Air NZ Engineers Threaten 21-23 December Strike
Dec 13, 2018, 12:25 am
#92
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
That they had been notified of a strike, and whether they anticipate any impact on passengers would be a start. Many of us if we didn't follow New Zealand news would gave had zero knowledge of this even happening.
Given there's been zero coverage of this strike in Australia, and Air New Zealand didn't even tell people that the strike had been notified to them, a reasonable person would not have known the strike was happening.
Given there's been zero coverage of this strike in Australia, and Air New Zealand didn't even tell people that the strike had been notified to them, a reasonable person would not have known the strike was happening.
Dec 13, 2018, 12:29 am
#93
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
That is a very good example of the way brand/customer management is handled in NZ: ignore it until after the fact.
NZ *should* have been actively managing expectations.
Contacting customers and telling them A. What is happening at point X ("A strike has been called by the engineers union for these dates. It will potentially affect ABC services. It will not affect XYZ services") B. Follow up with positive information advising what the airline intends to do on the days concerned (We will, as always, flail about like headless chickens) and outlining options for potentially affected pax (If you have ABC tickets you can consider adjusting your plans and moving your flight/s to another day. If you have XYZ tickets you are SOL. If you have travel insurance you might be able to claim on that'; good luck. We are not issuing refunds in the lead up because we're NZ and we Simply Don't Back Money Unless Forced After The Fact.)
NZ are great at marketing. They are ok at running an airline (with notable holes in capability). They are absolutely garbage at customer management.
NZ *should* have been actively managing expectations.
Contacting customers and telling them A. What is happening at point X ("A strike has been called by the engineers union for these dates. It will potentially affect ABC services. It will not affect XYZ services") B. Follow up with positive information advising what the airline intends to do on the days concerned (We will, as always, flail about like headless chickens) and outlining options for potentially affected pax (If you have ABC tickets you can consider adjusting your plans and moving your flight/s to another day. If you have XYZ tickets you are SOL. If you have travel insurance you might be able to claim on that'; good luck. We are not issuing refunds in the lead up because we're NZ and we Simply Don't Back Money Unless Forced After The Fact.)
NZ are great at marketing. They are ok at running an airline (with notable holes in capability). They are absolutely garbage at customer management.
Dec 13, 2018, 1:09 am
#94
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: WLG/BKK
Programs: TG*G, NZ*GE, QF G, Accor Gold
Posts: 10,167
This is a subjective opinion. The point that was being made IMHO was that whatever limited information NZ available should/could have been passed to customers - even a simple statement such as a notice of a strike had been made and that there was no further information. This is sometimes done with poor weather forecasts and potential disruption - which may not actually have had any impact.
Based on Air NZ's information, each passenger would determine their own appetite for risk, and act as they wanted. Yes, a few probably might make rash decisions (their issue).
I note NZ had no hesitation in providing a lengthy email following resolution (see my earlier post). Your line of logic would imply that this message from Air NZ was not necessary.
Based on Air NZ's information, each passenger would determine their own appetite for risk, and act as they wanted. Yes, a few probably might make rash decisions (their issue).
I note NZ had no hesitation in providing a lengthy email following resolution (see my earlier post). Your line of logic would imply that this message from Air NZ was not necessary.
Dec 13, 2018, 1:45 am
#95
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Frensham, Lincolnshire
Programs: RFC
Posts: 5,074
And they were correct in keeping quiet as it didn’t eventuate. Had it been confirmed they would have provided whatever information they could, I’m sure. Jumping the gun and causing unproductive worry and possibly booking cancellations would have been far more disruptive. It would also play into the hands of the union, who would have felt their threat was actually having a positive effect (in their eyes). All in all any other course of action would have been naive and stupid.
The strike was well publicised and widely discussed. NZ acknowledging the potential and going through the options at various points would not *add* to any worry - unless you're the type of person that doesn't want to know all your options and prefers to operates in an information vacuum, that is.
A course of action that ignores the problem and says everything is fine and not to worry until X or Y actually starts shows a complete disregard for customers IMO. It is a symptom of the "Never admit any wrong" way of doing business that is typical of small minded and short term focused NZ business.
