Originally Posted by
mlin32
Perhaps it's because inherently my job is the corporate bean counter- though not for airlines, I see things as a function of cost and benefit. Back a few years ago, there was the need to reduce cost and a reduction in headcount was the decision made. Of course, the unions don't like that, so they demand workload reduction. So the variable cost is reduced by one head and the flight attendant union is appeased. If there is not much loss in revenue from key customers because they don't notice, why add back the headcount ? I don't think serving the meals in two batches would be good because then half the J passengers would receive it notably later than the first rows. Unless you decide to also collect the trays 20-30mn later for the second half of the passengers, this would impact the service flow negatively.
I assume many like me either buy business class tickets for their private trips or upgrade at OLCI. And many of us may not be tempted to buy a Business Class with AF as the soft product is not worth it especially on those longer routes. So if the AF bean counters that want to increase revenues and margins, they better have a look at the revenues that would be generated if a better service is provided.
That is hard to quantify but they should look at the example of British Airways and their Gatwick base. BA at LGW is 99% point to point and it looks like the operation there is going well. Club Cabins can stretch to the emergency exists on the A320s fleet. They must make good revenue on these flights. And these have better margins than Club Cabins filled with connecting passengers.