Earlier this week, Heathrow Airport informed airlines that they’d need to reduce the number of passengers they book through the airport for the next two months, because the airport simply doesn’t have the capacity to handle the increase in demand.
Continue reading: Emirates Rejects Heathrow’s Request To Cancel Flights (Update)
Share your questions, experiences, and thoughts below.
Wasn't Emirates already asked to reduce from 6 to 5 daily services and hadn't they agreed, a feww weeks ago? If so what Heathrow is asking is been more preposterous.
I agree with the Emirates statement 100 per cent. Its Heathrow's mismanagement.
Heathrow is indeed a hot mess, and it’s doubly irritating because their CEO has for months been a sort of rent-a-gob spokesman demanding the ending of many covid restrictions and the faster opening-up of travel.
Emirates is bang-on with their statement.
Equally, the other main European hub I mostly use — Schipol — is also a hot mess. For years they’ve traded on a reputation for easy connections which they no longer deserve.
KLM also seems to be a bit chaotic, with booked flights being seemingly randomly changed and 50 minute connections magically becoming 4 hour waits. (I’m cross with KLM anyway — they shout about all the action they’ve taken to protect passenger health, then they park their plane at a remote stand and cram everyone into a bus. 1.5 metre (5’) distance? You’re lucky if you’ve got even 0.3m (1’) separating you from another passenger breathing directly into your face.)
Emirates is absolutely right. Heathrow's mismanaged is to ne dealt by themselves. After such disasters to aviation everyone should welcome travelers and airlines and increase capacity. Emirates has always grown and has invested so much in its staff. Heathrow has done just the opposite. If Emirates managed LHR they would do better.
Failure to prepare on Heathrow’s part does not constitute an emergency on Emirates’ part.
It is strange how the management team gave the CEO of Heathrow a 26% Pay rise if they cannot plan ahead, it makes the Boris Johnson mess look like a minor incident. If the management sack the staff instead of putting them on furlow then expect everyone to come back at their call, it looks as if they could not even plan to go to the pub without a problem
Although I agree that LHR in one hand lobbied for a return to norm and lift all travel restrictions they should have been better prepared for that norm, however I feel sorry for the EK and other passengers once they land and we will see a return of last summers scenes of passengers having to remain on planes as the immigration halls were unable to cope with people waiting on some days 6 hours to get through. It will interesting watching this unfold over the next few hours and days.
You state that Heathrow formerly averaged 219K passengers a day. The articles and TV news that I have read/seen have all suggested that Heathrow would like to limit daily departures to 100K passengers. That figure does not include arrivals.
That does not sound like a 50% reduction to me.
I appreciate Emirates total response & stance as LHR & the UK in general is far too complacent & brazenly audacious as well when you consider the departure tax amount passengers have to pay to use this inefficient airport. Thanks Emirates as you are 100 per cent right.
@BenSchlappig The 80.9 million figure is passengers both arriving and departing, whereas the 101,500 figure is I think just for departing passengers (I might be wrong though). This would mean Heathrow is actually operating close to 90% of its daily average of 2019. Having said that, Heathrow was averaging 219,000 passengers a day across the whole year in 2019, and in the summer of 2019 I'm sure the daily passenger count was a lot higher than that.
Good on Emirates. Call it out for what it is. 70% of staff at LHR but can only cope with 40% of passengers. LHR management needs to be taken to task. Surprised none of the other airlines with significant slots - looking at you BA/Virgin have made their voices heard in the same manner. BA trying to cut loads a little thru emails yesterday indicating if passengers want to voluntarily change from now thru July 25 to any time in the next year, they can do it for free. LOL. Here it is in full
"Dear Customer,
We are getting in touch as you are due to travel with us on or before __________.
You may have seen in the news that airports across the world have imposed restrictions on the number of flights that airlines can operate. This week Heathrow Airport has set a passenger limit per day until September 2022. As a result, they have told us to adjust our flying schedule to reduce the number of customers using the airport this summer.
We understand that some customers may want to review their travel plans in light of the current travel challenges. We want to be as flexible as possible so that you can move your flights if you wish.
If you are due to travel between now and _________ and you wish to change your flights, we have introduced a policy that will allow you to easily change your travel dates via our website. This means you can rebook onto a British Airways operated service free of charge to any date within the next 12 months of your original date of travel, subject to availability.
You can do this simply by logging into your booking _______.
Alternatively, if you decide that you no longer wish to travel, you can request a voucher for the value of your booking and when you are ready to use your voucher to book new flights, you can do so online. The voucher will be valid for travel before the 30 September 2023.
