bad move, if the food is going to be nasty anyways because airlines are cutting back on the $$ spend on the meals, I think the airline would be better off not offering them so they can save some money. At least this might help reduce the number of employees that will be laid off!!

Actually, I wonder to what extent AC is limited in cutting meal service (or at least a minimal amount of spending) with that 10 year contract it signed with Cara in 1999.

Empress.

I don't mean to complain...

Its just makes me mad when a company like AC has to blame their situation on one single event.
The problem with AC was there long before....

As to the food thing, I was watching CCN ( which as we all know is true)...And they were saying that the airlines where going to withdraw the food services on domestic routes.

I also think it's shameful that airlines are using this tragedy as an excuse to slash perks, lay off tens of thousands of workers, and ask for government money at the same time.

I'm disappointed with AMR's announcement that meal service will be eliminated on American Airlines and TWA Airlines domestic flights under two hours. They've always had good food (at least on all the flights I've taken with them). I hope other airilines don't start following suit. It makes Southwest's product look more and more favourable.

Southwest passengers love flying them because they're getting a comfortable seat, an on-time flight, reliable baggage handling, and friendly staff at the lowest fares possible. One doesn't have great expectations when flying them, but for a $99 ticket across the country, their product proves to have excellent value. I think they'll pull through the current situation without posting a financial loss.

As for government bailouts, I think it's a very bad idea. The only airline I think truly deserves any funds is US Airways because the FAA's decision to shut down DCA indefinitely is the main threat to their survival.

Looks like the original post in this thread was closer to the truth than we thought:

www.flyertalk.com/forum/Forum5/HTML/003498.html

"Under the meal-service changes, American will no longer serve meals in the main cabin of domestic flights, except those on nonstop transcontinental routes such as New York-Los Angeles, New York-San Francisco, Boston-Los Angeles, Washington Dulles-Los Angeles and Miami-Los Angeles.

In first class, meal service will be discontinued on domestic flights of two hours and under (Chicago-Nashville, for example), but will still be offered on domestic flights longer than two hours (Chicago-San Jose, Chicago- LaGuardia, Chicago-Boston, and Dallas/Fort Worth- Los Angeles, for instance)."

As I read it, anything short of a transcon will have no economy food, even if over two hours, and front cabin wi1l have no food on flights up to two hours, even those at mealtimes (so all flights YOW-ORD will now not have food at all, even those at mealtimes, whereas in my experience only the 1040am departure had no food in J).

But to give them great credit, AA did not claim passenger safety as a reason, they claimed the need to reduce costs and potentially reduced delays. I agree with Empress, it's better to drop the meal than to serve total crap.

andrew

Seems the Canadian public disagrees with your sentiments, Ferrari and FlyerAl -- why does this not surprise me? The G&M reports that their Ipsos Reid poll found 64% support an injection of public funds for AC and other airlines. Maybe they recognize the financial health of this industry is critical to a country that is so spread out, and that if they -- the public -- continue to demand the cheapest fare, someone other than AC's staff and shareholders are going to have to pay the bill.

The airlines have been in financial difficulties for decades, and much of it can be traced back to various world and terrorist events. The Gulf War destroyed the transAtlantic market for many years, preventing a significant recovery and stability to their balance sheets coming out of the Carter/Reagan recessions. The old style hijacking scares did not help at various times.

The insurance industry has bailed on them, no longer covering "acts of war". This has forced governments all over the world to cover off such politicies. When heat is on, it seems the private sector bails. And governments must step in and broaden the services they provide to keep the world functioning.

Get off the SouthWest, WestJet bull ****. These two carriers are totally different from the rest of the world's airlines. They have no history, no baggage which all other carriers bring with them. They have little infrastructure, and refuse to fly routes on which they cannot skim the cream and make money. Sen. Kirby's rediculous statement "maybe AC should sell some of its routes" begs the question to who? It tried to sell Canadian Regional and there was no taker, Canadian or foreign. [And don't say King Richard. He's cut and run like a rat and will not show his face soon in Canada, transAt or domestic.] Same goes for AC's regional carrier. Not a buyer in sight. The dear senator also suggested AC sell its YVR-TKO route to WestJet. That carrier has made some really annoying statements that defy logic. Mr. Beddoes knows that if he had to serve certain communities, he'd lose money too. [How about Grande Prairie as well as Ft. McMurray?]

AA will be cutting food service dramatically in the months ahead, to pare down its expenses. Why not? If people want low fares, they will get minimal service. Meals will still be available in the front cabin, and I suspect they believe most of their core FFers use upgrades and so will not suffer from this loss of service. I suspect this is similar to AC's plans for the back cabin, again assuming those who want the frills can either pay for them, or will use upgrades.

If people want SW and WestJet prices, then they also must accept that style of cabin service.

