Tiger Airways: ‘Air Ways’ TV series premieres on Channel 7 on Tuesday, 14 July

[samh004]

Both looking forward to watching the show when I get back, and dreading it as they have some great deals to ADL I'd love to book. Just $68 from OOL to ADL is really enticing to me.

 

[Flashback]

Both looking forward to watching the show when I get back, and dreading it as they have some great deals to ADL I'd love to book. Just $68 from OOL to ADL is really enticing to me.

I thought they looked like a reasonable airline and TBH most of the things that happened I see happen on Qantas as well so I don't see the fuss

 

[tuapekastar]

There's a bit of talk about negative PR for TT here, but Sleazyjet in the UK had their equivalent show run for quite a few seasons and they didn't come across to me much different to TT, so there must have been something positive in it for them for them to let it run for so long.

 

[medhead]

I thought they looked like a reasonable airline and TBH most of the things that happened I see happen on Qantas as well so I don't see the fuss

You've seen a group of Coptic Madmen storming the aircraft on Qantas
(waving their walking sticks)

Because if you're carrying the infant they can charge another schmuck the full price for the seat instead of getting only the child's price from you?

But they can charge the child for the seat, it is marginal really, another $27. Actaully, looking into this, that whole infant thing was the worng way around. The website says an infant gets no luggage allowance. As a child they would have been able to take more carry on for free. Sorry, does not compute.

Besides I can't find their luggage demension rules so definitely not flying with them.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

10 seasons of Airline in the UK, and Easyjet still going strong. And Airline continually shows angry, delayed passengers, passengers who miss checkin cutoff, excess baggage, all the same problems that Airways will show. I don't think Tiger come off looking bad at all, most of the public is laughing at the idiot passengers who like to create a scene at the airport.

I think it's a great PR exercise for Tiger and also a great education to their future passengers, with regards to baggage, checkin times etc. Also gives awareness of the route network to viewers.

As for the infant thing, it costs $30 to bring an infant not occupying a seat according to the fees/charges page on the website, here is the conditions of carriage excerpt:

4.2 Infants:
An infant under the age of two (2) years (on the date of travel) may fly at the prevailing administration fee per Sector provided he sits on an adult's lap. Only one (1) infant is allowed for one (1) adult. No baby seats or perambulators are allowed in the cabin of the aircraft. A child over the age of two (2) will require their own Booking Confirmation and separate Seat like any other Passenger. Newborn babies less than seven (7) days old will not be accepted for carriage.

Here is a quote from the children and infants page of the tiger site:

The charge for carriage of infants is S$40 or A$30 (for Australia domestic flights) per infant per sector, when they are seated on an adult's lap (maximum one infant per adult aged 18 or over). No baby/car seats are allowed in the cabin of the aircraft. Infants do not qualify for baggage allowance, the adult fare paying passenger can select the appropriate Luggage Upsize™ if required. If the infant reaches the age of 2 years prior to the return journey they must pay the applicable fare, taxes, fees and charges for that part of the journey. Proof of age will be required; so please have the infant's valid documentation available for inspection. For those adults wishing to purchase a seat onboard the aircraft for infants, this is possible providing the adult fare for the seat is paid, in this case the Luggage Upsize™ options will apply for baggage to be checked into the hold of the aircraft.

The fee for baggage up to 15kg at the airport if you have NOT pre-paid, is $25, which is what they were charged.

They kept arguing that they did not get charged on the MEL-OOL sector. I heard the staff explaining that the family only checked in one x 7kg bag on the outbound flight - they had 15kg prepaid baggage allowance , the pram weighed 8kg, so the bag+pram was ok to go with no extra charge. I take it the check-in bag was heavier on the return so the 15kg was not enough, hence having to pay an additional 15kg allowance @ $25.

 

[medhead]

They kept arguing that they did not get charged on the MEL-OOL sector. I heard the staff explaining that the family only checked in one x 7kg bag on the outbound flight - they had 15kg prepaid baggage allowance , the pram weighed 8kg, so the bag+pram was ok to go with no extra charge. I take it the check-in bag was heavier on the return so the 15kg was not enough, hence having to pay an additional 15kg allowance @ $25.

