hvnflyer

NO comparison in service. Co wins hands down. French flight attendants are rude and they just throw the food at you. I took 3 legs to DKR on Air FRance 777 and I was so happy to fly back from Paris to EWR on CO. The only place where Air France wins is their seats. They are tremendous

Oh, and you should have seen the expression on the flight attendents face when I asked him if he served American wines LOL

ContinentalFan

Have you tried asking them if they serve French whiskey? That question is a hoot too!

Babu

I've noticed AF FAs are a lot friendlier if you speak french to them.

CO 1E

I've never encountered such treatment in AF business class. Then again, I communicate with the FA's in French - that might make a difference.

ElkeNorEast

It makes a huge difference! I find the AF FAs to actually be very very nice, especially if you make an effort to greet them when boarding. If you are an English speaker who does their best to converse with them in French, they often will be extra nice (especially if you're stuck down the back).

Personally, I've started flying AF as much as I can when going to / through Paris - It's a much nicer plane, the IFE is better, the food is great. I used to avoid them, but recent experiences have changed my mind. That, and you get OnePass EQMs. Awesome!

Too bad about CDG though

rbrenton88

I always had a nice time in AF business. However, once I get my Foie Gras, I'm oblivious to anything else.

Last time I flew them, the attendant noted the type of wine I was drinking, and offered me an entire bottle upon arrival. She had popped the cork but didn't use any of it. I thought that was a special touch.

Babu

If she popped the cork, how did you transport it without making a mess?

LawFlyer

Sorry, but I respectfully disagree in toto. Frankly, I have encountered few truly "rude" FAs on either AF or CO. However, as a percentage, far more of them have been on CO than on AF. And if we are going to make gross generalizations (which I understand is never the best practice), I would have to say that AF cabin staff are friendlier, more helpful, and generally more attentive than their CO counterparts. Please understand that I am speaking very specifically about AF 33/36 and CO 10/11, the IAH - CDG - IAH roundtrip. So, although I am speaking only about this one city-pair, I do speak from LONG experience (more than a decade of twice-per-month slogging between the two).

Well, it sounds like hvnflyer was actually looking to pick a fight, unless he didn't actually say this. I mean, what did hvnflyer *expect* when he said this to an AF attendant? Was this supposed to be a "friendly" overture to a pleasant conversation? Come on; this would be like asking a JAL attendant if he served American-made sushi upon leaving NRT. It's just dumb.

I agree completely. From watching non-French speakers seated near me, however, I've noticed that a simple "Bonjour, ça va?" makes an enormous difference for that passenger for the next 10 hours. What's the big deal about THAT much French? After all, let's turn the tables a bit:

Have any of you noticed how the CO FAs tend to treat non-English speakers? In fact, I've noticed CONSISTENTLY up in BF on CO10/11 and CO 93/92 that the FA's relegate the non-English speakers to the exclusive realm of the "designated foreign language speaker" FA for that cabin, never to approach that customer again! That means the non-English speaker gets ignored for 10 hours UNLESS the designated speaker isn't busy. It's a pretty embarrassing service failure in CO's product.

It's odd to me that we expect all (or most) of the FAs on AF, LH and other EU carriers to speak English -- yet the Europeans do NOT expect all (or most) of the CO flight attendants to speak French, German, or [whatever] on flights to those respective countires. I have been on SEVERAL CO 10/11 flights lately where there was one (yes ONE) French speaker among the cabin staff. Sure, this was a mistake -- and people call in sick, blah blah blah -- but I'd say it's poor service on CO's part to have only one (or, on one memorable flight, NONE) FA in BF to serve 50 customers, many of whom were NOT English speakers.

The CO standard seems to be to have at least one "designated speaker" in each class of service. Sometimes they have more, and good for them. But can you imagine the outrage if AF and LH had only one "designated English speaker" in each class of service? And then we actually get UPSET about language issues -- when flying to a FOREIGN COUNTRY? My, my, my.

