Several days ago, I blogged about the decision of EasyJet (the British, low-cost air carrier) to eliminate its check-in counters, by requiring that passengers obtain their boarding passes solely on their home computers and printers. I also speculated that this first step in doing away with human contact at the airports, might be followed by the airlines' doing away with gate attendants, the people who actually allow you to board the plane.
Immediately, reader Donna Cuervo (well known to readers of responses to this blog) wrote an impassioned comment about the crucial role played by such gate attendants or "agents". Her essay is so very detailed and authoritative (Donna is herself, presently, a flight attendant) that I have felt it deserves greater prominence; it reflects such direct knowledge about aviation by Donna that it could be made the basis for a much more substantial discussion (possibly in book form). Here it is:
"The job of the Gate Agent involves a lot more than just checking people in. They have a lot of the responsibility for getting the plane out on time. They drive the jetbridge to the doorway of the plane, open the door on arriving flights, arrange for preordered wheelchairs to be where they need to be, prevent oversized bags from being taken onboard, participate in identifying hazardous materials and prevent them from getting on the plane, make public address announcements about delays, gate changes and other information (sometimes in two languages), identify people who are exit row qualified or not, sell premium seats, and make last minute seating changes for families to sit together and disabled people to have appropriate seating. This is all done in a rushed, high stress environment with a lot of pressure to get the plane out on time.
"Gate Agents provide pilots and flight attendants with detailed paperwork that is consulted throughout the flight. It is provided both at the beginning of the boarding process and finally before the door is closed. They come onboard to resolve seat duplication problems and other seating issues. They coordinate with provisioning about bathroom supplies, food and drink items and other service items that may have been left off the plane or need to be replaced - often having to carry the heavy items on themselves. They keep flight attendants advised on time remaining before departure and close the aircraft door when everything is done. On many arriving flights, the Gate Agents have to empty the trash and help clean the plane. While doing all this, they are constantly approached at their podiums by a stream of customers many of whom are obnoxious, make unreasonable demands or have stupid questions that could have been answered by listening to the announcements or reading the board. Gate Agents have to be skilled at using a computer, learning the airline's computer programs as well as other equipment, and they must have a high level of skill in dealing with the public.
"For all this they receive a starting salary of $9 an hour. I think the airlines are getting a good deal from these people, and I can't imagine how an airline would function well without what they do on a daily basis. I wouldn't want their job, although it is a good entry level position for somebody who wants to advance in the airline business. It provides good experience, and many Gate Agents move into Flight Attendant or Administrative office positions."
So, how about it, Donna Cuervo? Is there a book in the offing?
Both the union of flight attendants, and the union of federal air marshals, seem to be waging a powerful campaign against the TSA's proposed weakening of its security regulations to permit pocket knives to be carried aboard airplanes. It was recently pointed out by the president of the flight attendants' union that the September 11 hijackers took control of aircraft with box cutters having blades smaller than the pocket knives that the T.S.A. would now permit. Whether or not those pocket knives could now enable future hijackers to break through the doors of the airplanes' cockits, they could apparently cause severe injury to the attendants and passengers against whom they are used.
I find that argument compelling, and am puzzled as to why the TSA has proposed such revisions to its regulations. The claim that the new rules would bring us into sync with European regulations seems unconvincing; the Europeans' record of aviation safety--the ease with which they allowed the "shoe-bomber" and the "underwear bomber" onto planes--does not inspire confidence.
I plan to mail my own opposition to the new rules to the TSA, and feel that readers of this blog might want their own views to be known.
Accusations by Members of the Muslim Brotherhood Against Women Who Participate in Political Protests, Should Put a Decisive End to Western Tourism to Egypt
The recent, much-publicized physical abuse of women in Egypt, resulting in a great many instances of gang rapes, is itself a worrisome development that should concern women planning a touristic visit to Egypt. But far worse are the recent excuses for such attacks by members of the political party that now holds power in Egypt. In an astonishing recent article in The New York Times, prominent members of the political party headed by Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, have been quoted as attributing such attacks to the participation in political protests by Egyptian women. They blame the women who have been raped for not staying safely at home.
The Times quoted Reda Saleh Al al-Hefnawi, a legislator member of the Muslim Brotherhood, as saying "How do they [women] ask the Ministry of Interior to protect a woman when she stands among men?"
