Slashdot Mirror


British Airways CEO Won't Resign, Says Outsourcing Not To Blame For IT Failure (bbc.com)

British Airways CEO Alex Cruz insisted he would not resign on Monday as he sought to draw a line under three days of chaos at the UK flag carrier after IT problems left tens of thousands of passenger stranded. In an interview -- the first since a global computer outage all but shut the airline down -- Cruz said he doesn't think "it would make much of use for me to resign." Separately, he also denied an outsourcing deal was to blame for the IT problems that hit on Saturday, causing the airline to cancel almost all its services over the weekend. From a report: A leaked staff email revealed Mr Cruz had told staff not to comment on the system failure. When asked about the email he told the BBC the tone was clear: "Stop moaning and come and help us." The airline is now close to full operational capacity after the problems resulted in mass flight cancellations at Heathrow and Gatwick over the bank holiday weekend. Questions remain about how a power problem could have had such impact, said the BBC's technology correspondent Rory Cellan-Jones. One theory was that returning systems were unusable as the data had become unsynchronised. [...] Cruz told the BBC a power surge, had "only lasted a few minutes," but the back-up system had not worked properly. He said the IT failure was not due to technical staff being outsourced from the UK to India.

160 of 275 comments (clear)

  1. Capitalism is at fault by For+a+Free+Internet · · Score: 2, Funny

    We need communism now!

    --
    UNITE with the Campaign for a Free Internet because today, our future begins with tomorrow!
    1. Re:Capitalism is at fault by unixisc · · Score: 4, Funny

      Venezuela's really working out well! As is North Korea

    2. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2

      The same communism that failed everywhere it's been tried? Good idea.

      I'd rather the Spanish Inquisition return.

    3. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you use the "A is bad, hence B must be good" fallacy to make your point for A, you look about as stupid as someone who tries to use it as a point for B.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    4. Re:Capitalism is at fault by unixisc · · Score: 2

      Go to any Muslim country, you'll get your wish. The ex Soviet 'stans' may be an exception.

    5. Re:Capitalism is at fault by prefec2 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Both do not have a communist economy. However, Venezuela is struggling today under a leader who has problems with democracy and North Korea is owned by Kim Jon Un and his useless clan. Communism is an economic model where in essence everything is owned by everyone, money does not exist and people are sharing things. While this concept is totally utopian it has also nothing to do with any country which claimed to be communist. However, countries like the the German Democratic Republic or the Democratic Republic of Kongo were/are both named democratic, but they were both dictatorships.

      Also "communism now" was mentioned as a joke.

    6. Re:Capitalism is at fault by DeBaas · · Score: 5, Funny

      I still think it was BA who was bad here

      --
      ---
    7. Re:Capitalism is at fault by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Power failures happen. Hacks happen. It is the way you handle them that matters. BA's behavior was horrible. They should have had a fall-back paper based system. It would have been slow, error prone, and required them to rush-hire a lot of temps, but they could have muddled through without stranding tens of thousands of people. Also, it would have saved them money. The cost of the paper-pushing temps would have been far less than the cost of all the refunds for cancelled flights.

    8. Re:Capitalism is at fault by ColdWetDog · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Um, no. This is an interesting fallacy that I see all of the time - 'go back to paper'. Let's face it - the ONLY way you can run a modern airline, hospital, utility or whatnot is with a computerized system. When it goes tits up, you go tits up until you can get backups on line. Just finding the requisite paper products (and manual credit card imprinters - I'm going to bet that half the BA employees have never even seen one) could take days.

      Can you imagine trying to hire and train 5000 temps to fill out complicated forms while the rest of the staff has complete meltdowns?

      Fat chance.

      Now, BA should have been able to handle anything short of force majour with backups and redundant systems. The power supply theory is laughable. But paper isn't going to solve the problems on any sort of reasonable time scale.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    9. Re:Capitalism is at fault by rl117 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Businesses can and do have contingency plans to work without computers. It's absolutely possible with a little foresight and planning. I used to work in an industrial complex which was highly automated. But for every bit of process, there was an accompanying card with all the details filled out in ink. The card would be physically passed around the plant to hand over responsibility and document every part of the process. For each place the card passed through, local log books would record every addition to the card, and they details would also be entered into the computer. You might think this redundant, but it provided three important things: (1) audit - we could check that the computer details matched the card and that the local logs matched the card and the computer, to trace any discrepancies in the case of entry errors (2) physical accountability and traceability and (3) the ability to run the entire plant without any network connectivity; the details of the processes could be entered retrospectively. An airline can certainly mitigate a lot of what went wrong. Physically print out the passenger lists to permit check in and boarding. Most people book the flights well in advance; you can cope with most passengers with ease, even moving them between flights, if you have a backup paper system in place. Physically cross them off with the date and time you did it, then add them to a list that the gate staff can use. Card payment isn't an issue--most people already paid in advance; for those that didn't you can probably take the payment, physically document it and enter it into the system at a later time. It's absolutely doable, and any company who cares about surviving should have a system in place. The plant I worked at did this for legal and financial reasons. If a computer outage costs millions of pounds an hour, then you make sure it's covered. BA's outage likely cost much more than that.

    10. Re:Capitalism is at fault by lgw · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This is an interesting fallacy that I see all of the time - 'go back to paper'. Let's face it - the ONLY way you can run a modern airline, hospital, utility or whatnot is with a computerized system.