Dec 13, 2018, 2:05 am
#96
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
This is a subjective opinion. The point that was being made IMHO was that whatever limited information NZ available should/could have been passed to customers - even a simple statement such as a notice of a strike had been made and that there was no further information. This is sometimes done with poor weather forecasts and potential disruption - which may not actually have had any impact.
Based on Air NZ's information, each passenger would determine their own appetite for risk, and act as they wanted. Yes, a few probably might make rash decisions (their issue).
I note NZ had no hesitation in providing a lengthy email following resolution (see my earlier post). Your line of logic would imply that this message from Air NZ was not necessary.
Based on Air NZ's information, each passenger would determine their own appetite for risk, and act as they wanted. Yes, a few probably might make rash decisions (their issue).
I note NZ had no hesitation in providing a lengthy email following resolution (see my earlier post). Your line of logic would imply that this message from Air NZ was not necessary.
Dec 13, 2018, 2:10 am
#97
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
You're sure they would have provided info? Why would you assume they would break type and history?
The strike was well publicised and widely discussed. NZ acknowledging the potential and going through the options at various points would not *add* to any worry - unless you're the type of person that doesn't want to know all your options and prefers to operates in an information vacuum, that is.
A course of action that ignores the problem and says everything is fine and not to worry until X or Y actually starts shows a complete disregard for customers IMO. It is a symptom of the "Never admit any wrong" way of doing business that is typical of small minded and short term focused NZ business.
The strike was well publicised and widely discussed. NZ acknowledging the potential and going through the options at various points would not *add* to any worry - unless you're the type of person that doesn't want to know all your options and prefers to operates in an information vacuum, that is.
A course of action that ignores the problem and says everything is fine and not to worry until X or Y actually starts shows a complete disregard for customers IMO. It is a symptom of the "Never admit any wrong" way of doing business that is typical of small minded and short term focused NZ business.
Dec 13, 2018, 11:34 am
#98
Moderator, Hilton Honors
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: on a short leash
Programs: some
Posts: 71,419
That wouldn't have helped because you knew. Claims are excluded if either you knew it was forseen OR a reasonable person would know it was forseen.
Dec 13, 2018, 2:03 pm
#99
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Frensham, Lincolnshire
Programs: RFC
Posts: 5,074
Very true. But the position I'm advocating is also regarded as best practice in most any business school around the world.
Wait, let me get my violin...
OK, that second sentence I disagree with entirely and I don't think that's subjective. NZ is perfectly capable of projecting the likely disruption to services and has a positive duty to do so as a traded company. I'd futher argue they have an ethical responsibility to their customers and other employees to plan ahead, but I acknowledge that ethics is not a strong suit for NZ (or most other NZ companies, really). To say it's irresponsible to attempt to plan for known potential obstacles in a business is utterly irresponsible in itself. I hope that you're not involved in any sort of business that has hopes of lasting.
Apparently that’s not acceptable here.
Regardless, I disagree. It would have been irresponsible of NZ to attempt to forecast the effect of the strike as it would have been no more than speculation. I only want information when something has changed. Otherwise it’s not worth bothering about.
Dec 13, 2018, 2:08 pm
#100
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: New Zealand (most of the time)
Programs: Air NZ Elite *G, Honors Gold, IHG Platinum Elite
Posts: 6,094
The outcome of the strike would have very like been a 3 day shutdown of all jet operations. That is the only way to deliver certainty to all parties involved.
It's for that reason that the strike was never likely to actually happen - the consequences and follow on effects from that would have been one of the most disruptive events to have ever occured in New Zealand.
It's for that reason that the strike was never likely to actually happen - the consequences and follow on effects from that would have been one of the most disruptive events to have ever occured in New Zealand.
Dec 13, 2018, 2:24 pm
#101
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
Very true. But the position I'm advocating is also regarded as best practice in most any business school around the world.
Wait, let me get my violin...
OK, that second sentence I disagree with entirely and I don't think that's subjective. NZ is perfectly capable of projecting the likely disruption to services and has a positive duty to do so as a traded company. I'd futher argue they have an ethical responsibility to their customers and other employees to plan ahead, but I acknowledge that ethics is not a strong suit for NZ (or most other NZ companies, really). To say it's irresponsible to attempt to plan for known potential obstacles in a business is utterly irresponsible in itself. I hope that you're not involved in any sort of business that has hopes of lasting.
