As Arnaud Feist already said, trop is te veel.
![Rolling Eyes :roll:](./images/smilies/icon_rolleyes.gif)
Moderator: Latest news team
b720 wrote:Yes, I have friends stuck at the airport, waiting in line to process their "lost in strike"luggage papers..
amid total disinterest and no help whatsoever.. They landed at 08:50 and it is almost noon.. Way to go BRU!
I told them to avoid BRU, they didn't listen, and now they are convinced.
Failed state? Failed airport? I think we can reduce it further more, to "failed trade unions".Kris wrote:Belgium is for sure not a "failed state", bit I'm more and more afraid that we are evolving into a "failed airport"
That's for sure. But in the eyes of passengers, we're talking again about Brussels Airport, they don't care who's fault it is.Passenger wrote:Failed state? Failed airport? I think we can reduce it further more, to "failed trade unions".Kris wrote:Belgium is for sure not a "failed state", bit I'm more and more afraid that we are evolving into a "failed airport"
Yeah... and the Germans never strike, huh?evyncke wrote:After many flights from DUS (easy parking, easy control, ... but not too many destinations and about 10-15 minutes more driving -- at 160 km/h or more), I just returned for the first time to BRU last week. Lost 10 + 5 minutes for stupid/useless security checks and on the return my LH flight was delayed inbound due to this strike (LH preferred to remove the luggages from the cargo and ship them by truck :-O)...
I was able to get the German & English comments in the plane, not good!
At least those were announced. And then not all strike are equal. There were also strikes in AMS last month, for a whole 10 and 30 minutes! And announced in advance. The strikes at BRU stand out because of the number of different staff involved, their frequency and gross disregard to the interests of travelers.JAF737 wrote:Yeah... and the Germans never strike, huh?
Lufthansa never does either... huh?
I never wrote that LH (pilots especially) never strike, but, in BRU this is the norm nowadaysJAF737 wrote:[
Yeah... and the Germans never strike, huh?
Lufthansa never does either... huh?
Well I just can't wait for the day you'll decide to drive to Madrid to avoid loosing 15 minutes out of BRU.evyncke wrote:I never wrote that LH (pilots especially) never strike, but, in BRU this is the norm nowadaysJAF737 wrote:[
Yeah... and the Germans never strike, huh?
Lufthansa never does either... huh?
You can try to be funny, but all these strikes aren't funny at all. They are very annoying for passengers and they don't do the already tarnished reputation of BRU any good.JAF737 wrote:Well I just can't wait for the day you'll decide to drive to Madrid to avoid loosing 15 minutes out of BRU.
Drama queen is a kind word, actually.
Believe us, we do. But despite a lot of promises about better materials and more well trained staff, little has changed the last years. If anything, the handling companies are trying to make a profit on the workers backs.sn26567 wrote:Terrorists have shown that aiming at an airport can inflict have damage to the economy of a country with a minimal expense. And now e lot of people have understood the message, from baggage handlers to cabin cleaning people to air traffic controllers and even police unions. They have realised that striking at an airport is the best way to cause a permanent damage to the reputation of the airport and a heavy loss to the economy, and they know that their management will do the utmost to avert such strikes.
This is a poor mentality, because it pushes some people to look elsewhere for more security at airports in neighbouring countries, as we have seen in this thread and in the thread on the reopening of BRU after the attacks. And then the same striking workers will complain that they have lost their jobs in a deserted airport...
As BRU CEO Arnaud Feist has repeatedly said these last weeks, trop is te veel. All the airport community should try to use their neurones and look a little further than their immediate profits.
Here is what's wrong with the unions lover's twisted reality. Since when has that not been the case?? Does a company not NEED to make money in order to pay your wage? You can ALWAYS argue that they make money on the back of the workers as it is the workers labour that gives the company money which in turn allows it to pay your wage. No company in the world exists purely out of love for humanityflightlover wrote:If anything, the handling companies are trying to make a profit on the workers backs.
Sorry, but there is a difference between making a profit and making a profit on workers backs. It is all about how the workers are treated. There is nothing wrong with making a profit while providing decent materials and workable conditions.sean1982 wrote:Here is what's wrong with the unions lover's twisted reality. Since when has that not been the case?? Does a company not NEED to make money in order to pay your wage? You can ALWAYS argue that they make money on the back of the workers as it is the workers labour that gives the company money which in turn allows it to pay your wage. No company in the world exists purely out of love for humanityflightlover wrote:If anything, the handling companies are trying to make a profit on the workers backs.