I will NEVER fly Singapore Airlines again

Status
Not open for further replies.
But Jobu insists they were not late for check-in, but that the check-in was closed early when they arrived 10 mins before check-in was supposed to close. If the info posted by Jobu is accurate (and it is the only info we have been presented regarding timing), then he is entitled to every expectation that he would be able to get on the flight, or be treated as an involuntary denied boarding case.

Thanks NM. I know a few people have said that we only have my side of the story, and really all you can go by is my word. All I can say is that I would never think to complain about something like this if I was in the wrong - it's just not like me.

oz_mark said:
While understanding the position that jobu was in, it is difficult in a service industry to get to the bottom of an event that happened months before.

Hey oz_mark - it's not that they didn't investigate it, rather it was how they reacted/responded. And actually I think there are a few things they could have easily investigated which I have mentioned before in this thread so won't go through again here.

Cheers,

JOBU
 
Hi,

I was just reading this thread and having been to Vietnam recently, it occurred to me that Jobu was a victim of typical Vietnamese customer service. Just one question - were the SIA staff involved all Vietnamese? They seem to have a problem with understanding exactly what is asked and say yes when they don't know and respond inappropriately. I'm not bagging the Vietnamese as some of them are the nicest people but in the customer service dept they really suc.

So, I wouldn't be so hard on SIA as it is difficult for them to investigate 5 months after the event and I would not be surprised if they have the same communication problems with their own staff in Vietnam.

Anyway, hope you found a better airline to fly with. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Cheers,
Gems
 
You know does it matter when you write the letter?That does not change the incident.
I flew exclusively Singapore Airlines 5 times a year Aust/Asia and asia internally from 1996-2006.Would not look at another airline.
Then I noticed the different ways they changed there check in services/baggage allowances/pricing/attitude to customers.Started to become more like Qantas.(Wow)
It is not they do not replying to complaints.They just do not regard replying as important.
I have not flown with them now since March 2006. So they have lost 9 international and a few internal. But then the airline industry is booming so they will get someone to replace me?
 
Just one question - were the SIA staff involved all Vietnamese? They seem to have a problem with understanding exactly what is asked and say yes when they don't know and respond inappropriately.

Good point Gems however my wife can speak Vietnamese so language wasn't an issue. Also one of the passengers that arrived after us also spoke Vietnamese.

Personally I found the Vietnamese people in general very pleasant to deal with, other than this experience.

Cheers,

JOBU
 
The Frequent Flyer Concierge team takes the hard work out of finding reward seat availability. Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, they'll help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

AFF Supporters can remove this and all advertisements

1. I was not late for check-in;

2. I did not feel like I deserved special treatment (nor did I ever say so); and

3. I will definitely not fly SQ again and am quite pleased that I have convinced others that I know not to either.

Cheers!

JOBU

Hi, all, I accidentally bumped into this forum and started reading.

I have worked in a major international airline for over 30 years, although not in front line service like check in, but in aircraft maintenance.

Please allow me to shed a bit of light on what I see in the background which perhaps pax do not see.

Firstly Jobu, there is absolutely no excuse for rudeness, and as this is what you are complaining about then you are right to complain.

1. You were not late for check in, per se. But unfortunately, you were late in another sense, that is, (I'm guessing the flight was overbooked), all available seats on the flight had already been checked in to other pax ahead of you. So, where to put you when there are no more empty seats?

I'm not sure whether SQ practices voluntary "bump off" from overbooked flights. Perhaps this exercise had already been carried out earlier before you arrived. That is why it is essential to arrive way, way ahead of time, and, although in this case you tried but still arrived later than other pax, you could still be denied check in even if the time is 50 min before the official 40 min for counter closure.

I stay 10 min away from my local airport and I leave home 3 hours before scheduled departure time, with absolutely no chance at all of traffic hold up on this route. I'm not saying everyone should do this, of course, but just to show I do what I preach.