If you want to blame an entire industry for losing money and being bloated and inefficient, go ahead. Maybe it applies. But these changes were coming, Sept 11 or not, it was just a matter of time. Sept 11 just accelerated such changes because passenger loads fell off even lower, and with the system down for almost a week, it became catastrophic to their balance sheets.

Perhaps the real issue is that AC should never have been privatized. It is an essential public service which the private sector appears not to be able to provide an a national basis, and within the scope of the Canadian marketplace. Like public transit on the ground, or passenger rail service, it needs to be done by the public sector.

"Selfish" is not the operative word. "Self Preservation" is. In a war, you take out the vital elements of a country. Airlines today are as vital as railways were in the past two world wars. First you remove public confidence, then you let the marketplace play its role by rendering them bankrupt and financially unviable. Once that's done, you move on to the next industry... That's the type of war that is being fought by these *******s -- I know that word will be ****d out by some censor on FT -- against us, and it is the governments job to ensure they lose each of these battles.

The Canadian public seems to understand that. Why can't FlyerAl et al?

[This message has been edited by Shareholder (edited 09-24-2001).]

Air Canada is not an essential service. If they went bankrupt and ceased operations tomorrow, other airlines would fill the void. Why should the government keep an inefficient business operation afloat?

Air Canada seems to be the only domestic carrier that's begging for money. WestJet's loads have remained strong, and they are still hiring more employees.

American has taken the wrong step. They've eliminated meals in the back cabin on most flights. They've closed some Admirals Clubs and all Platinum Service Centers. First Class meals are gone on flights under two hours. What incentive is there for me to earn and use upgrade credits? American had the best meal service in North America.

America West has eliminated meals in all classes and all flights. If I was travelling on business, now I know who I wouldn't fly from BOS-PHX.

A VP of American once commented on Southwest, "They run on Herb Kelleher's bull ****." Well it looks like Herb's bull **** is winning the war. They conquered US Airways at BWI, they drove American out of some ex-SJC routes, they put Midway out of business at RDU, they drove TWA to bankruptcy at STL, and they've got America West going insane at PHX. While the industry is laying off 100,000 employees, Southwest (who's never laid off a single worker) is still hiring, and offering BUF-PHX for USD$98 r/t at the same time.

The industry ought to take Southwest more seriously. Good riddance to the airlines who can't compete in a free marketplace.

Shareholder, while I agree with your statement that West Jet is completely different than AC, there is a significant error in your post. West Jet does serve Ft. McMurray, as well as most small cities in Western Canada. In some cases, they provide the only jet service in some communities. They started out skimming the cream off the best routes, but they now provide basic service to every western Canadian community that can support a 737 ... even Comox BC and Grande Prairie AB.

My view is that a significant percentage of frequent fliers want a full service airline on domestic flights. I want meals at meal times. I want my baggage to be transfered to other carriers. I want to be able to stand-by for other flights. I want more leg room. I am willing to pay for it. But if Air Canada keeps cutting back they way they have been, I'll be flying on West Jet's cheaper fares because there will no longer be any difference in service. I believe there are many others like me.

[This message has been edited by StuMcIlwain (edited 09-24-2001).]

No they wouldn't because they aren't allowed to. Rather, we would be taking the Greyhound instead of flying on the regional carriers and connecting in the US for many international flights. There are plenty of communities that cannot support West Jet's 737 service.

C3K and Air Transat also need money.


[This message has been edited by StuMcIlwain (edited 09-24-2001).]

If we allow full-service airlines to become bare-bones operations, then I'm afraid the terrorists have already won.

Why wouldn't Canada 3000, WestJet, and Air Transat be allowed to pick up Air Canada's routes??

Okay, FlyerAl, you can fly C3K to Sydney, Australia. You can do it today because they do fly there.

I am actually quite puzzled by your posts. In one paragraph, you extol the virtues of Southwest, West Jet, and other discount carriers. In the next, you demand full service. Then you start promoting US Airways, which is about to go bankrupt. When was the last time you flew on AC? Have you even been in Y on C3K? How about West Jet?

I just can't believe your statement, FlyerAl. You're suggesting that people earn upgrades just for the food?? That's ridiculous. I agree that AA has better food in F than some other carriers, but it's still inferior to what is served in a typical 3 star restaurant. I usually decline the meal because I don't want to ruin my appetite for a decent meal upon arrival. Upgrades are very valuable to me, and elimination of food (on short-hauls) makes no difference to their value. Elimination of food service will actually save me the trouble of saying "no thank you" and "yes, I'm sure I don't want anything."

People are missing the big picture. Southwest and WestJet aren't a large success simply because they don't offer meals. They do well because they are efficient and they focus on both employee and customer satisfaction.

I feel that full service airlines shouldn't have to become "no frills" in order to compete. Otherwise there's no incentive for someone wanting full service to fly a full service airline.

Yes, I've flown AC several times this past year. Yes, I've flown in Y on 2T. Haven't been on WestJet yet.