As for the OP, I totally disagree that AF service lags behind CO's for these reasons:

• AF food is MUCH better than CO food in J. There's not even a valid comparison to CO J.
• Most AF flight attendants speak some English, and many are actually fluent. By contrast, CO passengers are *lucky* to encounter a CO flight attendant in their immediate vicinity who speaks fluently the language of the destination country. It is appalling.
• The AF J seat is actually VERY comfortable, and I prefer it to CO's BF seat. Reasonable people differ on this, af course. That's just my opinion.
• I find the AF flight attendants to be far more interested in giving good service, personalized touches, and exceptional attention to their J pax whereas I find CO's BF staff to be "by-the-book," but also very nice, very professional, and quite pleasant. Still I have to say that the AF attendants beat the CO attendants by a narrow margin (and they are hotter, too, but we're not supposed to say that, are we).
• I could go on...

...but I won't. Sure, CO's service is in J is very good. But AF has them beat in some areas. And I certainly cannot agree that it is "terrible," etc. That just doesn't make sense.

Babu

EXCELLENT point!! ^

Delhi Flyer

You may be correct about CO's inadequate policies towards foreign languages, but this does not justify any differential treatment towards non-French speakers (if that is what happens), particularly in an international airline that caters to an international clientele. It might be nice to say hello or how are you in French but it should not make an enormous difference in service. Everyone's paying for good service, particularly in the front of the aircraft.

LawFlyer

I agree. But my point related to the OP's comparing AF and CO, and the notion that CO wins because the OP encountered bad service in part because of the language barrier. My argument, however, is that the "problem" the OP encountered on AF (if it's a language barrier) is a FAR MORE FREQUENT occurence on CO. Or, put more succinctly, a far greater percentage of AF attendants in J are blingual compared to the percentage of bilingual CO attendants in J. Thus, a service failure stemming from language problems happens FAR more often on CO than on AF. I've seen it happen over and over.

Still, that doesn't excuse the problem, merely because it's language based. At the risk of repeating myself, I'm simply pointing out that YOU are correct: A passenger's lack of speaking the FA's native language should NOT have an emormous impact on service, especially up front. HOWEVER, although it occasionally happens on AF, it happens far more regularly on CO, because they refuse to supply more than one or two "designated foreign language speakers" on those flights.

Thus, if one is making a comparison between AF and CO, and if one looks at the language problem, one can conclude that a service failure based on language problems is far more likely to occur on CO. And anecdotally, I've seen this proven true.

TWA Fan 1

DL's JFK-SVO has a fully mixed American-Russian cabin crew. It's a terrific way to keep passengers, whatever their native language, content.

kilo

Well said ^

pptp

The mix of speakers to non is simply a matter of money. Speakers get an override to their pay so the less that are built into the crew, the more savings. I believe the amount was reduced across the board after 9/11. It's not a requirement to have any, but it's obviously good customer service. In fact, if staffing is low, they may send a flight out with none. It's either that or cancel the flight.

As to the bi-lingual issue, I may be wrong but it seems other countries focus more on teaching a second language (namely English). In many places it's part of the school curriculum. It's never been a focus in this country but should be. That begs the question, which ONE would be focused on, since English is clearly the ONE taught in other countries.

Maybe the reason non-English speaking PAX are relegated to the speakers on the flight is because they're the only ones that can communicate back and forth (unless were talking about hand gestures and sign language). Again it comes down to staffing. I'm sure all of the speakers at CO wouldn't mind a petition to increase their numbers.

TWA Fan 1

As an American who grew up in Europe I agree with everything you say.

While it is certainly true that teaching a second language is less of a focus in the U.S. than in most other countries around the world, it's also less of clear necessity.

When I grew up in Switzerland, we spoke French, were required to study German (the majority language in Switzerland), and English. The Italian border was about 75 km away. We lived in Geneva and the city was teeming with Spanish, Arabic, Portuguese, Italian speakers.

English is the lingua franca, the international language and anyone who wants a shot at bettering themselves, whether they live in the hinterlands of Laos or an ancient city in Uzbekistan will need to learn English.

For Americans the challenge is therefore which language to focus on. Spanish is certainly the most prevalent second language in the Western Hemisphere and, in all fairness, quite a few Anglo Americans speak at least broken Spanish.

Regarding the languages spoken on CO, I can never recall flying internationally without at least one crew member who spoke the language of the country the flight was originating/departing.