Of course, the counter staff could have being more nice in their handling of a delicate situation, but, perhaps they were rushing to get the flight ready for departure, and really didn't think there was any point in doing any further check in as the plane has no more seats to put anyone on (no excuse, though, but, still, human nature I guess)

As a background to why the 40 min rule came about, what used to happen was, pax were being checked in till very near to departure time, then they "disappear" into the airport shops for last minute shopping, or are held up at ICQ due to this or that. Now, imagine a B747 with about 400 pax all sitting and waiting for the last few stragglers to get to the plane. You wouldn't be happy if you were one of those waiting pax, would you? More so if you made an effort, like me, to come very very early for the flight or if you might end up missing a connecting flight at the destination. Then you will think, "throw that guy off the flight! Serves him right!"

Ok, then you have a pax who have to be offloaded due to whatever reasons, (passport irregularites, no visa for destination port, etc) and now you have to search through the containers buried deep in the cargo hold to remove his baggage, and this takes time.

The "airways" (imaginary roads in the sky used by airliners) are very crowded. If you miss your "slot" due to delay, you can end up with the flight now ready to depart, but, no "road" for the plane to fly on, so more waiting

All these delays can be very very costly, and all companies nowadays operate to very very cost saving conscious mentalities, not just airlines.

So, airlines decide, ok, we will have all pax checked in by -40 min STD, and, HOPEFULLY, this give ample time for last min shopping, time to clear up any passport problems, do any baggage off load, etc and still be ON TIME for departure.

2. You're right, you did not mention you wanted or deserved special treatment. You know, I have had occassions to write in or phone some companies to complain of certain issues. And what I noticed is, the less confrontational the tone of the letter or call is, the better the response from the other end (God forbid! I'm not saying you were confrontational in you letter of complaint. Could be a wrong choice of word on my part)

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the guy who read your complain letter. "Hm, he's a member of this and that frequent flyer club. What is he trying to say, that he deserved special treatment?" See what I mean? People do read between the lines, unfortunately. And your complain letter may be one of a number he read that day, and the rest "could" have mentioned too, that they were members of this or that freq flyer clubs and, may have actually stated they deserved better treatment. (Pure guesswork on my part here, of course)

3. I just reread your original letter, and, you said there, here and everwhere, that you are not flying SQ again. Honestly, how much attention do you think SQ would pay to your letter? Although SQ is considered "good" (read that any way you like), it still gets letters of complaints. Now compare your letter to that of someone who merely states the facts, without saying, "I'm not going to patronise your company anymore".

Who do you think SQ will respond to first?

And, frankly, 6 months after the occurance is a long, long time for anyone to remember an incident. For you to remember, easy, since you were probably dwelling on this matter mentally for the last six months, but, for the Customer service staff, very very difficult, since he had handled literally thousands of pax since then, and this is but one more pax as far as he/she is concerned.

I do agree with you that the Customer service staff could have been more polite and understanding. Perhaps then, your letter of complain and this entire thread would not have materialised. And, perhaps, SQ would not have lost so many previously loyal customers, you and all those you convinced to stop flying SQ!
 
Last edited:
DL8698,

Welcome to AFF. :D

Thanks for your insight from the other side. What you says makes sense to me.

I look forward to you can providing much more useful information in the future.
 
DL8698,

Welcome to AFF. :D

Thanks for your insight from the other side. What you says makes sense to me. ...
+1
thumbsup.gif
:D
 
The "airways" (imaginary roads in the sky used by airliners) are very crowded. If you miss your "slot" due to delay, you can end up with the flight now ready to depart, but, no "road" for the plane to fly on, so more waiting

+1 as well on your post, but i have to correct you on this bit. It isn't the airways being crowded, but rather the take off and landing "slots" There is plenty of sky up there, but only a small number of runways, and only so many aircraft that can land/take off per hour. Miss your assigned slot, and you'll be waiting a long time for the next one.