      There is a modern airline - Air France I think, that does just this. Their systems fail often, but they have a robust paper system to keep people from being stranded.

      Thing is, you don't to allow people to buy new tickets in order to function. Lots of what a modern airline does can just be ignored. You need to verify tickets and boarding passes - which can be done by straining the phone network back to a central office with lots of temp workers, and you need to keep aircraft inspection/maintenance logs current, but that's still mostly paper anyhow.

      You can make very complex systems work without computers if you care enough to do so. You can also make disaster recovery systems that actually work when you need them - though you do need to follow the expensive advice of professionals, so maybe some corporations are culturally incapable.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    11. Re:Capitalism is at fault by aix+tom · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Businesses can and do have contingency plans to work without computers. It's absolutely possible with a little foresight and planning.

      Foresight, planning *and* training. I work for a Retailer with about 20 branches. What we do, we disconnect every branch from central IT once a year for a day (granted, on one of the slower days), so that they know how to handle the backup procedures.

    12. Re:Capitalism is at fault by rl117 · · Score: 1

      Agreed, training is definitely a key part! At least where I used to work, because the two systems ran in parallel everyone was trained daily; any service outage would be a non-event other than having to do some data entry once the outage was fixed. For systems where you explicitly switch then training for that disruption is going to be even more important.

    13. Re:Capitalism is at fault by _Sharp'r_ · · Score: 1

      Yet somehow, Venezuela is doing much worse (we're talking riots because of starvation and forced labor in the fields) than every other countries with just as much (or more) of a basis of their economy on oil. The reason is directly attributable to their socialist government driving companies out of the country by taking over industries "for the people" and getting rid of all those capitalist "exploiters", i.e. living up to their socialist ideals.

      --
      The party of stupid and the party of evil get together and do something both stupid and evil, then call it bipartisan.
    14. Re:Capitalism is at fault by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      the ONLY way you can run a modern airline, hospital, utility or whatnot is with a computerized system.

      If you have people at the gate with boarding passes, and a plane ready to fly, it is idiotic to refuse to board them because your computer is down. You get a sheet of paper, you manually write a manifest, and you send them on their way. It was done that way for decades.

    15. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Hey, you didn't see this happen to Air Koryo, did you? That's what I thought.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    16. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 5, Insightful

      To blame Venezuela's problems on oil is to ignore the incredible mismanagement going on in the country. Price controls as a method of controlling the economy were discredited decades ago, and cause shortages. That is one reason Venezuela is having trouble. Another is because they close down any business that is doing well.....for example, if a grocery store is full of food, they close it down because obviously the store was hoarding food, keeping it from the people. Another reason is because they nationalized the oil, and they didn't really know how to run oil wells, so their production dropped. And yes, the price of oil dropped, which has hurt them (but it's hurt Norway and Russia too, and neither one is having the troubles of Venezuela). You can also add corruption: the daughter of Hugo Chavez is the richest person in Venezuela.

      Venezuela's problem have nothing to do with socialism: it's poor mismanagement in so many areas of government.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      It takes a while for market forces to stablize. When there's a food panic, market-forces won't be stable enough.

      but it's hurt Norway and Russia too, and neither one is having the troubles of Venezuela

      They didn't depend as heavily on oil as Venezuela. Russia sells booze and aerospace, for example.

      You can also add corruption: the daughter of Hugo Chavez is the richest person in Venezuela.

      Yes, that can screw things up also, in any system.

    18. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      No, blaming it all on just oil is ignorance, your ignorance. I can tell you haven't been paying attention to what goes on inside Venezuela. I don't know where you got your news, but you should expand your news sources.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    19. Re:Capitalism is at fault by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      How much fuel do you put on the plane and in which tanks? Is it due for any inspections? Did it throw a code last flight? 'Ready to fly' is an assumption.

      You could print it all at the start of a shift, but you know they didn't. It wouldn't be 100% anyhow, gates change, shit happens.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    20. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      No, blaming it all on just oil is ignorance, your ignorance

      Not really - even if the camel was already overloaded that was the straw that broke it's back.
      The poor choice (just like the poor choice of Greece to borrow deep and invest in US tech stocks around 2000) was the problem. While it could be argued that a different form of government would not make the same poor choice (although I very much doubt it) the form of government wasn't really the problem, just the choices they made. They've certainly made a lot that look bad, and others that look bad in hindsight but would not be so bad if the oil price had not been artificially driven down.


      There's no point blaming their government type just as there is no point in blaming ours for all those gas companies that went broke due to the Saudi price war (and there were a lot of them). If we were depending on that gas to fund an economy we'd be just as fucked as Venezuela.

    21. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      You fall back to drastically dumbed down procedures as seen in disaster management systems everywhere else - especially including hospitals.
      When a hospital gets 100+ people in one hit do you really think they do complex paperwork instead of falling back to a very simple (and necessarily brutal) system?

    22. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Dunbal · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Venezuela is struggling today because its economy is based on oil, and oil prices are low.

      Absolute rubbish. Venezuela was in trouble at $100/bbl. Has been in trouble since Chavez, but Chavez was better at keeping his house in order. I'm sure Maduro would like to blame oil prices but the real problem is his corrupt out of control government. But I'm sure he and his buddies eat very well.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    23. Re:Capitalism is at fault by brantondaveperson · · Score: 1

      You can't drastically dumb-down the process of getting a passenger jet into the sky.

