LETTER: "I take accountability for Aurigny"

Thursday 24 February 2022

The Chief Executive of Aurigny, Nico Bezuidenhout, has written to 25 passengers in reply to their complaints about "a litany of unbelievable events" which disrupted their travel plans over two days last weekend.

The group was scheduled to fly from Guernsey to Birmingham last Friday, 18 February. They ended up taking a bus to Birmingham the following day after being flown to London Gatwick. They complained to Mr Bezuidenhout of appalling customer service.

You can read their letter HERE.

Mr Bezuidenhout has replied to the passengers and his letter is reproduced below. 

Dear Mr and Mrs Duff, and fellow Passengers,

Thank you for allowing me the time to revert to your letter of yesterday.

From the outset I offer my sincere apologies for the service you had received and for the experience overall – whilst various factors, both inside and outside the control of Aurigny, played a role, I take accountability on behalf of the Company.  I accordingly provide the below narrative, not as excuse, but as explanation. 

I have undertaken a review of events on Friday 18 and Saturday 19 February 2022 and have found the following as background context:

• It is undeniable that weather played a major role and was the overriding contributor to flight disruptions over the weekend.  Storm Eunice has been the worst storm recorded in the UK since 1987, affecting all modes of transport.  By 13h00 on Friday 436 flights across the UK had been cancelled, the UK Meteorological Office had issued its rarely-used and highest-level Red weather warning, and airports closed in totality (e.g., London City) or partially (e.g., Heathrow diversions redirected to other ports).  On Saturday National Rail reported that rail services across most of England had remained affected, with numerous services not operating for the second day running – with the consequent shift from rail to coach, this had a bearing on the coach transfer service from Gatwick to Birmingham on Saturday, 19th February. 
• The effect of flight cancelations, delays, diversions, and closure of airports was system-wide and across all carriers.  The high wind conditions caused damage to airport infrastructure in Guernsey, damaged one of our aircraft doors, and necessitated periodic suspension of loading procedures which resulted in further delays.  The network-wide delays caused aircraft to be continuously reassigned throughout the day to minimise schedule disruptions to the extent possible, and by the end of the day a number of aircraft were out of position (e.g., at airports other than where originally scheduled).  Aurigny was unable to return two aircraft back to its base by Friday midnight, which then affected outbound services from Guernsey on Saturday morning.
• Aurigny’s scheduled flight activity for the 18th was greater than normal, being the start of the mid-term break, as well as catering for a flight to Geneva and a charter operation between Dublin and Cardiff.  When planning the schedule, months ahead, we could not have anticipated the weather conditions that prevailed over the past weekend.

Turning to the specifics of the Birmingham flight, originally scheduled for departure at 17h10 on Friday, 18th February.  The flight was originally meant to be conducted by the aircraft returning from the Geneva flight, however, the Geneva flight had been delayed by weather conditions earlier in the day and would only return to Guernsey by 19h00.  At 14h50, 15h15 and 16h40 messages were posted on our Facebook page advising passengers that Birmingham flight was, at that point, expected to depart from Guernsey at approximately 19h30.  

In the interim, as it relates to the Manchester flight you mention (scheduled departure of 17h25), the aircraft that was meant to conduct this flight was delayed for five hours at Bristol airport due to weather conditions there.  A decision was accordingly taken to cancel the Manchester flight and re-route passengers across Gatwick, onward to Manchester on a coach service.  At the time that this decision was taken the intent remained to operate the Birmingham flight.

During the day on Friday the Embraer aircraft was conducting its scheduled Gatwick services, which were running materially behind schedule due to Gatwick restricting the number of hourly flights arriving/departing from Gatwick based on high wind conditions at this port.  Given that one ATR aircraft was delayed in Bristol due to weather, this left the ATR returning from Geneva and the last available ATR, returning to service from a maintenance check on that day, available to conduct the Birmingham service and the charter operation to Cardiff.