I've sat in the jump seat coming in to land at LHR and i kid you not it is almost impossible to get your head around the number of aircraft and conversations going on.
 
+1 as well on your post, but i have to correct you on this bit. It isn't the airways being crowded, but rather the take off and landing "slots" There is plenty of sky up there, but only a small number of runways, and only so many aircraft that can land/take off per hour. Miss your assigned slot, and you'll be waiting a long time for the next one.

I've sat in the jump seat coming in to land at LHR and i kid you not it is almost impossible to get your head around the number of aircraft and conversations going on.
nlagalle,

Some airways (a lot) are very crowded also. The separation requirements at altitude are much greater than on terminal approach which in itself leads to congestion
Think of all the air routes that must combine to get those aircraft onto finals every 30 or 60 seconds depending upon where you are.
 
Just look up in the sky in USA or Europe... i am always amazed at just how many planes are flying overhead at any moment in the day. It really looks busy, unlike anything i see in Asia or Australia.
E
 
Sponsored Post

Struggling to use your Frequent Flyer Points?

Frequent Flyer Concierge takes the hard work out of finding award availability and redeeming your frequent flyer or credit card points for flights.

Using their expert knowledge and specialised tools, the Frequent Flyer Concierge team at Frequent Flyer Concierge will help you book a great trip that maximises the value for your points.

nlagalle,

Some airways (a lot) are very crowded also. The separation requirements at altitude are much greater than on terminal approach which in itself leads to congestion
Think of all the air routes that must combine to get those aircraft onto finals every 30 or 60 seconds depending upon where you are.

True some routes are very crowded. The crowding at the end is caused by the separation required so an aircraft can land and taxi off before the next can land. Aircraft have to be off the active runway before the next plane gets clearance to land.

Separation at altitude might sound greater, but remember they are travelling at speed. I can't remember the IFR minimums, but I think it is around 3nm (5.5km) - and I read somewhere about it being reduced too. And planes generally travel with a ground speed anywhere from 800km upwards. So really in time 5.5km equals about 25 seconds of seperation (based on 800km/ph).
 
True some routes are very crowded. The crowding at the end is caused by the separation required so an aircraft can land and taxi off before the next can land. Aircraft have to be off the active runway before the next plane gets clearance to land.

Separation at altitude might sound greater, but remember they are travelling at speed. I can't remember the IFR minimums, but I think it is around 3nm (5.5km) - and I read somewhere about it being reduced too. And planes generally travel with a ground speed anywhere from 800km upwards. So really in time 5.5km equals about 25 seconds of seperation (based on 800km/ph).
In my opinion your post supports the primes that the airways are just as crowded as the terminal areas. Time of separation is the issue not the distance.
 
Just look up in the sky in USA or Europe... i am always amazed at just how many planes are flying overhead at any moment in the day. It really looks busy, unlike anything i see in Asia or Australia.
E

Evan, spoken like a true Melburnian, where the number of routes that could potentially overfly Melbourne (at altitude) perhaps numbers 3 (SYD/JNB, AKL/PER and maybe a southerly track for CHC/SIN). And I agree with you - I can remember looking out over Barcelona once, and apart from the spectacular views I was amazed at the number of jets passing overhead in all sorts of directions.

With the exception perhaps of CBR, I guess this sparsity of jets overhead would be the case in most Australian cities.
 
In my opinion your post supports the primes that the airways are just as crowded as the terminal areas. Time of separation is the issue not the distance.

I don't see how. Time is a variable. It's the distance that must be maintained. and the fact you can stack planes at different flight levels, you still have plenty of space. The airport slots will fill up before the airways will.

Nick
 
Evan, spoken like a true Melburnian, <..>

:) Yes.... not really a 'true Melburnian'... i have lived in Sydney and grew up in Northern NSW.

Haveing lived or spent a lot of time overseas also i can tell you we live in one of the great countries, not to say i dont like to live in a few others but we really do have a nice place to live.

