LordBuckethead

Say they take 100 new entrants a week, that's three years' worth of fresh-faced supplies.

KARFA

What's the current turnover rate for MF though? I understood it was very poor. No point getting 100 in every week if you are losing 100 out too.

psollitt

Very true , it is designed to be high , from my conversations BA Cabin crew, the company does not want staff to stay longer than a few years , they expect them to move on as they expect other new-hires to fill the empty boots ..

BlueThroughCrimp

As I'm sure you're well aware, FR for long enough didn't have a great reputation for customer service.

CIHY's opinion was that BA need to stop the profit at all costs before customer service.

FR have changed tact and Made an effort to I improve customer service, and has improved their profits.
Their words.
Maybe BA should try it...

KARFA

Why do you think FR changed their approach?

BlueThroughCrimp

You tell me

nallison

A few points. First there seems to be a common misconception that earning profit automatically validates their management strategy. This is not at all so. We do not know the counterfactual, and it is perfectly possible alternative strategies would yield higher profits, and perhaps more importantly, greater long term profitability. There are plenty of business people who question BAs strategy. Of course, we will have to wait and see.

Cost cutting will always increase profits in the short term, but long term effects could be disastrous if too much harm is done to the brand. Plenty of case studies of this. Also plenty of examples of management following a strategy to maximise short term returns, purely for self gain, with the intention of getting out when things turn. Is this the case here? No-one can say.

In terms of customer satisfaction, we don't have BAs internal figures, but all the external data we can see seems to consistently show declining satisfaction, whether skytrax, TripAdvisor, feedback here, media reports etc. etc. And poorer ratings than their main competitors in Europe. That all show the same trend is telling, and I imagine the internal data is similar, hard to imagine customers lining up to tell BA they enjoy reduced service in various areas for the same price. Indeed we have heard reports of some in management admitting they have gone too far.

KARFA

Perhaps since you are making the comparison it may better coming from you?

BlueThroughCrimp

Why they decided is irrelevant and I was comparing the action, not methodology.

And your our reason for their change is?

KARFA

Why is very relevant surely. If the same factors don't exist with BA as they did for FR then why should BA change in the same way. I am trying to understand what the factors were at FR for their change.

I am not proposing BA follow the FR route so I am not sure why you are asking me to explain the FR change?

nallison

Ryanair were very open that they changed tack because the brand became so tainted it was costing them business, even while offering low fares.

If you happen to believe BA are damaging their brand to the extent it will lost them customers, this is very relevant indeed.

BlueThroughCrimp

I'm not privy to why, so any explanation I would give would be pure speculation.

All I can judge is the words and action.

The reason I'm asking you is you perhaps have a theory or actual knowledge of why.
If you did, it would be nice if you shared it.

KARFA

I am sorry but I have no such knowledge or theory. I didn't raise FR, you did, so I am not clear why you think I would know? Perhaps you could find out why by doing some research and tell us?

BlueThroughCrimp

Personally, I have better things to do.
Don't let me hold you back though.

And nailson's last paragraph is how I would perceive the situation to be anyway.

KARFA

Ah so FR changed because they were losing business. Is that happing at BA? What do the results say? They usually have load factors in as well as just headline profit.