Originally Posted by
Land-of-Miles
I think the "we are spending more on food" and cost cutting narrative can run simultaneously.
If the original contract with Compass was let on generous terms to BA (perhaps because Compass had an eye to expansion into onboard catering) then at the expiry any new contract is likely to cost more because that is what the market now demands. BA may have been faced with spending a bit more (to deliver what we see in this and the other thread) or rather a lot more (to deliver something equal to or beyond the previous Compass offering - pre horsemeat shenanigans).
So BA may return with the perfectly true response that "we are spending more on catering our lounges than ever before", whilst the quality of the service and product deteriorates.
I don't think this is a simple organisational issue for BS and the public response from BA that started this thread does not imply this either. BA seem to think that they have the service they are paying for. It is always easy for those on the ground (pardon the pun) to lay off blame on another party rather than take the brunt of customer ire themselves. This is pretty much human nature. That does not mean that the issue here lies with BS.
If BS wanted to produce better quality food but do not have a nearby location to act as a production kitchen they surely could have found an alternate (or portable) unit to use temporarily whilst the transition was in place? This should have been factored into their contract since this could hardly have been a surprise for them on day 1.
Frank an der Post also had to be front and centre in the reletting of this contract. It happened on his watch and I would have to assume with his personal input. Why doesn't he have the cojones to issue a statement via Nicci here explaining what is happening and if the current situation is a temporary anomaly, taking responsibility and laying out a timescale to resolution?
I suspect he won't do this because this is evidently a cost cutting exercise and he may well have found the best option for the budget he was given. I won't be holding my breath for any significant changes (rather than the shuffling of deckchairs on the Titanic) unless premium passenger numbers start to fall off a cliff as a result of these changes. Sadly I don't think they will in the short term but this will do longer term damage to yield and the BA brand.
The bottom line is when you have a company run by an accountant all the focus is on the numbers with very little on the employees or customers. All 3 aspects of the business need to be in balance to be successful in the long term.
I think your analysis is probably right. (I posted something similar but less eloquent at post 371 of this thread).
I suspect BA is getting what they are paying for and the cost of the new contract is more than the old because of the state of the current catering market, the cost of food and the cost of catering labour.
Many on this board seem to be urging BA to chuck more money at lounge catering. That would be nice, but a little unrealistic and may require changes to the contract. I would suggest that Plan A would be to make changes, in response to customer feedback, within the existing contract and existing budget.
There are to my mind areas of increased expense that could be done away with or pared back. The biscuits and luxury snacks for instance. Are hand-made artisanal biscuits costing three times a Walkers pre-packed offering really needed in the T5B GC?
In other areas rebalance the catering offer. A decent caterer should be able to offer solid food as well as gloop on the FLounge hot buffet. By all means source the gloop from one T5 kitchen if that saves money, but find a way to offer a bit more variety in your flagship lounge.
The move to afternoon tea only is just crazy. I am not sure of the economics here. Does it save server time/chef time? Are the products cheaper, even though they are only offered at this time, with the inevitable waste implications?
Offer a bit more variety - what saving does a single variety of crisps offer? Why only three or four flavours of sandwich?
If I were BA, I would be looking to tweak. I would also look to restore a clearer distinction between the Flounge and the GCs (I know I have a personal interest here, but so do BA unless they want a sizeable number of frequent flyers not bothering to retain gold as there is no significant benefit over silver).
Finally, silence and failure to identify, recognise and accept the real issues is not a good idea. Neither is marketing spin or continued claims that this is what customers want an acceptable alternative.
At this point, I personally feel that it behests a senior BA manager to respond in their own name constructively, openly and honestly to the concerns expressed on here.