E
 
just an idea - what if the airlines had ticket machines like the banks. you simply grab a ticket as you enter the cue, the ticket could have a time marker that indicates what time you enter the cue. game over no discussion to be entered into the airline cannot say you arrived late and the pax has proof they arrived before flight closed.

What a very good idea.
 
Hi, all, I accidentally bumped into this forum and started reading.

I have worked in a major international airline for over 30 years, although not in front line service like check in, but in aircraft maintenance.

Please allow me to shed a bit of light on what I see in the background which perhaps pax do not see.

Firstly Jobu, there is absolutely no excuse for rudeness, and as this is what you are complaining about then you are right to complain.

1. You were not late for check in, per se. But unfortunately, you were late in another sense, that is, (I'm guessing the flight was overbooked), all available seats on the flight had already been checked in to other pax ahead of you. So, where to put you when there are no more empty seats?

I'm not sure whether SQ practices voluntary "bump off" from overbooked flights. Perhaps this exercise had already been carried out earlier before you arrived. That is why it is essential to arrive way, way ahead of time, and, although in this case you tried but still arrived later than other pax, you could still be denied check in even if the time is 50 min before the official 40 min for counter closure.

I stay 10 min away from my local airport and I leave home 3 hours before scheduled departure time, with absolutely no chance at all of traffic hold up on this route. I'm not saying everyone should do this, of course, but just to show I do what I preach.

Of course, the counter staff could have being more nice in their handling of a delicate situation, but, perhaps they were rushing to get the flight ready for departure, and really didn't think there was any point in doing any further check in as the plane has no more seats to put anyone on (no excuse, though, but, still, human nature I guess)

As a background to why the 40 min rule came about, what used to happen was, pax were being checked in till very near to departure time, then they "disappear" into the airport shops for last minute shopping, or are held up at ICQ due to this or that. Now, imagine a B747 with about 400 pax all sitting and waiting for the last few stragglers to get to the plane. You wouldn't be happy if you were one of those waiting pax, would you? More so if you made an effort, like me, to come very very early for the flight or if you might end up missing a connecting flight at the destination. Then you will think, "throw that guy off the flight! Serves him right!"

Ok, then you have a pax who have to be offloaded due to whatever reasons, (passport irregularites, no visa for destination port, etc) and now you have to search through the containers buried deep in the cargo hold to remove his baggage, and this takes time.

The "airways" (imaginary roads in the sky used by airliners) are very crowded. If you miss your "slot" due to delay, you can end up with the flight now ready to depart, but, no "road" for the plane to fly on, so more waiting

All these delays can be very very costly, and all companies nowadays operate to very very cost saving conscious mentalities, not just airlines.

So, airlines decide, ok, we will have all pax checked in by -40 min STD, and, HOPEFULLY, this give ample time for last min shopping, time to clear up any passport problems, do any baggage off load, etc and still be ON TIME for departure.

2. You're right, you did not mention you wanted or deserved special treatment. You know, I have had occassions to write in or phone some companies to complain of certain issues. And what I noticed is, the less confrontational the tone of the letter or call is, the better the response from the other end (God forbid! I'm not saying you were confrontational in you letter of complaint. Could be a wrong choice of word on my part)

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the guy who read your complain letter. "Hm, he's a member of this and that frequent flyer club. What is he trying to say, that he deserved special treatment?" See what I mean? People do read between the lines, unfortunately. And your complain letter may be one of a number he read that day, and the rest "could" have mentioned too, that they were members of this or that freq flyer clubs and, may have actually stated they deserved better treatment. (Pure guesswork on my part here, of course)

3. I just reread your original letter, and, you said there, here and everwhere, that you are not flying SQ again. Honestly, how much attention do you think SQ would pay to your letter? Although SQ is considered "good" (read that any way you like), it still gets letters of complaints. Now compare your letter to that of someone who merely states the facts, without saying, "I'm not going to patronise your company anymore".