    24. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      There were so many bad decisions in Venezuela that if people don't know them, and blame it all on oil, they are ignorant. Beyond ignorant because they don't realize they are ignorant.

      You are right though, it wasn't the government type that caused the problem here.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    25. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Yes - but the one that stands out above all others is depending on a monoculture to drive an economy - stupid - potato famine levels of stupid - hence the finger pointing at being stupid about oil.

    26. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Yeah the other decisions they've made have been equally stupid.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    27. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Good point, but the obvious one that everyone notices shouldn't be ignored even when it is a symptom instead of the cause.

    28. Re:Capitalism is at fault by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      Also, I don't even think Venezuela can rightly be considered socialist. It's true they do give out presents to the peasants sometimes, but so did many monarchs throughout history. It has all the markings of a typical Latin American strong-man government.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    29. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Also, I don't even think Venezuela can rightly be considered socialist

      Another good point.
      Some places are socialist on some issues but as far as hard right on others.
      A single word rarely sums them up.

    30. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Can't be. He ain't getting in no plane!

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    31. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Bongo · · Score: 1

      That is funny, but there's also a point that, most people don't understand what capitalism, or rather, modernity, is really all about.

      There's an argument that capitalism has always been around in one way or another. The modern age, since 1800, with al the advances, happened not because of capitalism, but because of liberalism.

      And the communist systems which people keep arguing over as to whether they are really socialist or not, failed because they lacked liberalism. Because they were just the same old rule-by-elites, be that kings or caesars or top party officials or whatever. And to the extent that our society is controlled by plutocracies, well, that's not liberal either.

      So to the extent that BA is being crashed by its CEO, well that's a problem of lack of liberalism, lack of giving its people a reasonable say in how things need to run to avoid, you know, crashes.

    32. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Bongo · · Score: 1

      Wasn't one of the earliest or even first uses of hard drives for the storing of flight booking records? Because the previous system of using paper cards simply hit the wall.

    33. Re:Capitalism is at fault by aberglas · · Score: 2

      You actually don't even need to verify tickets. In an emergency like this just ask people and believe them, most will be honest. It is not that difficult to calculate fuel by hand. Weather is available. Rosters are worked out in advance, so people just turn up. It should all muddle along without computers for at least a few days.

      The trouble is that the systems were made very complex *because* of computers, and then nobody understands them any more.

    34. Re:Capitalism is at fault by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Not really - even if the camel was already overloaded that was the straw that broke it's back.

      This just shows how divorced your line of thinking is from reality. It's not the straw which broke the camel's back, but the person who put the straw on there.

      As for other countries not depending as heavily on oil, it seems you're ignorant on multiple countries.

    35. Re:Capitalism is at fault by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Let's face it - the ONLY way you can run a modern airline, hospital, utility or whatnot is with a computerized system.

      That word modern carries a lot of baggage in your statement. They airline doesn't need to pretend to be modern. They just need to be able to move more planes and passengers than they did ... which was zero.

      No one is expecting an completely trouble free transition. But basic business continuity planning that could put you even partially operational is achievable for every industry you mentioned.

    36. Re:Capitalism is at fault by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      Businesses can and do have contingency plans to work without computers.

      Some businesses can and do. Not all. If your business relies on giant SQL databases, it relies on giant SQL databases. (Mine does.) You don't print them out nightly and warehouse the paper copies.
       
      All the eggs in one basket? Yep. Are the databases backed up? Extremely well. But recreating the ecosystem needed to leverage those databases is something that will take time.
       
      If my business had a major computer meltdown, I think we'd have critical access back in 3-4 days, at very limited capacity. We'd need to be getting all the new hardware online, the data restored, the server addresses restored/updated, and then all the endpoints connected back. I doubt that we have spares for a lot of the hardware. We've potentially got older stuff that was taken offline when newer stuff was purchased, but the reason we needed the newer stuff was capacity. Using the old stuff will get us online more quickly, but not at full capacity.
       
      We've never been in a budget situation where we could buy double of everything and keep a spare off-site. We've been able to buy double the capacity needed when upgrading, to ensure that we have room, but double the hardware costs quite a lot more.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    37. Re:Capitalism is at fault by Xest · · Score: 1

      True story, somewhere I used to work had it's server room attached to a backup generator to take over in the case of power supply failure. This failover happened fine one night when the power went out.

      Only some genius didn't think they may need the air con units to also be attached to the generator in the event of failure, so when the IT staff got in the next morning they found a myriad of fried hard disks, nigh on melted backup tapes, and burnt out processors.

      Of course - I'm not saying this was justifiable, it wasn't, but it was public sector so not overly surprising. It took them 3 months to get e-mail back up and running for everyone and at least some of people's mailboxes restored. Then, being public sector, the IT team got an award for handling the issue well.

      Yes it was retarded, but don't underestimate the ability of a power failure to completely and utterly fuck up a system that's run by retards, I've seen it happen, so it's perfectly possible that something that should be trivial to guard against can bring down an entire large organisation for an extended period.

    38. Re:Capitalism is at fault by DeBaas · · Score: 1

      That's my point, he made sure no one was flying.

      Pity the fools!