As long as such viewpoints are common in Egypt, and are not vigorously opposed by other members of the current Egyptian government led by the Muslim Brotherhood, there seems a clear answer to the question of whether western women should visit Egypt. Though one or two members of the leading party, including one of its rare woman members, have spoken out in protest, the prevailing silence by most others in that party serves as a major reason to warn women against Egyptian tourism. Perhaps in solidarity with these outrageous viewpoints blaming women for the attacks they have sustained, the Egyptian police have been largely inactive in protecting women against rape by crowds of men congregating for political meetings.
Several months ago, I reported with great sorrow my own increasing realization that Egypt was not currently safe for tourism. My judgment on that matter has now been confirmed by uncontradicted news reports. If there is anyone among our readers who has contrary evidence, I'd very much appreciate hearing from them.
I think it's a significant development. EasyJet, the British budget air carrier, has announced that, like its rival Ryanair, it will no longer employ people to issue your boarding pass or otherwise attend to your pre-boarding needs. Except for an "emergency facility" that it says it will maintain for luddites who fail to obtain a boarding pass from their computer and printer at home (and it makes that promise somewhat ambiguously), it will stop employing a human being to check you in (there will be a single, separate area for depositing your luggage, with a luggage tag that you will have printed at home).
Already, Ryanair enforces its own ban against the check-in process overseen by a human being, by charging a stiff, 60-Euro per person penalty on passengers who fail to print out their boarding pass at home. It's obvious that eventually, EasyJet will assess the same kind of penalty. So in practice, everyone checking in for many different flights will simply drop their suitcase, if they have one, into a luggage receptacle, and then proceed--unattended--to the gate, never having encountered an airline employee.
The savings are so obvious that the adoption of similar practices by airlines around the world, including the U.S., seems inevitable. In fact, someone will undoubtedly create a self-service machine for easily scanning your boarding pass at the gate and thus being permitted to walk onto the plane. The entire process, from arrival at the airport to taking your seat inside the airplane, will be handled without the intervention of humans.
And what will happen to the unfortunate soul who doesn't quite comply with computer-operated procedures? Who shows up at the airport without properly creating boarding pass and luggage tag? "Tough luck", will be the response of the airlines. In fact, one poor British passenger traveling with her family of three others in Spain, had to pay a stiff, 240-Euro penalty to Ryanair for failing to print out her boarding pass in advance. When she protested that she had no access on vacation to either a laptop or printer, Ryanair responded that she could have demanded that the hotel front desk perform this function for her. And when she answered that she was staying with her family at a farmhouse that didn't possess such equipment, the President of Ryanair called her an "idiot".
So there it is--progress. We will someday look back fondly on the time when a smiling airline attendant greeted you from behind a check-in counter.
Because Great Britain is regarded by Americans as the most important trans-Atlantic destination, it behooves us all to stay current with touristic developments there, both for the purpose of recommending visits by others, or for affecting our own vacation plans. And among those developments, the British are claiming that the ability of tourists to visit, and even use, some of the facilities that were built for the London Olympics of 2012 is a new and potent reason for a visit.
Starting July 27, the one-year anniversary of the start of the 2012 Olympics, the British will open the Queen Elizabeth Olympics Park, which they claim will be the world's largest new park. It's an area of London that encompasses most of the major stadiums and other sports arenas (including the structures housing giant swimming pools), of which most will now be open to visits by the public (imagine yourself sprinting around the quarter-mile track used by long-distance Olympics competitors). In fact, if I understand correctly a recent statement by a spokesperson of VisitBritain (official government tourist office of Great Britain), it will now even be possible for members of the public to splash away in the famous Olympics-size swimming pools of those 2012 games.
Visitors will be able to arrange their own direct visits to the Olympics Park, or they will be able to sign up for commercial visits offered by tour operators as part of their standard half-day or full-day tours of London.
Another major London attraction--the London Shard--is already open to the public and has been admitting visitors since February of this year (several million persons a year are expected to visit it).
And what is the London Shard? It's an immense skyscraper of unprecedented height for Britain, which got that name in the many violent attacks upon the decision to build it several years ago, when opponents claimed it would resemble a glass Shard--they meant this negatively, and feared a disturbing architectural interference with the traditional look of London. Sponsors of the project thereupon adopted the name "Shard" as a positive term to explain what they were building.
