Mike P

Sorry but that's complete and utter nonsense. The Government hasn't mandated that BA provide substandard catering and cheap wine, BA has taken it upon itself to do that. Proper catering, provided in a hygienic and suitably socially distanced manner could certainly be provided should BA wish to do so.

GumshoeW12

The question was why can’t BA provide a full service in F when LH is?

HMG has advised UK airlines to reduce on-board service to the minimum necessary to ensure passenger comfort and well-being.

You may not like the answer, but there’s no escaping the facts.

SW7London

Hasn't HMG also advised airlines to reduce instances of passengers facing one another in close proximity? I.e. the current Club layout

​​​​​

ermis177

You know that is based on interpretation right? The government guidelines do not mention anything about quality or quantity. The reduced meal can be anything from having 2 options in F instead of let’s say 5 to reduce the F service to a bag of crisps and a sandwich. Also it has mentioned before that BA is ignoring other guidelines from the same document ( for example passengers don’t sitting facing each other). Looks like the guideline only suits BA when it saves money.

Often1

OP - Are your pictures and service description of the HKG-LHR or LHR-NCE segment? If the former, was this the sole meal offered on the long-haul segment. If the latter, it was, of course, CE.

orbitmic

Actually, that's not what the guidance suggests in my view. You rightly gave the link to the guidance yourself and what it asks in terms of onboard service is that when practical, the airlines consider using pre-prepared and pre-packaged food. For me this is about limiting interaction and handling, but not quantity (within the same interaction parameters) let alone quality.

For instance, that would entirely fit the definition of usual full KSML meals and there is no hint (either explicitly or implicitly) that this should be as minimal as possible. This is literally only guidance about privileging food which is plated/packaged in the highly protected environment of the caterer's kitchens rather than requiring heavy cabin crew handling. If airlines want to serve a 20 dishes picnic basket that involves lobster and foie gras, that is entirely compatible with the guidance.

In short, the guidelines are not intended to reduce service quality but to reduce the amount of interaction (ie give all courses at the same time rather than one by one) and of crew handling (serve food that has been prepared and plated in the caterers kitchen rather than expect the crew to serve from large dishes as a number of airlines actually do, including BA in terms of the F vegetable sides or the F and J soup for instance).

I'm pasting the full element on "onboard aircraft" for reference as I think that is where we get the best clue of the intention of the regulator (and as noted by some posters in other threads, it is also only fair to acknowledge that BA have taken the liberty to ignore some other aspects of the recommendation when it did not fit its purposes, as with passengers facing each other):

Finally, it is worth reminding that none of it is compulsory, those are just careful recommendations about what airlines should "consider", so in effect, even if BA chose to have a 5 service meal, this would not actually be a breach of regulation though I would personally agree that it would be a silly defiance to its spirit, however indicative.

On board aircraft

Measures to manage the risk of transmission on board aircraft will vary depending on the size of the vehicle, passenger load and cabin configuration.

In England and Scotland, passengers must wear a face covering onboard airline services.

Where possible and where mass and balance allow, enable social distancing among passengers of different households or support bubbles, where relevant. Consider:

• seat allocations
• passengers not facing each other
• ventilation
• reduced movement of passengers within aircraft
• reduced interaction between passengers and aircrew
• processes for isolation of symptomatic passengers
• pre-sealed and pre-prepared food and drink

Jed

If they were able to serve from a full size bottle of wine, then why serve cheap stuff and not the usual F wine?
Whatever government ‘advice’ BA wishes to hide behind, to me, that food looks poor for an adult paying an F fare in cash or Avios. It might do for a child meal.
Long haul catering out of LHR appears to be better than the return flight catering back to LHR.

Jed

I think the pictures were of HKG-LHR. The table cloth would not make an appearance in CE unless the customer took their own.

HIDDY

A shame the OP was disappointed with what they received. However these are extraordinary times and will continue to be so for some time yet in certain parts of the world. I suspect most passengers are just glad to get to their destination even if it means flying without the frills.

ermis177

Would you not be disappointed if you had paid for a First class ticket and you received that? Most passengers are not very happy for paying full fares and see the product being below average with a H & S excuse while the planes are sometimes full with no social distancing at all...

GumshoeW12

Yes, it is.

It says:

Reduce on-board service to the minimum necessary to ensure comfort and wellbeing of passengers and limit the contact between crew members and passengers.

• reduce the food and drink service
• use pre-packaged and sealed food and drink products

I’m not disputing that that’s not open to interpretation, nor the suggestion that BA has taken the opportunity to cut costs.

But when the guidance clearly calls for food and drink service to be reduced, it is ludicrous to expect BA to offer the normal F service, as the poster I was replying to appears to on the grounds that LH is.

orbitmic

I really read that as limiting the "amount" of service/interaction, not its content. Maybe differences of interpretation as you say, but to me it means something completely different from how you read it.

HIDDY

If the flight arrived as scheduled why should I? You do know there are far more serious issues going on in the world to get upset about?

drvannostren

I think anyone who kinda knows the business knew that was gonna happen. There are a few truly premium carriers, then there's everyone else. They'll take any chance they get to cut costs, on board, at the airport, on the ground, in the warehouse...wherever they can. Outside of their own bonuses and salaries of course!

It's not really in MY budget, but after flying BA F once, not long before all this started happening, I would never pay for it again, miles or cash. At this point, you're basically paying for privacy in my view. I'm not flying right now, but if I were, I would flat out assume I'd be getting basically nothing.

I can absolutely understand the OPs frustration, I had the same frustration being underwhelmed by BA F. But flying right now isn't going to be normal, we all know the business practices of these companies, they need to save money, expecting anything other than bare minimum right now I think is expecting too much. The OPs mentions spending 10 days laid up in bed upon arrival. The OP didn't mention their reason for "traveling extensively" right now, but hopefully he/she is observing local quarantines and whatnot as it seems those 10 days in bed would've at best had to be 10 days inside their lodging.

SKRan

I agree it was significantly better *PRESENTED* than what's being shown in these pictures.

Drinks are subpar. Anything other than LPGS is subpar.