inconsistency, again

As times become tougher, and every penny of discretionary spending is accounted for, it becomes ever more important that Virgin offer faultless, consistent service.

And yet they seem radically unable to achieve this baseline of uniformity. Why?

Here's an example, which I'm sure, sadly, will chime with some of you.

My brother got married recently. For his wedding present, I bought him and his wife UC tickets to New York, where he was beginning his honeymoon. He'd only ever flown Y before so, of course, he was very excited.

On his return last week, he talked about how much he enjoyed his outbound journey: the clubhouse, the attentive staff and so on. But I noticed he was less effusive about the return journey. I pressed him and he told me why:

On the outgoing journey, the crew were indeed attentive and friendly. They made their presence known throughout the flight. When there was a problem with my brother's AVOD, they relocated him to another seat and generally worked hard to make his and his new wife's first flight in UC a memorable one. Full marks.

On the return journey, however, it was a different story. The crew were indifferent and barely ever present doing their rounds in the UC cabin. My brother sought a crew-member out to ask if they could help him (as a newbie) to convert his seat into a bed; the crew-member's response was almost hostile. They seemed to resent being interrupted from something. My brother wondered what was being interrupted. So, curious, he waited a moment and then followed them back, and noticed most of the crew were congregated around the UC bar, talking loudly (and, apparently, rather lewdly) with other 'passengers' who were all sitting at the bar. In hearing their discussions, it soon became apparent that all of these 'passengers' were in fact off-duty Virgin employees/crew - a whole bar's worth and more. They remained at the bar for most of the rest of the journey, such that actual passengers - you know, the ones who pay the salaries of the galavanters - couldn't have used the facility even if they'd wanted to. This was not just a quick hello, this was a flight's worth of reminiscing and gossiping in passenger-space, for the majority of the rest of the flight. Not really on, and nobody attempted to moderate it. Either the FSM couldn't be bothered to check up on them or, worse, was one of the assembled gaggle. I don't know which in this case.

Since none of the crew were bothering to do any cabin-rounds except for the bare minimum of fixed meal times (remember the Freedom Menu? Haha), no drinks were being offered or refilled in the interim. So my brother walked to the bar and asked for a glass of juice. The crew were so busy chatting amongst themselves and their civvies-colleagues that they didn't even really reply with words or even make eye contact. They just gestured at the carton, suggesting he should pour it himself, which he did. God forbid they should be interrupted.

Now, in one sense, this is trivial. It's hardly dramatic or a great tragedy. In another sense, though, it's annoying. It's unnecessarily tainted ever so slightly what may well be a once-in-a-lifetime experience. Not in any massive operatic way, but it's just mildly tarnished what should have been and so easily could have been pristine.

To the broader point: in my line of work, I have a number of systems and procedures to ensure that this sort of inconsistency cannot happen, whether people are having an 'off' day or not. You design a system with the right checks and balances so that these inconsistencies become vanishingly unlikely.

So why are Virgin unable to design such systems and schemes themselves? What is so rotten at the core of their training and implementation that they cannot do what so many other organisations can do? It's not even like it's particularly difficult: just act like the professionals you claim to be, day in and day out, or leave, and make sure that this is checked for actively and passively.

I only hope that the systemic inconsistency so obviously on view does not seep into more technical, significant areas of Virgin's operation. I trust it does not, but trust can be lost.

But actually, I don't want to be too melodramatic here. I mean, if I have a ropey RyanAir flight, I shrug my shoulders: one gets what one pays for. Or one should. But in these constricting times, when you spend thousands of pounds on several hours' worth of product, it is surely reasonable to expect that product to be flawless and not contingent on the vicissitudes of the day?

Why can't Virgin achieve this? I ask this not as a rhetorical flourish but as a genuine question. What is it about the organisation that prevents them, over a number of years, from attaining this? Does anyone have any ideas?

I think that is terrible and you / your brother should write clearly and directly to VS about it.

It appears to demonstrate a total breakdown in service on board, ultimately, that lies with the FSM.

What a shame to sully the experience for your bro' and his new wife.

Unfortunately, what you are referring to is something I have experienced several times when travelling with Virgin, and in particular this occurs when departing MAN. No matter what anyone says, I happen to think that the MAN-MCO service is such a downgrade from flights out of LHR, and I'm not even referring to the lack of V-port.