To request a voucher, click ____
If you have booked via a travel agent, please contact them directly to discuss your options.
If your flight is part of a British Airways Holidays package, you can review your options ____
Thank you for your continued patience and understanding.
British Airways"
Perhaps the goal was simply to help some airlines cancel certain flights that were not profitable anyway. This would be giving the airline a free pass and might lead to a fair amount of cancelled flights with no stigma or reputational loss to the airline.
Airport: Traffic more than we can currentlyhandle, please slow down.
Emirates: Since the problem is your fault, we're gonna pretend there's no problem.
Poor, poor Emirates. I'm crying for you. Follow the emergency rules. Every other Airline has to comply. Your stupid government funded Airline is not exempt from this. Simply don't allow Emirates to abuse this Heathrow. Emirates is not the boss here.
Emirates is wrong, wrong, wrong period. Don't allow their passengers to decline. Problem solved.
This is a you problem not the problem of his highness Al Maktoum. Deal with it Heathrow and us av geeks cannot afford a huge loss of emirates first class suites capacity.
Frankly they need to turn their security screening down a notch - it’s complete overkill with such uneccessary high volume extra screening/swabbing anyone who has been through this stricture since 2001 know how redundant it is!!!!! (Dublin, I’m looking at you too!!!!)
To single out Heathrow is unfair. Yes, Heathrow is a mess, but look at the other airports with staffing issues situation (looking at you AMS). Look at air traffic control systems with staffing issues (FAA). Heck, look at the number of airlines in chaos with staffing issues, both in the US and elsewhere - meltdowns, cancellations, etc.
My point is this...the entire air travel system was unprepared, not just Heathrow. This article acts like Heathrow is the only airport in chaos, which in reality is far from the truth.
Emirates' response also highlights the continual blame game that's been played since the chaos started Until the airlines, airports and governments work as a team to solve the issues, we're going to be in this mess for a long time, and in the end, the customer loses. Yeah for Emirates on being prepared (as they say) and shame on Heathrow for not; however - it's reality. So Emirates will fly the same number of people in and out of an airport that can't handle the capacity, which means those customer will face long waits for security, immigration, baggage., etc. all for Emirates to prove a point.
Suck up the egos, quit thumping your chests and work on solutions instead of playing the blame game.
The fun thing is we don't have to actually guess. Heathrow actually publishes their traffic numbers on their website ( https://www.heathrow.com/company/investor-centre/reports/traffic-statistics). June 2019 the passenger traffic was 7,246,563, June 2022 the passenger traffic was 5,990,385, 83% of June 2019. Looks like your guess was pretty close!
While yes, we've known this was probably coming for a while, traffic double between February of this year and June (almost doubled by May). In 2019 traffic went up by 30% between February and June as opposed to over 100% that it did this year.
On the other hand, these numbers have been going up steadily since March/April. Springing this on airlines at such short notice is inexcusable. If they'd done it back then, it more than likely may have been manageable.
Yeah, the other comments pointing out the total pax vs. departures only are correct. Per the monthly statistics on Heathrow's website, they had 6.0 million passengers in June 2022, an average of 200,000/day. Their monthly record high is 7.8 million from July 2018 (with July 2019 being about the same.)
Emirates is egregiously wrong about the numbers here. You'd think that they'd have their powder dry before issuing such a scathing letter, which makes one wonder whether this 'mistake' was intentional. Surely Emirates is aware that Heathrow isn't really operating at less than half normal capacity during the current travel surge in Europe and North America.
While I'd agree with Emirates that Heathrow needs to do everything it can to fix its capacity problems as soon as possible rather than trying to pass those problems on to the airlines and passengers, Emirates characterization of the situation is demonstrably false. And so egregiously false that it should have been easy for them to figure that out before hitting the publish button.
Bravo to Emirates for calling out yet another bloated, corrupt and lazy European airport board. As stated in the article, the fact that this summer has been busy comes as no surprise. And airports like LHR and AMS (and they're far from alone - there are many others) totally dropped the ball. What I saw at Schiphol was a disgrace and I'm sure that LHR and others are no different. A complete lack of planning or preparedness. How dare LHR's authorities start making such dictates to airlines - to cover for their own negligence?
Airlines and airports need to work through this travel crisis together. Being the largest airline in the world backed by government oil money does not grant you special privilege.
