A P Yu

The only reason BA don't want the 3rd runway at LHR is because they know it would let such competition in and that would have a bigger impact than any other change EZY could make

dddc

Agreed. Most travel policies that I'm aware between myself and my friends don't exclude LCCs as they are often more convenient for people who live in places away from Heathrow (for example). You can enter your FF number into the staff travel system, but that didn't mean you'd get travel on that airline. Cost is always the main factor for those with multiple options (LCY, LGW and LHR) are my preferences in that order. My last work trip was to BCN and got sent to LGW, luckily on BA in that case. However some of my colleagues on that trip got sent to STN and ended up on Ryanair, having to buy their own suitcase allowance and then claiming it back through travel expenses!!

BOH

That's where the penny pinching travel policies of some companies fall over spectacularly. Plus making employees go through the hassle of paying the essential extras (a good oxymoron there) themselves and claiming back through expenses. Probably all cost more in the end - any rigid travel policies in large companies I have worked for always seemed to be designed by employees who never actually have to travel

DYKWIA

Some of us prefer that way or working (if you know what I mean...)

BOH

I know exactly what you mean. My preference too, full freedom to choose hotels / flights etc and pay all personally and claim back. Quite amazing the benefits available in terms of personal credit card points and perks. The policy is simply "be reasonable" ^

Those I feel sorry for are whereby they have no choice and are forced onto some LCC, on a weird routing or in a hotel that is really not appropriate. I have insisted on arranging my own flights / hotels after once being booked on a London to Chicago flight that went LHR-LAX-ORD....because the person that booked it noticed it was £50 cheaper with 1-stop. She had no idea of the distances involved in the US and thought that LAX to ORD was similar time to catching an LHR to MAN shuttle

milkyway88

She needs to come on here to learn about proper route planning.

That way she'd have booked you on OSL-HEL-LHR-JFK-LAX-PHL-ORD.and saved £75

NickB

Same airports but not necessarily the same terminals and facilities. To take the example of France, they are OK at CDG or NCE but at MRS, they operate, like other LCCs and unlike legacy carriers, from T2, aka the Punishment Terminal (think Costco warehouse meets HMP Pentonville in terms of ambience), which is a distinctly unpleasant and not at all business-friendly experience. The same was true in LYS although I have not used them there in yonks so I do not know whether it still is the case.

Mordac

Dunno about LYS, but you've described the low cost terminal at LIS perfectly.

Robespierre

Pascoe

I am basically to all intents and purposes pretty much equidistant between LHR and LGW (crow-flies miles I am not, but travel time is the number that truly counts and in that it's close enough to be moot) and public transport for me is a fair bit easier to LGW.

So I might actually consider it for my shorthaul biz stuff (particularly MAD).

Although ironically what I would lose doing it that way is actually what I have found to be one of the nicer lounges (ie going to LGW but not being in the BA lounge there).

But if the flight times suit I'd give it a whirl. Partly as, tbh, if I end up on an IB codeshare anyway (which is happening more and more at the moment), and unless we're talking one of the longhaul A330 / A340s, it may as well be any low budget carrier as far as I am concerned. IB single aisle A320 in the back is a product I have zero brand loyalty to.

So it's purely TPs and lounge as the benefits for flying BA. And also, as I pick the carrier for leisure on a wider range of factors, and we often quite like flying out of LGW with the family, accruing status on another carrier, with a good route selection out of LGW, does make some sense for me.

My only concern would be whether the corp TAs view it as the thin end of the wedge and then suddenly start mandating me to do it that way.

47Aitken

I am a great fan of U2 , they are good at what they do which is why they must have captured most of the main UK domestic trunk market. I well remember there handling of reservations during the weather shut down in February 18 which from my standpoint stranded in BFS was faultless.

Have these suggestions , may be more to do about seeing off competition from the likes of Wizz and FR ? I noticed in LTN recently more Wizz air Airbuses than Easyjet ones.

Ba is also pretty good at what it does but they are in a different market ; and I see no suggestion here that U2 are contemplating through transfers / ticketing
which would obviously step up the competition stakes

BillyBleach

I've been opting for EasyJet at LGW, over BA at LHR, to ZRH for 3 years now. Primarily to save the journey to LHR (I live near Brighton).

I would certainly be interested in a business offering on the EasyJet flight. I typically pay for the 'Up Front' offer anyhow. Key would be to ensure it is not sold as J, and instead an upgraded Y experience - as that would rule booking this (due to travel policy).

Also for ZRH, EasyJet really need to sort out the punctuality on this route.

ajamieson

Regrettably, I can confirm from work commute that LYS is still awful and Easyjet uses the most awful shack at the furthest end of it. It's like the BUD shack, but without the space or the efficiency.

Combined with arriving/departing LGW from the remote piers across the bridge from the North Terminal, the whole LGW-LYS experience on Easyjet is exhausting. It's as if they're trying to help Eurostar!

lfc84

For me - the big risk using easyjet is that when transferring through LGW North Terminal from an inbound domestic Easyjet service to an international Easyjet - notwithstanding it's not protected connection - i have to re-clear security. At the moment, I chance it. But I wish they would sort out these issues

subject2load