Wait, let me get my violin...
OK, that second sentence I disagree with entirely and I don't think that's subjective. NZ is perfectly capable of projecting the likely disruption to services and has a positive duty to do so as a traded company. I'd futher argue they have an ethical responsibility to their customers and other employees to plan ahead, but I acknowledge that ethics is not a strong suit for NZ (or most other NZ companies, really). To say it's irresponsible to attempt to plan for known potential obstacles in a business is utterly irresponsible in itself. I hope that you're not involved in any sort of business that has hopes of lasting.
Dec 13, 2018, 10:08 pm
#102
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: BNE
Programs: NZ*G, QF Bronze, VA Red
Posts: 563
The strike was well publicised and widely discussed. NZ acknowledging the potential and going through the options at various points would not *add* to any worry - unless you're the type of person that doesn't want to know all your options and prefers to operates in an information vacuum, that is.
On the contrary, not telling customers of even the remotest possibility of flight delays (which they do for anything from aircraft maintenance - see 787-9 engine issues - to weather events already, even when there's a high likelihood of no impact on passengers) is not "handled very well". It's disastrous, and contemptuous toward the people that actually pay their salaries - the customers. Once you have a strike notice in your hand, impacts are certain unless you can avert them. How you avert them is irrelevant. But not telling the customers who may be impacted is abysmally bad customer service, even if you are 99% certain you can avert them successfully.
The outcome of the strike would have very like been a 3 day shutdown of all jet operations. That is the only way to deliver certainty to all parties involved.
It's for that reason that the strike was never likely to actually happen - the consequences and follow on effects from that would have been one of the most disruptive events to have ever occured in New Zealand.
It's for that reason that the strike was never likely to actually happen - the consequences and follow on effects from that would have been one of the most disruptive events to have ever occured in New Zealand.
Not sure what business school would recommend providing speculative and potentially wildly misleading information to customers, least of all for a publicly traded company. Of course they would be internally making all sorts of contingency plans but that’s a totally different matter to communicating externally. Sounds like you have little or no experience of PR, crisis management or external communications, nor IR strategy and tactics (which they also handled very well). IMO 🙄
Dec 13, 2018, 11:26 pm
#103
Join Date: Apr 2017
Programs: SQ TPPS (21),QF G, NZ E, IHG D Amb, Marriott Gold, HH Gold, Shangri-La Jade, Accor Plat, Hertz P
Posts: 395
On the contrary, not telling customers of even the remotest possibility of flight delays (which they do for anything from aircraft maintenance - see 787-9 engine issues - to weather events already, even when there's a high likelihood of no impact on passengers) is not "handled very well". It's disastrous, and contemptuous toward the people that actually pay their salaries - the customers. Once you have a strike notice in your hand, impacts are certain unless you can avert them. How you avert them is irrelevant. But not telling the customers who may be impacted is abysmally bad customer service, even if you are 99% certain you can avert them successfully.
What rubbish. No business school would ever teach that you should handle a potential massive impact to your customers by ignoring it. On the contrary, you immediately work to control the narrative to dispel any potential panic that might be caused by media or other parties. And that means - guess what - communicating with customers. Not leaving it to the media. It's pretty ironic of you to be claiming that the posters you're responding to have little or no experience with PR, crisis management and communications if you think that's well handled.
What rubbish. No business school would ever teach that you should handle a potential massive impact to your customers by ignoring it. On the contrary, you immediately work to control the narrative to dispel any potential panic that might be caused by media or other parties. And that means - guess what - communicating with customers. Not leaving it to the media. It's pretty ironic of you to be claiming that the posters you're responding to have little or no experience with PR, crisis management and communications if you think that's well handled.
Dec 14, 2018, 7:20 pm
#105
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Christchurch, NZ
Programs: NZ *E, QF Gold, Hertz President’s Circle, Accor Gold, PanPacific Platinum
Posts: 747
yes, I wrote Dave Morgan (President of Sea Fearers Union) a s*itty letter about a strike on Xmas Eve. I called him a pinko..,he replied with a copy of Pravda. Bloody funny now, made me furious at the time.
