tuffnelpark

I was on a flight back from San Francisco the other day and experienced probably the worst service (based on money paid) I have ever seen on any airline. I would’ve preferred if they’d just set up a buffet!


In the terminal I knew something was wrong when we were offered food vouchers. This might have been useful if it wasn’t 5-10 minutes prior to boarding and the chaos that ensued.


It was a 787-900 aircraft with 216 seats (8F/42C/39P/127E) somewhere between half full and full, so maybe circa 150 passengers. The problem was there were only THREE CABIN CREW to serve the whole aircraft.


The service took a LONG time - the crew were highly embarrassed and as fast as they could offered all the cold food they had. No hot food was served as they didn’t feel it was safe to operate the cookers, I assume in case there was a fire. 2 crew served from 1 trolley in economy leaving 1 other to serve all of Club and First.


I asked a crew friend after I got back how this was even possible and got some more info from the grapevine. The crew has been sent out via Los Angeles and over the course of 2 nights had their rest interrupted repeatedly including having to move hotels. They were going to be bussed up (!!!) but eventually were put on a flight, by the time they made it to San Francisco they were down to 5 which is the legal minimum to fly back home.


Because of how long their working day was from leaving LA and going straight to work they had to take turns in shifts of 2 sleeping right after takeoff on the flight to ensure they were still legal.


In retrospect this was quite worrying - it’s a big long-haul aircraft, 8 exits, up to 220 passengers - if there was a fire or medical emergency or disruptive passenger (or combination) god knows how 3 crew could have safely managed the situation.


Obviously I have no issue with the crew - they did an outstanding job given the circumstances and still delivered with charm and a smile.


What is atrocious however is instead of being commended for coming to work knackered and avoiding cancelling a flight I hear they were hauled over the coals in disciplinary action when they got back for not cooking all the meals and doing a normal service.


I’m not sure I want to fly on an airline that bullies it’s staff like that when it comes to safety. I hope it’s a short-sighted on-off.


Beyond appalled.

CT-UK

Are you sure it left with only 3 crew? Did you actually count them?

I would be amazed if was allowed to fly,

navylad

they wouldn’t be, indeed I’m amazed how the OP managed to see the Service in all cabins

Minimum CC

Stewie Mac

The OP said that it left with 5 crew. Did you actually read his post?

DYKWIA

It clearly says 5 cabin crew in the OP, and that 2 were resting.

Is 5 legal for 150ish passengers? I assume it must be.

Something doesn't add up though.

navylad

negative according to the EASA documentation that lists the minimum number from aircraft certification.

corporate-wage-slave

Welcome to Flyertalk tuffnelpark, welcome also to the BA forum. It does sound quite an extraordinary turn of events, it's difficult to judge this because on the one hand full markts for getting everyone home, on the other hand this sounds like a below minimum viable product.

I'd just highlight that unless I am much mistaken, your complaint is mainly about the way that the crew got told off by their management for not completing the service is with 3 cabin crew rotating out of 5 on board.

surryson

did your ‘crew friend’ not tell you the the 787 doesn’t operate from SFO?

Stewie Mac

But as with all these things there's a get out:


Let's not be so quick to bash the OP, please.

BertieBadger

But the 789 does currently operate SJC which many people use as an airport for San Francisco the city. As far I can tell, the OP only talks in terms of the city not SFO the airport.

13901

Five crews is, if I remember well, the minimum amount of crew that can fly on the 787-9. As per the manual.

As for the flight, OP are you sure you left from SFO? I think SFO only sees 747s and 380s, to my knowledge and memory there hasn't been a 787 flight there in a long time (at least for BA) if ever. Wasn't it perhaps a flight out of SJC?

As for the performance management, I've no doubts that the poor crew will have negative feedback on that flight and that it'll affect their performance (although the bonuses aren't being paid as far as I understand it). I work in a company with a pretty crappy performance management system, although our ways of working is still miles ahead the 'dashboard' implemented with Mixed Fleet. My other half is MF and has plenty of cases when situations outside of their control - e.g. badly cleaned planes, or tatty cabins such as the three-class 77Es - trigger low scores and of course low ratings. Management response is of a level of stupidity and obtuseness such that you'd expect them to have worked in the office issuing visas for Turkmenistan.

Tiger_lily

Beat me to it. I’d be willing to bet that this was SJC from the description of the cabin config

CT-UK

sorry teacher will do better next time.....

1Aturnleft

I think the OP's misplaced creative writing exercise has everyone hook line and sinker. Perhaps if he writes in to BA with my Exec Club number they'll palm me off with some Avios as a gesture of good will for having wasted my time reading this rubbish. I don't believe a word of it.

FlyerTalker6823123456

It all seems pretty concise and accurate in all details from what I can see. Maybe you’d prefer bullet points of a few syllables easier to digest.

Minimum crew on a 787-9 is 6 from base or 5 from outstation. SJC is essentially San Francisco and the 787-9 operates from there - the OP doesn’t mention SFO airport specifically.

We know crew need breaks on long flights anyway - and the rest flows naturally. Would you want to be on a flight with such minimum staffing, especially if paid for F or J? I believe you need 2 crew to run the type of trolleys they use in economy for safety reasons - so that leaves only 1 crew spare.

Goodness know where all this bile and negativity comes from especially to new members. I’m surprised it doesn’t start with the usual apology for daring to register and write a post in fear of retribution.

Can we remember this is webpage on the internet not something of any gravity worth getting worked up over?