      --
      ---
    39. Re:Capitalism is at fault by lgw · · Score: 1

      I think in the US you're legally required to verify tickets as part of security theater, but maybe that's not true everywhere.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    40. Re:Capitalism is at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

      With the greatest possible respect, it's a bit more than an *ism that is to blame when Norway for example has similar form of that *ism.
      You repeatedly keep on replying to things I write with comments that indicate nothing other than you being out of your depth on a topic. Are you really that bored?

    41. Re:Capitalism is at fault by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Venezuela is struggling today because its economy is based on oil, and oil prices are low.

      All the politics, within Venezuela and among other nations is factions attempting to exploit the situation to gain power.

      No, a big part of the problem was that they gave away oil for free to countries like Cuba and other Latin American countries to bribe them to support Hugo Chavez. Such a practice would have a quick way of bankrupting one, no matter how rich one is.

    42. Re:Capitalism is at fault by jeff4747 · · Score: 1

      Absolute rubbish. Venezuela was in trouble at $100/bbl

      Oh really? http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Venezuela...

      Chavez was president from 1999-2013. Show me on that GDP graph the economic chaos that started in 1999...you know, just before the giant economic growth?

  2. So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by blind+biker · · Score: 1, Interesting

    They pissed me off more than a decade ago, and I swore never to use their services again. Since then I flew all across the world, for scientific conferences, cooperation, or just fun. This includes even many flights to the US.

    I'm not surprised BA sucks this bad, with a CEO like Alex Cruz.

    --
    "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    1. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      They seem to be generally quite incompetent. Endless staff walk-outs over conditions, indicating poor labour relations. The food on their flights is terrible even by airline standards. Even the staff uniforms are just terrible, especially the women's which don't seem to have changed since the 60s and require that garish red lipstick.

      In any case, Cruz is to blame for this. Ultimately, there should have been regular tests of the backup systems and a plan to quickly recover if it did fail, and it was his responsibility to ensure that those things happened.

      I imagine he will be punished harshly with a slightly reduced bonus this year.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      "The food on their flights is terrible even by airline standards"

      They are just trying to give an authentic British food experience!

    3. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by tysonedwards · · Score: 5, Funny

      Slightly reduced bonus? He confirmed the issue was not his fault, and not that of the new guys maintaining the system... It was obviously an issue of the old people who didn't properly train or leave adequate documentation of the intricacies of the system when they left 5 months ago. If anything, an extra large bonus should be coming for getting rid of that level of incompetence.

      --
      Thirty four characters live here.
    4. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by unixisc · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Were those 'old people' people who were expected to train someone from Infy or TCS how to do their job, before getting their own employment terminated? I can see why 'proper training' of their replacements might have been low on their priority list

      It's amazing: in the 60s, the BOAC used to be the state of the art in airlines. Sad to see where it has fallen, while airlines from Arab countries flaunt superior service

    5. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      My absolute worst travel experiences have also been with British Air.

      Fundamentally, what I don't like about them is that if you're rich and don't deviate even slightly from proper British behavior (drinking your tea with the proper pinkie elevation, etc) then they'll try to treat you pretty well. But if you need any kind of accommodation at all or, even worse, if you're not rich, they will go out of their way to make your life as miserable as absolutely possible.

      If possible, I fly Japan Air. But these days they're in high demand to their general reputation for good customer service (even to people who aren't rich or need a little extra help). So it's hard to find available flights.

      And British Air is the one airline that I go far out of my way to avoid.

    6. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      with a CEO like Alex Cruz

      Ted's evil twin, separated at birth?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    7. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by fibonacci8 · · Score: 2

      I'll take the bait... Do you imagine that Ted is the good twin, or that they are identical evil twins?

      --
      Inheritance is the sincerest form of nepotism.
    8. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by jeff4747 · · Score: 1, Informative

      He confirmed the issue was not his fault, and not that of the new guys maintaining the system... It was obviously an issue of the old people

      And who decided to replace "the old people" with an outsourcing firm featuring inadequately-trained personnel?

      He's the CEO. The buck stops on his desk, no matter what.

    9. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      The food on their flights is terrible even by airline standards.

      They're British. What do you expect?

    10. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by squiggleslash · · Score: 1

      That's what he means: it's all gormet food, not a deep fried Mars Bar or pork pie in sight...

      --
      You are not alone. This is not normal. None of this is normal.
    11. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have worked in IT systems development since the early 90s and am pleased that finally people are seeing the disastrous consequences of off shoring to India. I have seen this happen in 3 major banks over the years but these things are rarely made public. Whereas in the early days you would have a solid experienced team of UK based developers who would take pride in delivering and supporting quality IT systems, now you have teams of 100s mostly offshored in India who have very little experience or enthusiasm to do a good job. They have a high turnover of staff. Things that took hours now take weeks or months, and when they are delivered they are broken in the testing environments. It's not the fault of all Indian resources, they have a handful of good people, however such is the demand for IT people there, that they employ anyone who can write a program to print their name 10 times. It is absolutely madness and so frustrating as it makes it so difficult to get things done in any form, let alone in an efficient way.

      I worked for company that made me redundant about 10 years to offshore to India. They lost a team of 5 in the UK, replaced with a team of 20 Indian resources initially. I learnt from non IT colleagues that remained that was it was a total disaster. The bank tried to rectify things by increasing the team to 50 10 x the original local team size)...a disaster again. After 2 years they needed to get in expensive UK based consultants who knew what they were doing

      The CEO is to blame. Simple as that.

    12. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      They are just trying to give an authentic British food experience!