The product is great when it is successfully executed, however this is so inconsistent. I almost cringe when I step onboard as I await the service - will it be good or will it be bad?! I have no idea why it is so inconsistent, the only thing I can think of is that it is to do with the particular FSM onboard and how they are managing the rest of the crew.

[fozzyo]

In my experience it all comes form the FSM. If the FSM leads the crew then you get a top quality service, unfortunately there are some FSM's who don't do this and the service on the whole flight quite clearly suffers.

All VS need to do is address the training / monitoring of FSM's to make a big step in resolving this (very common) complaint about service.

Mat

lorelai, you are probably correct about how crucial the FSM is. But when a system relies entirely on the proficiency of one individual, and yet seems unable to check the actual performance of that individual sufficiently well or frequently, then it becomes a problem with the company, its training and its ongoing QA. Things should not be allowed to collapse, time and time again, just because a few disillusioned or unprofessional chancers are given the freedom to be incompetent ad infinitum.

And slinky, you are probably correct that I should complain, but I don't know if I can be bothered. So many other people before me have complained, and yet nothing is ever done about it. I resent complaining to an organisation where the Customer Service side is clearly divorced and firewalled from the operations side such that any complaint will never be able to achieve a systemic improvement.

If I thought that my complaint could help to a root-and-branch improvement, I would do it. If I thought it'd merely result in corporatese and the flippant throwing of miles my way - well, to be honest, I can't be bothered

I agree with you - obviously the FSM needs to set a standard, but I imagine it's something more deeply routed that instigates these inconsistencies, such as training as you mentioned.

Originally posted by frangipan
... slinky, you are probably correct that I should complain, but I don't know if I can be bothered. So many other people before me have complained, and yet nothing is ever done about it

VS does accept complaint and comments on particular flights and individual staff are monitored by team managers. I encourage you to do so - just as I encourage you too for a good flight.

Originally posted by slinky09

VS does accept complaint and comments on particular flights and individual staff are monitored by team managers. I encourage you to do so - just as I encourage you too for a good flight.

Indeed, I'd strongly support this. In the end, especially when there are detailed, specific things to comment on, you should do so. It is very difficult to achieve consistency, and overall standards, in a business like Virgin's, and it is especially so when their customer facing staff are always relatively young, and don't work together all the time. In my mind, they have a difficult task, and our feedback is in fact critical.

With the juggling act these businesses are currently performing, we are likely to see difficult employee decisions on the part of Virgin, and they won't know the impact of these unless we are very vocal about it. Not just here, but directly with VS. In effect, you are the check and balance. Boss is not around, if the FSM is slack, and they are as likely as not to take the chance that no one will much complain. After all, your brother was on a night flight? He might have slept through the whole thing.

So, let them know. They need to know, or the checks and balances go out of the window. Remember, they hand out survey forms on a lot of flights, which get locked in a specific cart at the end of the flight, and the cart sealed IIRC. That is one check and balance. Any other feedback we provide can only help.

Comments from others have indeed hit the nail on the head you paid for a service and did not get it. Your totally in your right to put pen to paper to tell Virgin that they are letting there customers down on their product.

Last Jan i flew UC for the first time with my reward points and like your brother on the outbound flight received service beyond what i expected, even to the FA clipping my seatbelt whilst i was asleep. Next month i have paid for the UC so if the service changes i will be airing my veiws quite vocally(normally addressed straight to SRB).

Jurgen and Sue

Some excellent posts on this thread!

It does seem that monitoring is somewhat lax and FSM performance is noticeably variable. Many of us have seen and reported it.

Airlines are going through a period of threat - this includes management. Just look at the recent BA situation - 450 'managers' becoming redundant. This is not only BA - Virgin also will review management. How they react to that threat during the process can be critical to performance. Unfortunately with processes such as voluntary redundancy many of the best can, and do, go.

One of the advantages the Virgin has is closer links with their passengers. We must both (Virgin and its passengers) accept some responsibility for monitoring. I believe that VS senior management regularly read comments on VF (although it would be nice to get an occasional confirmation of that!) but while posts such as the above are valuable, to deal with specific problems they do need specific detail.

I believe that it is important that we do write and give that detail when issues arise and also whenever we get particularly good service. If we don't - we deserve the inconsistency we will get. We are part of that monitoring process.