Who do you think SQ will respond to first?

And, frankly, 6 months after the occurance is a long, long time for anyone to remember an incident. For you to remember, easy, since you were probably dwelling on this matter mentally for the last six months, but, for the Customer service staff, very very difficult, since he had handled literally thousands of pax since then, and this is but one more pax as far as he/she is concerned.

I do agree with you that the Customer service staff could have been more polite and understanding. Perhaps then, your letter of complain and this entire thread would not have materialised. And, perhaps, SQ would not have lost so many previously loyal customers, you and all those you convinced to stop flying SQ!

How much would emerald one world status have when reading about a problem with a star alliance carrier?

I guess it means you are already loyal to one brand and not the other.

I was a PPS with SQ for a few years and never had any issues, in fact the only flight i missed was with SQ beacuse i was late arriving at the airport!! They were very good, just confirmed me on the next one - no ho ha. Maybe Australian versus Vietnamese culture? not sure. Certainly status is a big thing and the more yu have the better.

You are emerald - fly One World next time and put this down to experience. Act on any issues immediately is the other cue.

cheers SPRUCE;)
 
Although it seems like there should be plenty of sky for all the planes to use, unfortunately there are two more factors which work against this, ie, wind direction and aircraft take off weight.

Wind direction:
The jet streams at altitudes are very strong, sometimes (or most times) in 3 figures, and, (I hope I'm right here) different flight levels may have opposite wind directions, thus at some flight levels you have head wind (Bad!) and, at others, tail wind (Good!). Obviously all pilots want to go to the flight levels with tail wind (save fuel, reduce flight time). Therefore, some flight levels may be congested while others are shunned because of the strong headwind.

Pilots may elect to delay take off, even with a delayed flight, if they can eventually get a much more favourable flight level with good tail wind, which results in an earlier arrival time than if they took off earlier but flew against a head wind.

Take off weight:
If the aircraft, eg a B747, is going on a 10+ hour flight, it is carrying more than 100 tonnes of fuel. Add on the pax, cargo, etc, it may be so heavy that it cannot climb above a certain altitude, therefore it is restricted to lower flight levels even though slots may be available at higher flight levels. So if a slot is not available at lower flight levels, the flight will have to wait, even if slots at higher altitudes are available.

Many factors work against you if you miss your assigned slot.
 
Hi, all, I accidentally bumped into this forum and started reading.

I have worked in a major international airline for over 30 years, although not in front line service like check in, but in aircraft maintenance.

Please allow me to shed a bit of light on what I see in the background which perhaps pax do not see.

Firstly Jobu, there is absolutely no excuse for rudeness, and as this is what you are complaining about then you are right to complain.

1. You were not late for check in, per se. But unfortunately, you were late in another sense, that is, (I'm guessing the flight was overbooked), all available seats on the flight had already been checked in to other pax ahead of you. So, where to put you when there are no more empty seats?

I'm not sure whether SQ practices voluntary "bump off" from overbooked flights. Perhaps this exercise had already been carried out earlier before you arrived. That is why it is essential to arrive way, way ahead of time, and, although in this case you tried but still arrived later than other pax, you could still be denied check in even if the time is 50 min before the official 40 min for counter closure.

I stay 10 min away from my local airport and I leave home 3 hours before scheduled departure time, with absolutely no chance at all of traffic hold up on this route. I'm not saying everyone should do this, of course, but just to show I do what I preach.

Of course, the counter staff could have being more nice in their handling of a delicate situation, but, perhaps they were rushing to get the flight ready for departure, and really didn't think there was any point in doing any further check in as the plane has no more seats to put anyone on (no excuse, though, but, still, human nature I guess)

As a background to why the 40 min rule came about, what used to happen was, pax were being checked in till very near to departure time, then they "disappear" into the airport shops for last minute shopping, or are held up at ICQ due to this or that. Now, imagine a B747 with about 400 pax all sitting and waiting for the last few stragglers to get to the plane. You wouldn't be happy if you were one of those waiting pax, would you? More so if you made an effort, like me, to come very very early for the flight or if you might end up missing a connecting flight at the destination. Then you will think, "throw that guy off the flight! Serves him right!"