The London Shard is now the tallest building in the European Union, an Empire State-like structure 95 stories high, its surface almost totally of glass, and located near London Bridge, in what might be considered the heart of London. Designed by famous Italian architect, Renzo Piano, it now towers over London in the same way that the Empire State Building hovers over Manhattan. And it has a four-story high observation platform on its 72nd floor, from which visitors will have a hitherto-unavailable view extending for many miles around London. I've heard one claim that you'll actually be able to see Oxford from the London Shard, but haven't been able to confirm that possibly-overambitious assertion.
Admission to the observation platform of The London Shard will be the equivalent of $35, but despite that high tab, the building's owners are expecting visits by millions of residents and tourists. And London tourist officials are hoping that the Shard will now become an outstanding attraction of the city, in the same way that the Empire State Building is often regarded as the most important and popular sight to visit in New York.
How can you best prepare for a visit to Britain? In a recent meeting I had with the marketing director of VisitBritain, it was stressed that one of that organization's most potent aids to visitors is its special website called VisitBritainShop.com. There, the British tourist office offers substantial discounts to persons who make advance purchases of some of the transportation schemes--like the London Oyster Card enabling multiple London subway trips for less--and admission tickets to important attractions. Though some of these devices can also be purchased at the various London airports on arrival, purchasing them in advance through VisitBritainShop.com permits you to avoid the long lines that sometimes form at the airport shops selling them, in addition to saving you money. Another related website, VisitBritain.com (without the word "shop") supplies general information on travel to Britain, as does the website of British Airways, BA.com, which supplements its sale of air tickets with that advice. Consulting all three websites in advance of your trip may prove highly advantageous.
There's been additional evidence that Carnival Cruises is taking serious and expensive steps to refit its older ships with back-up electrical generators. But because the first ship to have that makeover has a totally new name, the fact that it is one of the elderly vessels has been obscured from public view.
It was announced this week that the Carnival Sunshine (a name never before seen in cruising) would not embark on a risky trans-Atlantic sailing to the Mediterranean, but would stay in drydock for several weeks to have this additional safety equipment installed. That announcement made it look like the newer ships in the Carnival fleet were in need of redundancy safeguards.
The fact is that the Carnival Sunshine is not a new ship, but one that was launched in 1996--seventeen years ago--as the "Carnival Destiny". It was undoubtedly a ship with only one set of electrical generators. And although it had already been in drydock for various cosmetic improvements that would see it emerge as the "Carnival Sunshine", the Destiny was undoubtedly designed in the former--and now discredited--fashion as far as safety features were concerned.
Carnival has now realized, apparently, that it is too risky to send such a ship on a trans-Atlantic sailing. Suppose it lost electrical power in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean?
So there you have it. Faced with the possibility that another tragedy (like the four that Carnival has encountered in the last three years) would have a devastating impact on the willingness of the public to hazard a cruise on a Carnival ship, Carnival has cancelled the immediate trans-Atlantic crossing of the Sunshine (née Destiny) in order to bring it into the modern world of safety.
In a blog of several days ago, I said it was "ironic" that Carnival may now become the safest cruiseship line, because of the grave problems it has recently had. We are still only hearing a total silence on the subject from other cruiselines. Is Royal Caribbean outfitting its older ships with a second set of generators? No one, as far a I know, is aware of what it is doing. How about MSC cruises? Though their fleet is relatively modern, does it possess redundancy in terms of generating electrical power? Not a word, apparently, from them. How about Celebrity Cruises, a subsidiary of Royal Caribbean? Though several of its ships are very new, and thus presumably have back-up generators, how about the older vessels of Celebrity Cruises? Don't they owe us a statement?
I believe passengers about to sail aboard Royal Caribbean, Celebrity and MSC ships should be told what those lines are planning, in terms of a shutdown of electrical power while the ship is afloat. Meanwhile, until they open up, it appears that a Carnival cruise may be the safe way to go.
Almost twenty years ago, when a great many women still felt they could not engage in far-ranging foreign travels, Marybeth Bond published the first edition of Gutsy Women, claiming the opposite. In nearly 200 pages, she told of her own adventures in the colorful world of travel, and supplied scores of extremely practical suggestions for the female traveler, in addition to the names of travel companies that specialize in the organization of trips for women.
