Can we ban the 'C' word from BAEC FT?
Sep 1, 2016, 7:13 am
#47
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: Isle of Man
Programs: IHG Platinum Elite, BA Pleb
Posts: 347
Over the last decade the airline industry had plenty of opportunities to treat customers fairly, and they chose not to. So the EU were forced down the route of regulation, because the airlines refused to put their house in order.
They have nobody to blame but themselves.
Originally Posted by HIDDY
I agree, the customer should always be compensated when the service provider hasn't delivered what they were contracted to do.
However....my comment was aimed at the chisellers.
However....my comment was aimed at the chisellers.
The Vueling culture Cruz has brought with him encourages the antagonistic approach. People let things slide if they're treated with respect; they don't if they don't. And BA recently have shown that they have no respect for their customers and, what's worse, they can't even be chewed to pretend otherwise.
Sep 1, 2016, 8:00 am
#48
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: NYC/PSP
Programs: AA EXP, A3 Gold
Posts: 4,106
When BA offers more than 5,000 Avios for a completely inoperable seat in CW, and that only after being prodded, is when pax will proactively stop asking for compensation. Until then, they're not a customer-centric business that can be trusted to do the right thing.
Sep 1, 2016, 8:11 am
#49
Join Date: Oct 2011
Location: City of Kingston Upon Hull
Programs: BAEC Gold
Posts: 4,940
The problem with that was that back in the day, it *was* down to the airlines and commercial considerations took priority over passengers, with the result that passengers got shafted. Hence a need for regulation was seen and it was consequently done.
Clearly airlines don't like them - it costs them money and forces them to behave in a way that considers their customers properly in the general scheme of things, but it would be a brave government that capitulates to the airlines on this and doesn't retain some form of regulation. The notion of compensation when things go wrong is now well-rooted in the minds of customers who may remember what it used to be like.
Clearly airlines don't like them - it costs them money and forces them to behave in a way that considers their customers properly in the general scheme of things, but it would be a brave government that capitulates to the airlines on this and doesn't retain some form of regulation. The notion of compensation when things go wrong is now well-rooted in the minds of customers who may remember what it used to be like.
Sep 1, 2016, 8:32 am
#50
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Argentina
Posts: 40,211
Chiselling works both ways too. We laugh at the enhancements, but what are they if not Cruz chiselling?
The Vueling culture Cruz has brought with him encourages the antagonistic approach. People let things slide if they're treated with respect; they don't if they don't. And BA recently have shown that they have no respect for their customers and, what's worse, they can't even be chewed to pretend otherwise.
The Vueling culture Cruz has brought with him encourages the antagonistic approach. People let things slide if they're treated with respect; they don't if they don't. And BA recently have shown that they have no respect for their customers and, what's worse, they can't even be chewed to pretend otherwise.