Hi Frangipan, I really cringe every time I hear a report like this. This kind of incident is totally unacceptable and I really am appalled at the crews' behaviour.
Unfortunatley guys it's not down to the training, we all receive the same training, but as you say most of our crew are great but sadly a few are not so great. Our training really focuses on service and we all know what tough times we are facing at the moment, but a minority are obviously not as bothered as others.
As an FSM there is no way that I would allow positoining crew to sit at or monopolise the bar. Crew who are positioning should sit in their seats and keep a low profile. The J pax should ALWAYS take priority. The FSM on this flight should have reminded the postioning crew to go back to their seats and ensured that the working crew were doing just that - WORKING!
The only way things will change is if these slack FSMs are reported to the company and then held to account. I'm really sorry your brother had such a bad experience, hopefully he'll be on one of my flights next time!

This really bothers me as we are taking our first UC flight next month. We've paid a fair amount for this and have been looking forward to it with great excitment. We have 2 more booked in the next 10 months.

Can you experienced UC travellers estimate what proportion of flights tend to have poor service and does it tend to be on the return rather than the outward sectors?

Virginboy 747, Thank you for your comments. They just highlight that the likes of you and i must comment on a guy called ** **** who very attentivly served my wife during our last reward flight are such a credit to VS and compliment our start to a well earned holiday.

It is a shame Frangipans brother never had that level of service we had and to be honest we were blown away by the due care and attention we received well done all the FSMs and FA's who show the drive and commitment that VS once held first and foremost but now in certain areas have allowed to laspe. Certainly from me Virginboy 747 i hope your on my flight next month.

Jurgen and Sue

Virginboy747, you are exactly the sort of person that Virgin need on their team, and I hope your value is recognised. Certainly, if I experienced your level of service on a flight I took, I would send a complimentary letter to Virgin recommending they double your pay

The problem is a little bigger than the 'few bad apples' theory, I think. It's that bad apples, through tacit intimidation and peer pressure, can make other apples temporarily bad as well.

I'm sure there are many of us here who have behaved badly in a group of friends and then later, on reflection, have felt shame and incomprehension at our lapse. Many studies have shown conclusively that group dynamics can make normally good, responsible people deteriorate into a bunch of mindless chancers. I suspect this is what is happening here. Think of it this way:

A group of young, possibly tired, crew board a return flight. The load's not extensive, so they tell themselves that this is going to be an easy flight and that they can relax a bit. Their number is bostered by off-duty crew, with whom they wish to bond. Then a passenger in 2A annoys them by being a bit brusque, and they feel even less psychologically inclined to go through the motions. Then they talk about what they were doing whilst they were in New York. The stories are entertaining and affirming of the group. Perhaps, after a while, one of the crew in this group feels a little guilty that they should be checking up on their passengers, but doesn't want to mention it, because by now the group dynamic is so strong that this would be an awkward betrayal of the 'psychological solidarity'. The FSM sees it's happening but convinces him/herself that it's just a temporary blip and ignores it. The FSM does this because, psychologically, he or she doesn't want to opprobrium of breaking the strong group dynamic that has formed. In a tribal sense, if the FSM had not been involved in the group, he or she would be a 'hostile outsider' attacking a cohesive social unit, which is a difficult thing to do as social mammals! If the FSM were already in the group, then he or she would have to alienate him or herself from within the group by breaking it up.

On paper, these sound like trivial concerns, and the tempting response is 'buck up and do your job!', but we've all been there and know how significant group dynamics can seem at the time, especially in an isolated and constricted context. And, let's be honest, there are few places more isolated and constricted than in a metal tube miles above the ground.

The point of this, I think, is to note that it's not just the bad apples, but normal people who react as you would expect them to react through group dynamics when there's nobody to nip the behaviour in the bud early. Even some good FSMs might feel unable to deal with the issue after it had gone on too long. It needs someone sufficiently conscious to realise 'hold on, these are good guys, but if they continue like this, a group-dynamic is going to form, and it'll be tough to break it up. So let's get the procedures/systems going now before that happens'.

Perhaps FSMs need to be trained to watch out for such things, and to react to them calmly: ie, the people who crystalise these groups are just normal humans, not evil malcontents, but normal humans who, sadly, have to restrain their normal human social urges for a few hours.