Yep that is right. And that is why it is dodgy. As the woman was claiming an infant gets a free pram for check in. Clearly not with the T&C. Also now that they all had tickets, they could take 7 kg each onto the plane, so the extra in the 7 kg checked bag could have become the child's carry on. Just seems like a bit of a set up situation really. the pax seem to know all about the baggage rules, except that one.

Anyway, will have to see if I bother waking up for next weeks episode.

 

[Aussie_flyer]

Well, we don't know what else they had with them, they may have already had up to 21kg of other carry-on, that we didn't see being weighed.

The star of the show though was the guy breaking through the doors, he couldn't wait that last 1 minute for the wheelchair passenger (from his own party) to board, quite incredible. He should be barred from being in an airport for a year or something if he wants to bust his way into secure areas.

 

[drron]

Re: Strict check in times

Maybe a basic question ...but why are some airlines so strict with check-in times?
For example not even a few minutes flexibility?

Thanks

Chris

So you were watching Airways last night.Certainly a great ad for TT wasnt it

 

[straitman]

Re: Strict check in times

So you were watching Airways last night.Certainly a great ad for TT wasnt it

They actually handled themselves better than I expected they would :!:

 

[Travel Guru]

Re: Strict check in times

I don't have a problem with airlines having strict check in times, they have to draw the line somewhere, and if they don't enforce their checkin curfew it'll quickly get out of hand.

The other issue that airlines face is takeoff slots, and missing one can be an extremely expensive exercise, especially at larger airport such as SYD.

People know the rules, if they get there 26 mins before a flight, tough luck, they should have been more organised.

And as far as the TT show goes, would you really be flying TT if your business meeting in ADL was that vital?? :mrgreen::mrgreen:

TG

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: Strict check in times

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reasonably well.

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

 

[NYCguy]

Re: Strict check in times

I really must agree with the above. Where does one draw the line when it comes to late-arriving pax? One minute? Five minutes? Twenty minutes? The conditions you agree to when you buy the ticket with a carrier like TT or JQ are clearly stated and easily understood - if you're late, you miss your flight. Easy.

Unfortunately, just about every passenger thinks that they are entitled to have the rules bent for them, just as every passenger feels entitled to the best seat in the cabin, the most carry-on junk, and the best spot at the luggage-carousel on arrival.

 

[Flashback]

Re: Strict check in times

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reaosnably well

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

I haven't used that term since I was in primary school!

Agree with all of the above though, the line needs to be drawn with no exceptions made.

 

[drron]

Re: Strict check in times

I thought that other than the handling of the oversold flight, Tiger handled themselves reaosnably well

The person going to Adelaide who was late was a complete richard cranium and the 17 y/o stuck trying to get home was an interesting issue

I see no issue with strict cut off times; it is better imo to say 45 minutes and enforce it strictly rather than say 55 minutes and then allow people to arrive 10 minutes late. With atrict enforcement, everyone knows where they stand

Dave

I agree completely,however the vast majority of pax on LCCs are not even lurkers on AFF,would have very little knowledge of airline proceedures and hence would look at the show and think TT failed to do a proper job of helping the pax.And the idiot going to Adelaide was a definite richard cranium.

 

[medhead]

Re: Strict check in times

I agree with the idea of strict check-in times and following the carriers rules. But I note that the example of TT on the Airways show was a complete scam really. the CIP had her excuses and they just didn't stand up. It was widely acknowledged that the lady was 4 minutes late. The excuse given for the strict cut off, a) I've already done the paperwork, and b) the cut off time is set so early because of all the paperwork i have to do. Clearly the paperwork is not that much of a burden if it is all done and finish in under 4 minutes. Not only that, the CIP spent the same time required to check in the pax on explaining why they couldn't check her in.

Finally, according to SWMBO (i missed this bit), there was a flashed up note to say that TT now give a few minutes grace on check in.

Having said all that, let me restate that I totally understand and agree that limits have to be set.