As I noted earlier this week, airports can't just decide they are going to change negotiated international agreements because the airports can't manage what they agreed to in terms of capacity
The economic reason why Emirates is justified in not bowing to Heathrow is because British Airways is by far the largest carrier at LHR and they can cut some of their short haul flights and have a disproportionately smaller financial impact by cutting the same amount of capacity than a carrier like Emirates which is all international longhaul traffic from LHR.
And the logistic argument is that LHR must have seen this developing and it isn't realistic to demand immediate compliance for a problem that didn't just development overnight.
Most of the large carriers at LHR are in some sort of alliance so AA-BA and DL-VS have to agree because the British government can make life really hard for the British carrier and even for short haul European airlines like the Star Alliance at LHR. EK is not in an alliance and so can't shift capacity to someone else and also won't be hurt if the British "take it out" on one specific airline.
LHR needs to figure out how to make it work today based on the agreements that the UK has signed.
Presumably, airlines that cut flights will have their slots protected rather than being forced to operate the same flights but with lower load factors. that would be nice to know
I love that "airmageddon" is in Emirates' official statement to the press.
I agree with Emirates that imposing this policy only 36 hours before it is due to take effect puts impacted passengers in a pretty untenable position. If a passenger were flying to another country to attend a specific event (e.g., a wedding), they can't move off the trip to the next date on which there are available seats.
Emirates may need to cooperate in coming up with a medium-term plan, but I do not blame them for being acerbic if they were being given only 36 hours to comply.
Ben - I have a flight connecting through LHR (US-LHR-JNB) August 8th. There’s only one LHR-JNB flight a day, what are the chances the flight gets cancelled?
Big bonus for the CEO and dividends resuming for shareholders this year! Now if airlines would just stop bringing more people here, nobody will notice we didn’t actually reinvest any of those increased fee revenues…
Heathrow has lease agreements with the airlines. The demand to lower capacity absent "force majeure" is a violation of the lease. Heathrow CANNOT claim force majeure for things easily explained by incompetence. EMIRATES WINS.
No. Having lease agreements with the airport that allow the scheduled flights grants Emirates a “special privilege” to tell LHR to bugger off.
Also, you seem to have skipped the letter. Emirates did its part to work through this - LHR decided to not do its part, and the “travel crisis” at LHR is a direct consequence of the airport’s own poor management. No airline has any responsibility to bear the costs of LHR’s poor management.
Most people with travel plans would prefer to have a few hours’ wait at LHR than to have their trip entirely canceled.
As for egos and chest thumping … LHR sent Emirates an email basically saying, “here’s a long list of flights you need to cut (and carry the cost on) because we aren’t prepared, do it within 36 hours or we’ll sue you.” LHR deserved this response.
Not really. LHR could have increased to full capacity, it just chose not to do so. LHR still can get back to 100% capacity, it just doesn’t want to pay the price of doing so - and is demanding that airlines face increased costs instead.
LHR could have avoided this, and can fix it.
The US has become so laxed with security and other countries are still very strict. Once I got to SEA and realized I had my 6oz tube of toothpaste. Yet Heathrow transit security confiscated my 4.2oz container of hair product. A real menace to society I must be with that extra ounce
Yeah baby! It's called "push back" and it doesn't just happen to the aircraft.. Right On EM! You RoCk.
LHR should no longer be considered a gateway and transportation hub if it cannot handle the pressure. They should also cut those ridiculous departure fees, even if imposed by the UK government. If you can't handle passenger demand, you should not be that bull, LHR deserves all the negative publicity they are getting.
Heathrow's attitude is hardly unsurprising. It's the Western way, it's always someone else's fault.
Are you bloody serious? Which planet are you from? Heathrow's patently obvious incompetence and unpreparedness cannot be papered over by totally unreasonable demands on carriers to cut flights within 36 hours! LHR management need to get real, grow up and pull the finger out!
I'd be more sympathetic if LHR didn't have its insane passnger fees, and if they airport was less transparently focused on in-airport sales. With the kind of money they're asking for, they should absolutely be delivering a premium experience. I'm very glad to see Emirates do this.
Absolutely a first class response by Emirates, as a frequent flyer I have found Heathrow airport has been deteriorating for a number of years now, to the point where I will only use it as a last resort. The airport is mismanaged and fails to deliver anywhere near an acceptable service despite charging one of the highest passenger service fees in the world. It's now time for the government to become involved and force the clearly incompetent management to deliver the service we are forced to pay instead of blaming any one for their failures. As Emirates point out they invested in people to be ready for the return to travel and Heathrow did zero despite taking huge handouts from the Government to help with the cost. I and many many others agree with and support Emirates and will making the them my carrier of choice.
