Jumaat, 30 November 2012

Comments for Wee Choo Keong

Comments for Wee Choo Keong

Comment on AirAsia did not meet regulatory standard? by Adam Yahya (@mdnizamy)

Posted: 29 Nov 2012 11:56 PM PST

Malaysians… Complaint only know. Murah mau. Tapi itu salah ini salah. Beli kapal terbang sendiri la. lol.

Comment on Passengers are now able to claim compensation for delayed flights of more than 3 hours by Poseidon's Spear

Posted: 29 Nov 2012 11:35 PM PST

My apologies for the typo. Please ignore the last paragraph in my preceding post above.

Comment on Passengers are now able to claim compensation for delayed flights of more than 3 hours by Poseidon's Spear

Posted: 29 Nov 2012 11:32 PM PST

Av Joe

Yes, I am aware of the CCT ruling you had referred to.

As a fairly frequent traveller myself, such initiatives to protect passengers against unwarranted, unreasonable or untenable restraints on passengers’ rights is to be applauded.

We must be careful, however, that consumer and judicial activism does not result in unfair and onerous restrictions on the way that companies (airlines in this case) run their business.

Low-cost carriers have a different operational model and work under different constraints from “premium” full-service carriers.

To put it bluntly, it’s Pollyanna-ish to expect first world service at third world prices.

Why else would LCCs be flourishing (in most cases) and taking away traffic from the full-service carriers?

If passengers aren’t prepared to acknowledge these operational differences and accept these constraints, then they would be well advised to give their business to the “FSCs” and stay well clear of the LCCs.

Alas, for most of us, the contents of our bank accounts preclude us from partaking of such indulgences!

On a side note, I believe that most, if not all, of the airline check in desks at Changi Airport close 30-45 minutes before scheduled flight departures.

Alas, for most of us, the contents of our bank accounts prevent us from partaking of such ibdu

Comment on AirAsia did not meet regulatory standard? by Ronald

Posted: 29 Nov 2012 10:14 PM PST

Poseidon’s Spear

By all means make the profits but not hidden charges all over. check in at counter had to pay money. Airport taxes collected from untraveled passengers not refunded automatically. When asked for refund, high administrative charge imposed almost equivalent to airport tax itself. Etc etc etc.

By all means make the profit but passengers safety is of utmost importance. Therefore, DCA should have grounded it until all regulations have been met. Why the 6 months? If it is in UK, the Civil Aviation Authority would have grounded it.

It was not about race, it is about the modus operandi. If it was about race then Slumberjack would not have taken away 96 routes from MAS and gave them on a silver platter to it. Are you sure that the real person behind it is an Indian? AA would not have been given all the time in the world to hold on to the Airport Taxes collected from the passengers for so many years. When was pressured to settle, a discount of about 30% was given. Airport taxes belong to MAHB not to AA. AA is just a collecting agent like other airlines.

Please do your homework and you will no doubt find out the real position. May be you will because of the reason best known to you and the few others.

Comment on AirAsia did not meet regulatory standard? by Frequent Flyer

Posted: 29 Nov 2012 11:21 AM PST

Before the issue gets overboard, let’s clear the air a bit – it is actually a requirement of the aviation regulations that for every aircraft type registered in Malaysia, an officer of DCA is trained & qualifed on that particular aircraft type. This is to faciltate them in carrying out their duty & responsibility in overseeing the operation of these aircraft types in Malaysian airspace. This practise is not peculiar to Malaysia only but also practised in most of the countries around the world.These officers are responsible to ensure that the instructors, pilots and cabin crew of these aircrafts are trained & qualified in accordance to the required standards therefore how are they suppose to carry out this responsibility if they are not trained & qualifed on the aircraft type themselves? On top of their day to day duties as a DCA inspector, they are also required to study the aircraft systems, operating procedures, keep abreast with any new revisons to the procedures etc., just like their counterparts in the airline but all the while earning a Government salary which is in most cases a quarter of what their counterparts in the airline gets. They do get to claim for mileage to and fro the airport, parking charges & a hundred odd Ringgits perdiem for everyday they are away from home but that would hardly be enough for a decent meal in places like Europe, Japan or Australia. So what do they get out of this?….nothing much I assure you.

Touching on another issue asking why it is not ok for AirAsia to make a profit – I’m sure it is ok, not only for AirAsia but also for any business establishment anywhere.What is NOT ok is for these businesses to neglect their morale & social obligations to maximize their returns. What is NOT ok is for them to endanger my safety so that they could turn a profit. It is then up to the public to make an informed decision whether to continue patronizing such a business. So the questions beckon;

1) how bad is the safety standard of AirAsia? Do I need to redo my travel plans after the 31st March?

2) why are the mass media such as the Star not reporting this issue but would rather report the news of AirAsia possible purchase of an airline in India? That news might interest a handful of Malaysian but this news affect the livelyhood of the 10000 Malaysians that works for AirAsia & safety of the 30 odd millions of passengers that AirAsia claimed had carried.

3) Has AirAsia brought in the right people & fired the wrong ones as demanded by the authority or are they trying to b/s their way out of it?

I personally think it would not be wrong for YB to bring these questions up with the right authority or even bring it up in Parliament as it is not only of public interest but also public safety.

‘Now everybody can fly…but getting to your destination safely is not our business.’
Dicatat oleh di

Tiada ulasan:

Catat Ulasan

Langgan: Catat Ulasan (Atom)

Nuffnang