 

[medhead]

Re: Strict check in times

SO if they say, 42 minutes, people will argue that 40 minutes should be ok. At some point they do have to say that's it!

Yeah, of course.

But I'm just commenting on the advice that TT themselves have reportedly released to the people watching their TV show.

some mumbling about shooting the messenger.....

 

[N860CR]

Re: Strict check in times

I think the bigger concern that has come from that show is not the actual problem of the checkin times etc, but the attitude of the TT staff (most of all the Sarah girl - who's supposed to be the supervisor!)

Even with the ROK pax (who wasn't rude or abusive at all) Sarah seemed to take absolute pleasure in refusing to allow her to fly - and made it very clear to the customer that she was enjoying it. Her attitude to the 17yo (btw has anyone else never heard of such a policy??) and even Mr Kranium was equally disgusting.

If I were Mr TT and I saw tonights episode... there would be one less contractor working in MEL tomorrow!

I think I shall stick with Qantas - even though they're not much better these days.

 

[straitman]

Re: Strict check in times

Except Jetstar of course who apparently carry enough fuel to go from SYD to MEL and then to BNE.! (Or at least they did a few weeks ago)

..as all airlines must carry fuel to get to a suitable alternate.

Hiding behind an arbitrary rule is only to serve the airline's interest, which isn't good customer service and therefore is likely to discourage customers from choosing you again when there's a choice.

Unfortunately they can get away with this as they are catering for the masses who travel infrequently. If they burn a few off there are plenty more out there.

So less than 30 minutes before a LHR-SIN flight i was checked in... It goes to show the legacy airlines do have some room to move if they have to.

Having said all this generally i am very mich for strict cut off times and make sure i am at the airport with time plenty of time to make it.

It is a little easier if a long haul is a minute or two late as there is the next 6-8 hrs to catch up the time.

I think the bigger concern that has come from that show is not the actual problem of the checkin times etc, but the attitude of the TT staff (most of all the Sarah girl - who's supposed to be the supervisor!)

Even with the ROK pax (who wasn't rude or abusive at all) Sarah seemed to take absolute pleasure in refusing to allow her to fly - and made it very clear to the customer that she was enjoying it. Her attitude to the 17yo (btw has anyone else never heard of such a policy??) and even Mr Kranium was equally disgusting.

If I were Mr TT and I saw tonights episode... there would be one less contractor working in MEL tomorrow!

I think I shall stick with Qantas - even though they're not much better these days.

I suspect that Sarah was implementing the policy exactly as she has been told to do. The TV show is a great medium to get the message across.

 

[straitman]

Re: Strict check in times

What happens when a SQ flight gets delayed....

YouTube - 2009/7/3 SQ117 at KLIA Gate C3

The show about TT was quite mild by comparison.

 

[Dave Noble]

Re: Strict check in times

I think the bigger concern that has come from that show is not the actual problem of the checkin times etc, but the attitude of the TT staff (most of all the Sarah girl - who's supposed to be the supervisor!)

Even with the ROK pax (who wasn't rude or abusive at all) Sarah seemed to take absolute pleasure in refusing to allow her to fly - and made it very clear to the customer that she was enjoying it. Her attitude to the 17yo (btw has anyone else never heard of such a policy??) and even Mr Kranium was equally disgusting.

If I were Mr TT and I saw tonights episode... there would be one less contractor working in MEL tomorrow!

I think I shall stick with Qantas - even though they're not much better these days.

I didn't see anything majorly wrong with the approach of the agent; she was enforcing the rules in accordance with the airline policies from what I can see

I thought that her attitude to the 17 year old was remarkably helpful tbh. It may be a surprising policy ( though credits at end indicated that they have dropped the age of not needing a form to 15 ) but her approach of allowing virtually anyone to sign it was extremely helpful rather than disgusting

The agents seemed remarkably restrained when dealing with Mr Kranium.

The show should ensure that TT passengers that see it will realise that 45 minutes means 45 minutes and not 44,43,42 or 41 minutes

Dave