Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Tiger Airways Crew Use Own Money To Compensate Pax  
User currently offlineDocpepz From Singapore, joined May 2001, 1971 posts, RR: 3
Posted (5 years 3 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 6255 times:

http://www.straitstimes.com/ST%2BForum/Story/STIStory_425203.html

Basically a TR flight from KUL to SIN was diverted to the Indonesian island of Batam. Pax were stranded there for four hours. Management policies prevented crew from distributing free water to pax, so the crew decided to use their own money to distribute bottled water to pax.

Is this justifiable?

10 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineTrigged From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 539 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 3 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 6102 times:

Justifiable? Sure. But at the same time there is some corporate responsibility to reimburse the flight crew. There was a situation where the crew worked in the best interest of the company and appealed to basic human needs. It was a great thing to do and it also saved TR a few repeat passengers too.

User currently offlineMirrodie From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 7443 posts, RR: 62
Reply 2, posted (5 years 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5878 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Its purely honorable on the flight of the crew.

Lets home the company is equally honorable.



Forum moderator 2001-2010; He's a pedantic, pontificating, pretentious bastard, a belligerent old fart, a worthless st
User currently offlinePhoenix9 From Canada, joined Aug 2007, 2546 posts, RR: 8
Reply 3, posted (5 years 3 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5825 times:



Quoting Mirrodie (Reply 2):
Lets home the company is equally honorable.

Probably not since the management policies didn't allow for distribution of free water anyways. The crew did an honourable thing, but I doubt the company will follow in the same footsteps.



Life only makes sense when you look at it backwards.
User currently offlineGFFgold From Indonesia, joined Feb 2007, 443 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 3 weeks 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 5296 times:



Quoting Mirrodie (Reply 2):
Lets home the company is equally honorable.

Now that the glare of publicity is on them I expect the company will be very honorable indeed. One hopes that they will take an honorable look at their policies to prevent a repeat performance.


User currently offlineOlympic472 From United States of America, joined Jun 2008, 461 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (5 years 3 weeks 4 days 5 hours ago) and read 4786 times:

I do not get this one. This much we know: Water at the taps are unsafe for drinking; airline passengers held because of delays; no liquid to be brought pass security. And this airline charges for a basic necessity?
I have not flown them, so is this standard?
Who owns the airline?
Anyone care to share here which other airline charges for water?



Civil Aviation has a "Need for Speed"!
User currently offlineLJ From Netherlands, joined Nov 1999, 4435 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 3 weeks 4 days 3 hours ago) and read 4665 times:



Quoting Olympic472 (Reply 5):
Anyone care to share here which other airline charges for water?

In Europe, LCCs charge for water (as do other airlines which don´t serve free drinks in economy). However I don´t know what their policy is in an emergency situation


User currently offline9V-SVC From Singapore, joined Oct 2001, 1797 posts, RR: 10
Reply 7, posted (5 years 3 weeks 3 days 22 hours ago) and read 4471 times:

For all I know, I will never fly with this airline ! Its not like as if the passengers caused the plane to be diverted, the least the management can do is to distribute free water to them. It seems that they can afford to lose passengers, the other competitors are waiting.


Airliners is the wings of my life.
User currently offlineShanxz From Singapore, joined Apr 2006, 243 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (5 years 3 weeks 2 days 14 hours ago) and read 3999 times:



Quoting Olympic472 (Reply 5):
I have not flown them, so is this standard?
Who owns the airline?

Ironically, Singapore Airlines owns Tiger Airways. But Tiger strictly follows the RyanAir model, so you can probably decipher why pax have to pay for everything. There's now even a RyanAir-ish convenience fee of $5 for booking online.



Airlines are in the service business, not transport. Brand matters...
User currently offlineLufthansa From Christmas Island, joined May 1999, 3217 posts, RR: 10
Reply 9, posted (5 years 3 weeks 2 days 12 hours ago) and read 3896 times:



Quoting Shanxz (Reply 8):
Ironically, Singapore Airlines owns Tiger Airways. But Tiger strictly follows the RyanAir model, so you can probably decipher why pax have to pay for everything. There's now even a RyanAir-ish convenience fee of $5 for booking online.

Aint that the truth!
If you want to see life onboard Tiger... search for tiget airways on youtube and you'll find a program called "airways" which shows tiger's outstanding customer service policies in full swing mostly out of melbourne, throughout their Australian operations. Believe me...nothing is included here. And one slight hickup in your plans (such as say the day before tiger change the departure time, and only contact you via email after you've already started travelling thus you probably never get the message) and tiger very quickly becomes a false economy.

I did it once. Amazingly... I never thought I'd say this... but I actually thought Jetstar did a better job. It was a little TOO cheap. And I'm no jetstar fan. I was kinda shocked that I could say Jetstar was actually better then somebody.


User currently offlineHuaiwei From Singapore, joined Oct 2008, 1114 posts, RR: 2
Reply 10, posted (5 years 3 weeks 2 days 4 hours ago) and read 3659 times:



Quoting Shanxz (Reply 8):
Ironically, Singapore Airlines owns Tiger Airways. But Tiger strictly follows the RyanAir model, so you can probably decipher why pax have to pay for everything. There's now even a RyanAir-ish convenience fee of $5 for booking online.

Singapore Airlines is merely the biggest shareholder of Tiger Aviation (the holding company). It is not even a majority shareholder, so to say SQ owns Tiger is pretty much misleading.

Unlike the SQ-MI relationship which is basically functioning like one entity, Tiger is given plenty of autonomy, including competing with SQ on its own routes. And Tiger follows the RyanAir model because the late Tony Ryan invested in the airline himself and helped the airline to adopt Ryanair's "winning ways".



It's huaiwei...not huawei. I have nothing to do with the PRC! :)
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Tiger Airways To Launch SIN-TGG, Considers SIN-MYY posted Wed May 20 2009 11:17:05 by FlyBeQ400
Tiger Airways To Acquire Another LCC posted Mon Apr 21 2008 04:09:44 by GneissGuy
Tiger Airways To Drop India Routes? posted Tue Feb 19 2008 06:54:20 by Coal
Tiger Airways To Start SIN-BLR posted Wed Jan 2 2008 16:40:56 by BlrBird
Tiger Airways To Start Operations In South Korea posted Mon Nov 5 2007 05:21:01 by GneissGuy
Air Asia / Tiger Airways (?) To Fly SIN-KUL posted Sat Oct 27 2007 20:31:43 by GneissGuy
Straits Times: Tiger Airways To Open Hub In ICN posted Wed Aug 15 2007 14:46:36 by Coal
Tiger Airways To Fly To Brunei! posted Thu Aug 9 2007 07:43:26 by FlyTUITravel
Tiger Airways To Commence SIN-India Flights In Oct posted Tue Jul 3 2007 15:54:41 by FranxSIN
Tiger Airways 4pw To Perth posted Fri Jan 12 2007 07:51:54 by 6thfreedom