First class response to LHR by Emirates, the airport has gone downhill for years, sky high passenger fees while delivering unacceptable poor service. Dubai delivers first class service because they invested to be ready, time for the government to force action and make LHR deliver what we are forced to pay for.
I completely agree with their stance and wish American had taken that same aporoach. Im flying thrpugh heathrow next week and they cancelled the yk internal leg WITHOUT either letter me know or rebooking. The volume of travellers is NOT a surprise as they have been taking our money for months now
For the sake of accuracy: EK isn't the largest (nor second, nor third) airline in the world, and the Dubai-based government doesn't have much in the way of oil money (that'd be the Abu Dhabi government, which has its own troubled pet aviation project).
Right?! I got singled out, and forced to wait for nearly 20min despite the latter leg on my MSY-LHR-CAI flight calling boarding, because...... I used a gallon sized Ziplock bag of toiletries, instead of the 20cm2 size.
Seriously.
Orrrrr, a more realistic approach would be: Emirates reaffirming that (1) the UAE and UK have a bilateral agreement on capacity allotment, that LHR doesn't have the legal authority to just change on a 36hr whim, and (2) EK and LHR have lease agreements, that LHR doesn't have the authority to just change on a whim.
How is it any of the Al Maktoums' problem or issue, that their airline is (correctly) reminding LHR management of those two established facts?
"Every other Airline has to comply."
Actually, no.... they don't.
Neither Heathrow nor the CAA has the unilateral authority to compel carriers in such a way, which is exactly why EK is telling them to sod off.
The problem for UK airlines and Airports is Unemployment is at its lowest in many years, especially in and around London. They let all these people go during Covid who got other jobs and can't physically get them back.
Brexit has finally happened and statistically a lot of these rolls were filled by Europeans who didn't mind lower pay, in the inconvenience and expense of traveling to the facilities and working hours and conditions...all that is gone now and not easily replaceable.
As they say a perfect storm
The update on this is nothing more than allowing everyone to save face. The reality is that EK's LHR flights are probably already 95% booked given the August holiday demand. As well, they can always sell LGW seats for any spillover last minute bookings, though these are minimal in August given how little business traffic there is that month. This is a big old nothing in the end, lol. Well done, EK.
Absolutely this. It's one of the shittiest hubs in Europe, island or mainland. I get that we basically defaulted to it from the US/Canada as our nations were birthed from England - common language, ancestry, (sordid) past, yadda yadda yadda... But it's high time we invest in the much better, closer/regional hubs that mainland Europe has to offer and spreadload the flights. Brexit hurt. Covid hurt. We get that, but LHR was a disaster way before any of that yet the North American 4, save maybe DL because of JVs, keep thinking LHR is the *it* place. Possibly for biz travel, yes, but let's see how that weathers the out years of Brexit now that they're not part of the EU. I know I purposed never route through LHR anymore because it's just such a shitshow in every possible way. I love London but I'd rather fly into CDG then onward (and that's saying a lot, because it's also a disaster given French work ethic/politics) just to avoid dealing with ::gestures vaguely:: that.
Now that Emirates managed to "negotiate" a cap for only month instead of two, you can bet every other airline will be doing the same thing or the airport will be forced to quietly drop the caps.
Emirates pushed back and got less than what was imposed.
It appears Emirates won.
Dubai airport employees are from all over the world with most of them from South Asia. I don't think LHR can do that.
So Emirates wants to force Heathrow to be a hell hole for their customers and other airline passengers rather than make a minor cut in flights?
I do love a well crafted response, albeit with a small error, to an unreasonable legal threat. Thank you Ben for printing the missive in its full glory as it was an absolute joy to read. No doubt you have excellent abridging skills, but it is important to absorb the full delight of this intelligent 'get stuffed'!
Could it be possible for LHR senior management to move out of their Ivory Tower and get themselves out into the business. See the wasteful practices at Security and Baggage handling so they can work hard with their employees, unions and the public to become as efficient as most Asian airports already are.
Ben, welcome to British politics. Which of course cannot be blamed on the recent resignation of the PM. As Emirates points out, these issues were on the table months before when the government was fully aware, but inaction.
Really sorry to hear this news because LHR was a nice place, fairly organised, a great hub. It is sad.
But we must keep that strong upper lip and press on, at least I am happy to see Emirates pressing onwards.
Hi Ben,
What's your take on the other saga between JQ/3K and SIN?