Ok, then you have a pax who have to be offloaded due to whatever reasons, (passport irregularites, no visa for destination port, etc) and now you have to search through the containers buried deep in the cargo hold to remove his baggage, and this takes time.

The "airways" (imaginary roads in the sky used by airliners) are very crowded. If you miss your "slot" due to delay, you can end up with the flight now ready to depart, but, no "road" for the plane to fly on, so more waiting

All these delays can be very very costly, and all companies nowadays operate to very very cost saving conscious mentalities, not just airlines.

So, airlines decide, ok, we will have all pax checked in by -40 min STD, and, HOPEFULLY, this give ample time for last min shopping, time to clear up any passport problems, do any baggage off load, etc and still be ON TIME for departure.

2. You're right, you did not mention you wanted or deserved special treatment. You know, I have had occassions to write in or phone some companies to complain of certain issues. And what I noticed is, the less confrontational the tone of the letter or call is, the better the response from the other end (God forbid! I'm not saying you were confrontational in you letter of complaint. Could be a wrong choice of word on my part)

Now, put yourself in the shoes of the guy who read your complain letter. "Hm, he's a member of this and that frequent flyer club. What is he trying to say, that he deserved special treatment?" See what I mean? People do read between the lines, unfortunately. And your complain letter may be one of a number he read that day, and the rest "could" have mentioned too, that they were members of this or that freq flyer clubs and, may have actually stated they deserved better treatment. (Pure guesswork on my part here, of course)

3. I just reread your original letter, and, you said there, here and everwhere, that you are not flying SQ again. Honestly, how much attention do you think SQ would pay to your letter? Although SQ is considered "good" (read that any way you like), it still gets letters of complaints. Now compare your letter to that of someone who merely states the facts, without saying, "I'm not going to patronise your company anymore".

Who do you think SQ will respond to first?

And, frankly, 6 months after the occurance is a long, long time for anyone to remember an incident. For you to remember, easy, since you were probably dwelling on this matter mentally for the last six months, but, for the Customer service staff, very very difficult, since he had handled literally thousands of pax since then, and this is but one more pax as far as he/she is concerned.

I do agree with you that the Customer service staff could have been more polite and understanding. Perhaps then, your letter of complain and this entire thread would not have materialised. And, perhaps, SQ would not have lost so many previously loyal customers, you and all those you convinced to stop flying SQ!

Hi DL8698,

Welcome to FrequentFlyer and thanks for such a well written response. :)

Honestly there is not much if anything that I disagree with you.

1. I believe like you that the flight was overbooked and they weren't trained on how to handle it.

2. I could have definitely worded my letter better.

3. I never wanted a response from SQ but the fact that they called me up just to complain took me over the edge so to speak...

Actually since relaying my story to dozens (possibly over 100 people by now) I have heard similar experiences with SQ's WA state manager. It's unfortunate because I like the look of their new business class seat and they have such a broad coverage but nevertheless I will stick to my guns. In fact I now work for a major global company and am in a position to divert travel away from SQ, which I have been doing without hesitation (diverted 12 business class flights away from SQ traveling Australia to Europe and Asia just last month). Whilst still immaterial to SQ the dollars are getting more serious than what a single disgruntled passenger can do. That is my team alone and as I move up the ranks of the organisation I won't hesitate to continue doing this.

:)

J
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Enhance your AFF viewing experience!!

From just $6 we'll remove all advertisements so that you can enjoy a cleaner and uninterupted viewing experience.

And you'll be supporting us so that we can continue to provide this valuable resource :)


Sample AFF with no advertisements? More..
Back
Top