The flight returning from Geneva landed at 19h20 on Friday night and the aircraft undergoing routine maintenance was released for service by 19h50.  The inbound Geneva aircraft was assigned to the flight to Cardiff, originally scheduled to depart Guernsey at 13h30, and departed Guernsey at 20h30.  The second aircraft was assigned to the Birmingham flight originally scheduled for departure at 17h10, however, on dispatch the weather conditions at Birmingham had deteriorated such that the aircraft would not be able to land in Birmingham due to a defect in the aircraft’s anti-skid system.  This defect is not of relevance under normal operating conditions but does become so under icing conditions.  A decision was at this point taken to cancel the Birmingham flight and to schedule a new flight on Saturday morning, for which an airport slot at Birmingham was duly arranged.

On Saturday morning the two available aircraft in Guernsey were dispatched for the Southampton and Manchester services respectively, with the Southampton service to be followed by the rescheduled Birmingham flight.  Weather conditions in Southampton were such that the anti-skid defect posed no operational risk to the flight, whereas conditions at Manchester required the anti-skid system to be operative – this consideration accordingly dictated which aircraft was to be assigned to which route. 

By the time that the aircraft returned from its Southampton rotation on Saturday morning, weather conditions had deteriorated with hail being reported at Birmingham airport.  With weather conditions not improving, and in the interest of getting the Birmingham passengers to their destination, it was decided to redirect the flight to Gatwick, where runway conditions were better.    The flight arrived at 11h40 in Gatwick and the onward coach, given congestion caused by rail disruptions in the UK, arrived for the onward journey to Birmingham by approximately 13h00.  Since Gatwick Airport handled this flight as a diverted flight, the flight did not appear on the arrival boards at Gatwick and, as with all diverted flights, the passengers were processed through the international arrivals terminal.  

Based on the above I have a full appreciation for your, and your fellow passengers’, sentiment towards the travel experience had, and again, I sincerely apologise.  Whilst the extraordinary weather conditions and the consequences thereof, and an unforeseen technical challenge, was at the root of this unfortunate experience, there were things that Aurigny could have done better, including (but not necessarily limited to): 

• Communication: whilst public communication did occur, it is clear more and better communication should have taken place, albeit that the situation was dynamic and information fast-changing.  I can assure you that, to the extent that communication did take place, facts as they were known at the time were communicated as accurately as possible.
• Duty of Care and Compassion: I concur with your comments surrounding the provision of refreshments, considering the extended journey time involved and the exceptional circumstances that occurred. 
• Managerial visibility/access: I do understand your observation regarding access to operational management during times of disruption, and generally we strive to deliver this.  From late last year we have commenced a process where the Company’s executive management are scheduled for airport duty on a rotational basis, both to gain direct insights into our customers’ experience as well as to be off assistance to airport management during busy times.  Under the circumstances over the weekend, however, there were practical realities of network-wide disruptions and multiple delays that impacted on managerial visibility, and resource allocation was further exacerbated by pandemic-induced resource absenteeism within Aurigny, and within the workforces of its suppliers.  It is for this reason that Aurigny could not dedicate a resource to accompany the coach transfer from Gatwick to Birmingham, and why your arrival at Gatwick was not handled better. 
• Customer Service/Experience: I do take note of your commendation of some Aurigny staff, and whilst I sincerely regret your experience, I would like to add my appreciation to Aurigny’s employees who endeavoured to make the best of a bad situation.  As it relates to your observation regarding an improvement in customer service/experience, a process is underway to achieve exactly this, involving improved punctuality performance, a definition of the desired customer experience and supporting interventions to achieve this.               

Prior to the events of the weekend Aurigny commenced an initiative of reviewing its overall service disruption process, and a further and deeper analysis of your experience, which you kindly relayed in detail, will take place in the coming days - it is very likely that further shortcomings/areas of improvement will be identified.  

In conclusion, I recognise the service shortcomings evidenced in your experience, and unreservedly apologise for these, and we will be in further direct contact with you and each of your fellow passengers. 

Kind Regards,

Nico