      This coming from the country that brought us HFCS and "cheese" in a can.

    13. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by oobayly · · Score: 1

      I have a colleague who raves about them. He only flies with them, tells other people that they'reâ daft not to fly with them. Yet, almost every time he comes back from holiday there's a story about something that went wrong. I bet he's glad he didn't go abroad for the long weekend...

    14. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Stockholm syndrome, irrationality... or plain stupidity. If you have constant problems with an airline, yet you only fly with them, the problem is your decision making.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    15. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by blind+biker · · Score: 2

      My absolute worst travel experiences have also been with British Air.

      Fundamentally, what I don't like about them is that if you're rich and don't deviate even slightly from proper British behavior (drinking your tea with the proper pinkie elevation, etc) then they'll try to treat you pretty well. But if you need any kind of accommodation at all or, even worse, if you're not rich, they will go out of their way to make your life as miserable as absolutely possible.

      If possible, I fly Japan Air. But these days they're in high demand to their general reputation for good customer service (even to people who aren't rich or need a little extra help). So it's hard to find available flights.

      And British Air is the one airline that I go far out of my way to avoid.

      Indeed, Japan Airlines is excellent! A few more I feel comfortable to recommend, are Finnair, THAI, and... the machmachine itself, Lufthansa. Lufthansa specifically does everything better where BA fails miserably, and yet they are a similar type of airline. Even Lufthansa's hubs (Frankfurt and Munich) function flawlessly and aren't a total hell, like Heathrow.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
    16. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Little known fact: "keep calm and carry on" is actually originated as a phrase to tell people when they find out what's in black pudding.
      "Keep a stiff upper lip" is the term of endurance you have to make when the figgy pudding hits your stomach. urghhs.

      It's so bad that half of the British national dish, fish and chips, wasn't even invented in England it was invented in France, and the fish part was brought to England by Sephardic Jews.

      The main reason the British had to let India into the commonwealth, was because otherwise they would have no good restaurants in London.

      I went off a bit there, did I? But if you can find some nice maple syrup freshly dripped from a tree.......now there you have something good.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    17. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Actually, you can get some really nice food there these days. Of course, the Brexit may roll that back... :-/

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    18. Re: So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by gweihir · · Score: 1

      He's the CEO. The buck stops on his desk, no matter what.

      Not these days. The CEO not taking responsibility for anything except successes (that he usually had no part in creating) is pretty much in the job description.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    19. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Ted is good. Alex is evil!

    20. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Dutch+Gun · · Score: 1

      Is there a lurking British Airways exec with mod points or something? Because otherwise I'm not sure how this qualifies as "flamebait".

      --
      Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
    21. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      There are people who just systematically mod my posts flamebait or overrated. The right complains about censorship a lot, but also loves to practice it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      You seriously overestimate the amount of passengers at Heathrow. It is only 25% more than in Frankfurt (or 20% more than in Paris). MUC and FRA together, as you have suggested, have in turn 25% more passengers than LHR.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    23. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by Wulf2k · · Score: 1

      As an outsider, I can assure you that there is no discernible difference between the left and the right. I don't even know which is which.

    24. Re:So glad I never use BA - (the Sucky Airline). by blind+biker · · Score: 1

      Dude, Lufthansa is larger than BA by any metric.

      --
      "The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
  3. What happened to identifying the source of error? by Quakeulf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I remember when people would say that "X happened in Y with outcome Z", but here we don't get to know anything of what went wrong?

    Not telling me in detail means I am highly unlikely to fly with them as they are seen as untrustworthy with something to hide.

  4. Country of origin isn't the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Having a foreign IT staff isn't the issue, having an incompetent IT staff that is not able to manage the system and deal with issues like this is. If you are firing people who are able to do this and bringing in people who are barely able to hold stuff together because it lowers the salaries you pay then it is your own fault.

    1. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Opportunist · · Score: 5, Insightful

      “It's unwise to pay too much, but it's worse to pay too little. When
      you pay too much, you lose a little money - that's all. When you pay
      too little, you sometimes lose everything, because the thing you
      bought was incapable of doing the thing it was bought to do. The
      common law of business balance prohibits paying a little and getting a
      lot - it can't be done. If you deal with the lowest bidder, it is well
      to add something for the risk you run, and if you do that you will
      have enough to pay for something better.”

        John Ruskin

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    2. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Richard_at_work · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Its not so much about incompetent staff, its about the loss of institutional knowledge when you outsource.

      The company built up a large internal IT team for a reason - the IT problems of an airline are complex and convoluted (airlines often cant actually predict what price your ticket is going to be because of the complexity in the ticketing and fare based systems... and that complexity has snuck in over the 60 years of the boom in commercial aviation).

      When you then get rid of that internal IT team, a huge sea of knowledge walks out with it. Yes, you can have them document the system, but no level of documentation makes up for practical experience that allows you to give a gut reaction in a given circumstance.

      And thats what happened here. The root cause might not be anyones fault - but the recovery time might have been minutes to hours if the company still had that internal institutional knowledge to run with. They didn't, and the outsourced IT team had to troubleshoot the system from first principles - which can take forever.

      Now watch BA switch outsourcing contractors again, citing their failure - and watch the knowledge gained via this incident once again take a walk out of the door.

    3. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      But also, see "lemon market". If buyers can't tell which product is better, the entire market gravitates to cheap, low quality solutions.