But her book was more than a "how to" guide. It was a deeply felt, colorfully narrated, intensely personal memoir of her experiences, her reactions, her optimism and her occasional fears. In the hands of a woman contemplating a trip to anywhere, it became an indispensable read, a marvelous travel companion for the woman making a gutsy trip to a foreign place. It was, in fact, a minor classic of its kind, a book that stood out among the several written, in whole or part, for female travelers.
Although Bond had herself, at the age of 29, spent two years traveling around the world completely by herself, without a travel companion other than friends joining her for short stretches of time, she does not necessarily advocate solo travel, although she believes that many women will enjoy such a trip. But her main emphasis is on travel with a companion -- either another woman, a parent, child or relative, or even in a group of women. In supplying rules and preparations for such a trip, she is joined in this fourth edition by many of her readers who have contributed pithy bits of by-lined advice that she highlights on nearly every page of the book. Gutsy Women is thus a collaboration between Bond and her female followers.
Equally important, and beyond the tips and suggestions in Gutsy Women, Bond contributes memoirs of outstanding moments from her own travels, colorfully illustrating how she, a woman, benefited from and found her life enlarged by the experience of travel.
I first met Marybeth Bond almost at the start of her writing career. I then chanced upon her at last month's Los Angeles Times Travel Show, when she alerted me to the publication of this fourth edition, and even provided a copy for me to read on the flight back to New York. Gutsy Women, by Marybeth Bond, is found in most major bookstores, as well as from such internet booksellers as Amazon or Barnes & Noble, and it is also available in a Kindle edition. It is, in my view, a valuable book for any woman thinking about an extensive trip.
Despite all the economic ills that segments of our population suffer, Americans continue to travel -- heavily, enthusiastically, and to ever-more exotic and remote locations. They also continue to pursue careers in the travel industry. How do I know? I know it from the questions I receive by e-mail from a surprising number of readers. Here's a sampling:
Q. How can I escape my current present job and become a tour guide, traveling all over the world?
A. One way is to sign up for courses with the International Tour Management Institute in San Francisco (travel@itmisf.com or 800/442-4864 for information), which has an impressive record of placing its graduates with leading tour operators. But don't expect to earn anywhere near your present income from that boring current job.
Q. We'll be going to Tunisia, and look forward to exploring the less-heavily-populated areas of that country, like its southern desert. Any recommendations?
A. Are you kidding? While our State Department does not issue an unqualified ban on travel to Tunisia, it lists serious warnings, especially in the non-touristic areas located in the interior. Consult the State Department's advisories (www.travel.state.gov/travel) before you visit any iffy country. The same advice is given to a reader who is seriously considering a trip to Mali. I wouldn't.
Q. A dozen of us are planning a family reunion trip to Ireland. How can we best obtain the lowest airfares?
A. Make your reservations one at a time -- and not by asking for twelve tickets all at once. In that manner, some of you may obtain the few heavily-discounted seats aboard the flight you have chosen, and the cost for the entire group will be averaged out to a lower level.
Q. My fiancee and I are planning to be married in Rome on the day after our arrival there, and then to travel within the rest of Italy. Can you name a Presbyterian Church in Rome where we might have this done?
A. Rome is no Las Vegas. It doesn't issue marriage licenses on the spot to a newly arrived visitor (as they do in Vegas). Nearly all European countries and cities have severe residence requirements, and usually specify a lengthy stay before the knot can be tied.
Q. Can you name a tour operator offering a group visit that starts in Poland (Warsaw and Kracow), then goes to Germany (Regensburg), and finally takes in Paris and the D-Day beaches?
A. There's none. Tour operators offer logical itineraries of the sort that are requested by a multitude of people. You'd best make your own independent arrangements, using a travel agent.
Q. We plan to visit Berlin, then spend the rest of our stay in Paris. I'd like to fly between the two cities, my husband prefers taking the train. Which?
A. It's a matter of taste. If your husband feels strongly that a train trip between Berlin and Paris is itself an important viewing experience, then the train it should be. But point out to him that such a trip requires at least 13 hours.
Q. We wish to study Spanish in Costa Rica, and have heard of a language school there. Do you know anything about it [and here the reader names the school]?
A. No. What you do in such instances is ask for references from the school -- the names and phone numbers of other Americans who have studied there. You take the same precautions as if you were choosing a dentist or an accountant. You ask for references.