Thanks for your comments Frangipan. I think any FSM who is doing their job properly would ensure that the crew are out in their aisles taking care of their pax. To expect a J pax to get their own drink is TOTALLY unacceptable.
I have had situations like this where crew are congregated and just chatting, and you just politely remind them that the cabin needs patrolling and that they shouldn't be grouped at the bar.
You're right it all comes down to how you manage people. There are ways and means to get your crew motivated, without having to be harsh and severe. I usually find that leading by example is the best way. If the crew see me out doing drinks rounds and checking on the pax then they are more inclined to keep thmselves busy.
Once again i have to say that that whole situation was down to the FSM either not being bothered about the passengers or too timid to interupt the conversation. If this is the case then they really shouldn't be in the postion of FSM, they're just undermining all the good work that the rest of us do.
Hi Jfenney, I know ****, I flew with him a couple of flights ago to Lagos, he is a really nice guy and a hard-worker. I'm sure he'd be really pleased to know that his efforts dont go unnoticed.

[Darren Wheeler]

As an aside...

Can I remind everyone that crew members names must not be used unless they have given their express permission to have them used, as per site rules. If they have, the post should indicate that.

[Decker]

Modded both posts per Darren's point [:)]

apoligies

There is a simple way around this, make sure positioning staff are only seated in PE at best and start upgrading paying passengers that they displace! If there is a chance to take the P**s then human nature takes over and some people take it to extremes.

By all means VS should look after their staff but surely not to the detriment of their paying passengers.

Originally posted by gilly
Can you experienced UC travellers estimate what proportion of flights tend to have poor service and does it tend to be on the return rather than the outward sectors?

Gilly, let us try to retain proportion here. Although this was a particularly bad experience for the OP's family it is not atypical. Certainly in my 30 odd flights this year I haven't experienced anything as severe.

Take a look at the TRs and do a sense check, bearing in mind that people correspond on negatives more frequently than positives, even here I think that holds true with such a group of experienced Virgin fliers!

Originally posted by wanderingmariner
There is a simple way around this, make sure positioning staff are only seated in PE at best and start upgrading paying passengers that they displace! If there is a chance to take the P**s then human nature takes over and some people take it to extremes.

By all means VS should look after their staff but surely not to the detriment of their paying passengers.

I agree with your last sentence and believe that is firmly VS policy in the case of staff upgrades or UC seats. While these reports may seem frequent, they probably represent a very small minority of Virgin flights and it is right the customers should correspond if their experience suffers.

Most airlines would place staff in J/F when on duty travel, on a space available basis.

Perhaps the main problem with VS is the bar & it's attraction to certain people. When i've flown on VS just been happy to sleep or watch a movie, but have seen staff members or their family kicking the a#*e out of the bar!!!!

Maybe they should just classify the bar as staff-only

[HighFlyer]

Thanks for your input, virginboy747.

Having recently completed a flight where travelling staffers had spent the vast majority of the flight drinking at the bar and having also previously received a similar sort of return flight as frangipan it is reassuring to read your thoughts. I have no issues with travelling staff enjoying the flight but I do wish there were clearer expectations so that paying passengers never have to feel awkward or ignored when onboard a J cabin. That really isnt good enough and i'd like to think that any good FSM would heartily agree.

Thanks,
Sarah

Originally posted by HighFlyer
Thanks for your input, virginboy747.

Having recently completed a flight where travelling staffers had spent the vast majority of the flight drinking at the bar and having also previously received a similar sort of return flight as frangipan it is reassuring to read your thoughts. I have no issues with travelling staff enjoying the flight but I do wish there were clearer expectations so that paying passengers never have to feel awkward or ignored when onboard a J cabin. That really isnt good enough and i'd like to think that any good FSM would heartily agree.

Thanks,
Sarah

I'd say this is the last word on the topic. As ever, Her Grace has strolled majestically down a clear path of logic and balance.

GJ

Sorry GJ, I don't see that as the last word...
It is now a recurrent theme.
It is also a concern that it seems to be able to happen with impunity. Records are clearly available to senior management so if complaints come in, the issue can be dealt with

Also becoming noticeable on other sites such as this.
What incentive is there for the staff who give that extra service which gains VS a high rating when a few can cause so much damage?

It is not something that either passengers or VS senior management can ignore or try to sweep under the table.
We must recognise that, in the current climate, airlines are under threat. Bad PR, even if it does just relate to a few flights, can be serious for us all. Some of the recent reports such as the above and the Martinique incident could easily be picked up by the journos. and media. See the damage done to BA by programmes such as the recent Ch4 effort.
We don't want to see VS attracting such attention and unfortunately, like BA, VS enjoys a historical reputation that the media would love to attack.