    4. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Spinlock_1977 · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing may not have caused the issue, but I'd like to ask: How much more difficult is it to return your systems to normal, using that outsourced staff?

      --
      - The Kessel run is for nerf herders. I can circumnavigate the entire Central Finite Curve in a lot less than 12 parse
    5. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by TuballoyThunder · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spot on. While it is usually a good idea to outsource non-core functions, IT has become a core function for almost all large businesses. If you do not have control over your IT with an organic (n.b. not the health food organic) workforce, you do not have control over your business.

      I would assert that outsourcing IT only makes sense for a small business (e.g. a doctor's office, family restaurant).

    6. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 2

      on the other hand it is a commodity. you dont want to define your business in such a way that your core business includes so.e irrelevant commodity.

      But that's the point. It's not irrelevant, it's actually the core of your business. And it's not a commodity, it's unique and irreplaceable knowledge of how your business works.

    7. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And that is just the point. Competent Indian IT staff is _not_ any cheaper, because they can get jobs all over the world at local salaries. And outsources always adds to the cost.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    8. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Nice quote! Assumes a competent buyer of course, and with this joke of a CEO right here under discussion, that one is nowhere in sight.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    9. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by gweihir · · Score: 1

      Indeed. And given that the root cause was both minor and expected ("power outage" is a very standard IT disaster scenario that a competent organization is well prepared for), but had such a devastating effect, a major outage will probably kill them.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    10. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by gweihir · · Score: 1

      And that is just wrong. If you have more than a PC with office and email on it, IT is _not_ a commodity at all these days.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    11. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      CEOs, at least in my experience, are very often actually very incompetent. I'm dead serious when I say that the average CEO of a large corporation couldn't run a small business without running it into the ground within 3-6 months.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    12. Re:Country of origin isn't the issue by aberglas · · Score: 1

      CEOs are extremely competent ... at becoming CEOs. If we had those skills we would cashing in instead of winging on slashdot.

  5. They didn't hire creimer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    that's why their IT failed. In between sets of rowing machine powerlifting, and pleasing the "girls" with his powerful sexing, he'll fix that IT with a Python script and a slashdot post!

  6. So in house? by MrLint · · Score: 1

    "He said the IT failure was not due to technical staff being outsourced from the UK to India."

    So is this tacitly blaming the staff they still have?

    You know what will fix your IT problems! More staffing cuts and outsourcing!

    1. Re:So in house? by AC5398 · · Score: 2

      He's just admitted that rabid cost-cutting measures were responsible for the outage, and said cost-cutting measures were his fault, it just wasn't outsourcing that was to blame.

      Either BA didn't update mission-critical infrastructure that is long past its expiry date, or they ignored the needs of mission-critical infrastructure (which includes having well-trained operators who know what to do when 'things get out of sync'. So it is still his *&^% fault.

    2. Re:So in house? by Richard_at_work · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The *failure* wasnt a fault of the outsourcing - the problematic *recovery* almost certainly is a fault of the outsourcing. His statement doesnt cover both of those...

  7. Re:Spanish Inquisition by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Be careful. You might get what you wish for. With all the scary anti-privacy laws, the UK is definitely heading in the "right" direction.

    --
    Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
  8. Phrasing by OpenSourced · · Score: 2

    I don't think that it would make much of use for me, to resign.

    There, fixed that for you. Commas are important.

    --
    Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
  9. Bad Backup? by minstrelmike · · Score: 2

    The backup didn't work. Wow. Who woulda thunk? I suspect some IT person complained about the backup procedures being inadequate and he was probably fired. Someone else asked if they could actually test the backup and they were given a demotion.

    And now that the backup failed to actually be a backup, we're all shocked and surprised (and it's definitiley not management's fault).

    I tested my backups daily by importing the data into a different database. (Of couse, I'm an Oracle admin and am used to having failed backups).

    1. Re:Bad Backup? by DarthVain · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think generally backups are badly managed. I don't think most management sees them as all that critical. I suspect admins likely get tired of trying and just go with the flow after awhile.

      In all my years professionally I've only ever really needed enterprise backup (i.e. not my desktop etc...) twice (Oracle DB). Both times it was useless. The first was a scheduling issue where the last backup that was done was 9 months old which is really unacceptable. In that case we had to use some complicated data harvesting from log tables (which fortunately we had in this instance), though some data was lots due to format differences. The second time apparently the backup process was broken, and it was under maintenance to fix it, for a month, but no one decided that it might be a good idea to tell anyone, so when we deployed a new version of an application into production which caused a number of data issues, the last good backup was 3 weeks old, meaning we had to get creative with the existing data and live with the rest putting it on users to manual confirm a couple weeks worth of possible changes.

      Anyway from my own experience whenever it's been needed, it's not there. Personally I think I am way more fastidious about my backups, but there seems to be a thing about corporate culture, and perhaps the idea of risk management and passing blame and responsibility off on somebody else..

    2. Re:Bad Backup? by bongey · · Score: 1

      Common practice now is to do forced failover testing during none peak hours. Google create DiRT tool for testing fail overs. Amazon does testing also.
      Hate it when PHB's are cheapasses or they just know better than you. Worst one I ran into was that we were trying to explain it would be better to have site redundancy vs one big machine at one location.The government side just wanted it running on big data center no matter what.

      Earthquake hit 1 week after setup, all hard disks were destroyed/ data unrecoverable. Entire data center had to be recovered from tape backups, 1000s of machines from tape backups.