Q. On our forthcoming Alaskan cruise stopping in Skagway, we'd like to rent a car for a day trip into the Yukon. Does that work?
A. Probably not. The average cruise ship, on a port stop, disembarks passengers around 9 or 10 A.M. and then leaves the port to sail elsewhere at 4 p.m. The process of picking up a rented car (much paperwork) and then handing it back, leaves you with little time for roaming, and the roads going inland from Skagway are undoubtedly minor ones of short distance, in any event.
Q. Ever heard of a travel agency for Russian travel called "Travel All Russia"?
A. No. Ask for references before using them.
Q. We are five sisters planning an extensive trip through Great Britain. Where can we stay cheaply?
A. Look up the many scattered properties belonging to the Travelodge chain, or alternatively the Premier chain, most of them modern hotels with very inexpensive (for Britain) rates.
Q. In view of the several recent problems aboard cruise ships that have lost their electrical power, how can I best select an upcoming cruise?
A. It appears that the newer ships, those built within the past four or five years, are usually equipped with dual sets of generators located in different sections of the ship. I'd favor those ships in choosing a cruise. I'd also pose questions about whether particular older ships have been subsequently equipped with back-up generators or their equivalent, which one of the large cruise lines has publicly announced it will do. If they do, I would think their ships are now acceptably safe.
Ironically enough, it may be that Carnival Cruise passengers may enjoy greater safety than the passengers on other cruise lines in the immediate months ahead. That's because Carnival's management, frantic over a series of power-outages or failures that so bedeviled the lives of passengers these past two weeks, are apparently taking emergency measures to equip their ships with back-up power sources. According to a conference call by Carnival to various financial analysts, made more specific to Gene Sloan, cruise editor of USAToday, Carnival will spend "tens of millions of dollars" in immediately upgrading the electrical connections from one set of generators to another on its ships needing such improvements.
By way of explanation: the newest cruise ships -- those built, say, within the last several years -- apparently have redundancy in their electrical generators, according to recent reports. Older ships sometimes do, and sometimes don't, possess such back-up facilities. Older ships in the Carnival fleet will be equipped with substitute sources, or access to substitute sources via more powerful and protected power cables, as a result of the considerable immediate expenditures that Carnival executives have promised.
"We expect to make an announcement early next week on the initial steps of our implementation program…," said a formal statement issued by Carnival. By "implementation program," they mean the physical upgrades that will be made to existing electrical equipment.
And what will now happen to older ships of other cruiselines? There's been silence, complete silence, on the part of the other companies. Whether they are taking similar steps to insure the availability of back-up programs if one source of power should go dead, is simply not known.
If I were a passenger scheduled to sail in the weeks ahead, I would pose some urgent questions to the company whose ship I have chosen. I would demand to know whether the ship in question has back-up generators far removed from the main generators. And if such companies should refuse to provide that information, then I would demand the right to cancel without penalty and to make a similar cruise booking on another line.
First it was the 2,000-passenger Carnival Splendor in 2010. It had an "engine fire" off the coast of San Diego and had to cut short its scheduled voyage.
Then it was the Carnival Triumph last month, losing electrical power in the Gulf of Mexico and leaving 4,000 passengers without all the accustomed amenities of cruising (toilets, elevators). They were stuck onboard, in harrowing conditions, for five days.
Yesterday, it was the Carnival Dream that lost some power while the ship was docked in Philipsburg, St. Maarten. So it is no longer sailing, and all its 4,000 passengers are awaiting chartered airplanes to fly them home.
Today, as unbelievable as it may seem, the Carnival Legend has suffered from diminished sailing speed because of a mechanical problem, and is unable to make a scheduled stop in Grand Cayman. So it is slowly making its way back to Tampa, and passengers will receive a proportional refund.
What's with Carnival? A lot of people will be asking whether it has cut corners in the design, manufacturing, or maintenance of its ships. But one point remains crystal clear: It is vital that back-up generators be installed in all cruise ships, so that passengers in the future do not find themselves adrift in the middle of the Atlantic Ocean, or some other vast sea. How can a ship embark on a lengthy voyage without reliable redundancy in the generation of its electrical power? And should ships be compelled to reveal, in public statements, whether their power-generating features are sufficient to overcome disastrous problems? Then passengers could intelligently decide whether to book aboard the deficient ships.
