That's how I felt about the title of this thread -- bereft. As bereft as Robert Milton iss of ideas about how to revitalize an airline. Right now, I'm stunned, demoralized, and completely without hope. For perhaps the first time ever, I have sympathy for those working at Air Canada as I never had before.
I had seen the other thread about 2 million passengers without a complaint. Other than being mildly amused by it, particularly the semantics, I didn't think about it. Until I read today's Vancouver Province over dinner, and stumbled upon an article titled "
Pay cuts key to airline's survival". It was an article about RM's speech to the Vancouver Board of Trade.
Even then, as reading the article, I began to feel a sinking feeling. I started to become aware that RM was completely befert of new ideas. The best he could come up with was to copy WestJet, to be just like them in fact. Rather than come up with new ideas, take chances, lead with bold steps, his only avenue was to "do what they did." How uninspiring.
I'd have liked to posted a lot of stuff a few weeks ago when he was in the news, but being in Egypt, internet access was difficult. I had intended to follow up when I got home, but it seemed to have lost it's timeliness, and I lost interest. But it seems that lack of vision is always timely.
Here's a few quotes (and not quite quotes, paraphrases, perhaps) from the article:
'Concessions from Air Canada's unions are the key to the national airline's survival'
'Air Canada must reinvent itself as a low-cost carrier along the lines of WestJet'
"To do this, we must address labour costs"
I suppose that there's not a lot new or surprising here, but it was depressing to see that RM himself thinks that Air Canada should become WestJet. But then I went looking for the on-line version, and found something else. This:
Milton ticked off as questions on airline accentuate negative.
This was even more depressing. It's clear to me that RM is completely without vision, that he thinks for the most part everything is fine, and that really, Air Canada's problems are its customers. Here are a few more quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">"Because we're a small country, because there is not a lot of choice, we don't understand what airline service is like," he said. "We don't understand, perhaps, how competitive Air Canada really is."</font>
Understand?
We, that's you and me and everyone else, "don't understand what airline service is like". We also "don't understand, perhaps, how competitive Air Canada really is." Perhaps we're thick, or just downright stupid. Or maybe it really is "Because we're a small country," or maybe even "because there is not a lot of choice" in Canada.
[I've got news for him. I have choices, and I
do understand what airline service is like, to the tune of eleven thousand dollars.]
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">One of the audience questions directed to Milton asked: "Why does Air Canada continue to develop policies that annoy their customers? . . . When will policies and actions actually show you care about the customer?"</font>
Milton's response?
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">"Anybody can come to any conclusion they want but the facts are the most frequent flyers say that we are the best airline in North America,"</font>
Apparently he really believes it. Notwithstanding that the methodolgy is questionable (to be kind) and that OAG doesn't realize that Canada is in North America, he continues to believe that he has a great airline. And if it's great, it obviously doesn't need fixing, does it? So what was with those two audience questions? (And what can you say about a survey run by an alleged travel industry company that doesn't understand the simple political geography of North America?)
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">He said the airline won't use old-style airline management in the face of dismal results but transform itself into the kind of low-cost carrier that is winning in the post-Sept. 11 market.</font>
Sure... we'll just copy them, and by the way, we need to extract massive concessions from our employees. If that isn't "old-style airline management" I don't know what is. How he can say these things with a straight face simply boggles my mind.
<font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif" size="2">"Market psychology is the deciding factor," he said. "People want discount fares and nothing else and in order to provide that Air Canada has a massive restructuring job ahead of them."</font>
He seems blind that people want value, and they perceive that they are getting from the likes of WestJet. Charging 10 or 20 times the price for 50% more space and a few drinks isn't good value.
There's an old saying that one should "lead, follow or get out of the way." Air Canada right now needs more than anything else a bold leader with vision, and all they have is a copycat. He dismisses doing things "the old way" yet carries on as everyone before him has, complaining about labour costs. He looks at a sucessful competitor, and just says "let's do what they do."
Air Canada needs a leader that inspires everyone, customers, shareholders, and most of all employees. Because inspired employees that can make a difference like nothing else. Because inspired customers can be the best sales force a company can have. And because inspired shareholders will be prepared to stick with a plan, an inspired plan, through the thick and thin of it.
I feel I should apologize for the lack of coherency in this post. But I'm just so bewildered by these two articles and RM's statements, I find I can't think straight. And I'm completely demoralized.
[This message has been edited by Ken hAAmer (edited 02-21-2003).]