    3. Re:Bad Backup? by mspohr · · Score: 1

      As a naive observer, I'm just wondering why there is a single point of failure in this system. It seems to be that such a mission critical application should have distributed data and functionality to provide resilience... kind of like this new fangled Internet thingy.
      (But what do I know?)

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
    4. Re:Bad Backup? by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      Which is why this is the CEO's fault. When the CEO pushes for cost cutting, every manager scrambles to push out important work, so they can make the quarterly bonus; it is silly to criticize manager for doing what they are literally paid extra and patted on the back to do. But there are certain business critical systems that the CEOs must take responsibility for making sure that they are checked thrice on a regular basis. No manager can stand up to a CEO directly or indirectly, because that manager always has other managers incentivized to breath down his/her neck to not rock the boat and jeopardize bonuses.

      If the CEO does not put skin in the game, then threats sound like "let's all hope we do not get caught and we will carry on as usual". When a CEO who says earnestly that he/she him/herself will probably be fired but you definitely will be if this backup not work, that will get attention. Everything else is just CYA blather.

    5. Re:Bad Backup? by Strider- · · Score: 1

      I think generally backups are badly managed. I don't think most management sees them as all that critical. I suspect admins likely get tired of trying and just go with the flow after awhile.

      This is why I always try to build/design my systems with active/active fail-over type mechanisms, doing my best to avoid the single point of failure. During normal operations, both systems are in operation and responding to needs. They are being constantly updated, constantly tested, and constantly monitored. The tricky thing is to ensure that should one of them fail, the other can take the full load.

      --
      ...si hoc legere nimium eruditionis habes...
    6. Re:Bad Backup? by brantondaveperson · · Score: 2

      We had a fire. Burnt the whole place down. Fortunately, we had backups on tape, and we'd tested the backups using the tape drive, to make sure that they extracted correctly.

      Trouble was, the only tape drive that seemed to be able to extract the tapes, was melted in the fire. Other tape drives appeared unable to do so, due to some subtle misalignment of the tape drive itself. Luckily, the data turned out to be available in other places, and our (frankly, pretty great) IT guys had us back up in a couple of days.

    7. Re:Bad Backup? by houghi · · Score: 1

      This is, I think, because most will focus on the backup. However the backup is just a tool. What people need to focus on (and test and train) is the restore.

      What people need to do is figure out how to do a restore and that will lead to the backup. A backup will not always lead to a restore.

      It should be part of a contingency plan. What do we do if the building burns down and our self acclaimed IT guru dies in that fire? How do we continue. One of the things will be to do is a data restore.

      --
      Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
    8. Re:Bad Backup? by aberglas · · Score: 1

      If you were in management you would realize that backups are not important.

      Normally things work. So you save money and get praise. If they fail, you just move one. And in all probability they will fail after you have gone anyway.

  10. An open letter to BA upper management by gestalt_n_pepper · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Dear British Airways Upper Management,

    This is your fault. To avoid another incident, you will bring in the operations IT managers, who are quite frankly, much smarter than you. Then sit down and shut the fuck up and listen to the solutions that these managers already know about, and which will easily fix the problem.

    It would be best if all fools, MBAs, accountants and other technical illiterates were excluded from that meeting. A lawyer or too, on the other hand, may be quite helpful.

    Hint. The solutions cost money. Guess why they were never implemented. Bonus question! Guess how expensive an unplanned failure is going to be.

    Cheers!

    --
    Please do not read this sig. Thank you.
    1. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny


      Guess how expensive an unplanned failure is going to be.

      They no longer need to guess.

    2. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Guess how expensive an unplanned failure is going to be.

      Early estimates peg this at a fraction of a percent of yearly net profit. Combined with the rarity of the event I would say that this incident will come and go without any change.

      Mind you these costs are also offset by not having planes in the air. British airways in one year had their fuel bill change by more than the IAG 2016 net profit. There's far more expensive things that can and do happen to airlines regularly than stranding all their customers for a day.

    3. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by Cederic · · Score: 3, Informative

      Early estimates peg this at a fraction of a percent of yearly net profit

      The numbers I've seen quoted are closer to 10% of their annual profit.

      That's not a trivial sum.

    4. Re: An open letter to BA upper management by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I have worked in IT systems development since the early 90s and am pleased that finally people are seeing the disastrous consequences of off shoring to India. I have seen this happen in 3 major banks over the years but these things are rarely made public. Whereas in the early days you would have a solid experienced team of UK based developers who would take pride in delivering and supporting quality IT systems, now you have teams of 100s mostly offshored in India who have very little experience or enthusiasm to do a good job. They have a high turnover of staff. Things that took hours now take weeks or months, and when they are delivered they are broken in the testing environments. It's not the fault of all Indian resources, they have a handful of good people, however such is the demand for IT people there, that they employ anyone who can write a program to print their name 10 times. It is absolutely madness and so frustrating as it makes it so difficult to get things done in any form, let alone in an efficient way.

      I worked for company that made me redundant about 10 years to offshore to India. They lost a team of 5 in the UK, replaced with a team of 20 Indian resources initially. I learnt from non IT colleagues that remained that was it was a total disaster. The bank tried to rectify things by increasing the team to 50 10 x the original local team size)...a disaster again. After 2 years they needed to get in expensive UK based consultants who knew what they were doing.

      The CEO is to blame. Simple as that. I

    5. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by gweihir · · Score: 1

      On the plus side, by statistics, they are not going to have another of these for quite a while now, so all is well! Oh, wait...

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    6. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by SimonInOz · · Score: 1

      A while ago I worked in a large bank. The staff there consisted of large numbers of imported Indians, and larger numbers of non-imported Indians. The management staff consisted of South Africans - I was one of the few odd ones out. (I apologize for seemingly racist descriptions, but it was in fact true. Of the developer staff, there were about 5 non-Indians).
      The results were pretty horrible. The code was made up of collections of frameworks-de-jour, whatever was trendy that month, layered. Maintenance was near impossible, as clashing frameworks made things unbelievably complex.
      Why was it in such a state? Poor leadership, cost cutting, and terrible communication.
      If you employ overseas staff, including interviewing them (is it really them?) over the phone, from a large outsourcing company, then no only you have no real idea what sort of staff you are getting, you have lost control over your companies IT intellectual property. You are subsequently beholden to said overseas outsourcing company. The costs savings are in fact relatively small, but the loss of control is catastrophic in the medium to long term.
      I feel this is what you get if you let the next quarter's bottom line be the only driving factor, forgetting entirely the long term company value. (A previous comment on actually listening to experts applies to much of business [and politics] lately).

      BA has reaped what it sowed. For a once great airline, this is very sad.

      --
      "Cats like plain crisps"
    7. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      The numbers I've seen quoted are closer to 10% of their annual profit.

      That's not a trivial sum.

      I'd be questioning the soruce. Based on the affected number of air passengers, even if ALL of them qualified for overnight compensation costs along with the EU mandated penalty costs (which I'm sure the airline will be able to talk themselves out of) it won't come close to 80million pounds.

      I have my doubts that it will come close to the quoted figure of 30million pounds that I saw on the BBC.

      I have no doubts that either number don't include operational savings in the form of unused fuel.

      There is more to hiding the profits at the moment too. Notice how we're coming out of the tail end of really low oil prices? It doesn't take much for an airline to justify a ticketted increase, and it takes even less to bump them up $1 more to cover the costs of the earlier blunder.

      This result is insignificant, especially when combined with event rarity. Unless you're an accountant obsessed with opportunity costs, but then my car not starting in the morning can suddenly look very bad on my balance sheet too.

    8. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Well, do the basic mathematics.

      200,000 impacted passengers, lets assume a mere £100/ticket, that's £20m straight up. Throw in the £2-300 cancelled flight statutory compensation and already you're hitting £70-80m.

      That's ignoring claims for meals, hotels, the knock-on impact of seating many of these passengers on future flights, reputational and brand damage..

      "The media" are quoting estimates of £100-150m, which is where my 10% came from - e.g. http://www.thedrum.com/opinion...

    9. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Basic math requires starting with accurate numbers.

      I've seen 75000 passengers as the quoted number, and not all of them required overnight stay and the vast majority are not affected by the EU rules. Knock-on effects are minimal. It's not a high-holiday season which means rebooking people is not costly. Again you're also ignoring savings from nonoperational expenses. For every 300 intercontinental passengers BA rebook on existing flights they save close to $200,000 just on fuel costs. Most other costs are sunk or need to be financed for anyway.

      "The media" I've seen numbers from 15million - 250million. It's hardly a source to base a business decision on.

    10. Re:An open letter to BA upper management by Cederic · · Score: 1

      Basic math requires starting with accurate numbers.

      I've seen 200k passengers quoted - I think you'll find 75k is the number left unable to return home, you're ignoring the ones that failed to fly to their destination in the first place.

      Shit, you think the 1000 impacted flights only had 75 passengers each?

      It's not a high-holiday season which means rebooking people is not costly

      No, just half-term week, one of the few chances for families to go away for a week without hitting the punitive costs of school holiday travel. Oh, and a week starting with a bank holiday, allowing people to get a week off for just four days of holiday allowance.

      For every 300 intercontinental passengers BA rebook on existing flights they save close to $200,000 just on fuel costs

      Assuming those existing flights had spare capacity, and assuming you're spending $200k per flight on fuel costs - which sounds about twice the amount it should.

      But don't forget those long haul flights also incur nearer £600/ticket refund costs and â400 compensation, so rather higher than the very modest estimates I used.

      "The media" I've seen numbers from 15million - 250million. It's hardly a source to base a business decision on.

      No shit. I'm not basing a business decision on it though, merely highlighting that it's very credible to suggest that this is going to materially impact on what ends up in the annual report.

  11. Re:Should be renamed Indian Airways by Opportunist · · Score: 2

    It would already be enough if their CEO has to personally pay for the blunder, and you'll see them replace cheap code chimps with sensible IT staff pretty fucking quickly.

    CEOs don't give a shit about anything as long as it doesn't cut into their bottom line. And I mean their personal one, not the one of the company they are allegedly responsible for.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  12. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by NoNonAlphaCharsHere · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Well, first, Something Bad happened. Then, everybody tried to figure out What Went Wrong, but nobody could, because anybody who could find their ass with both hands had been laid off and their jobs outsourced to a faraway land where everything has to be microscopically explained, perhaps starting with "Well, hydrogen is one proton and one electron" and build from there. Then, The Suits started screaming for blood, but nobody they were screaming at was even competent enough to come up with a cogent response beyond "We're looking into it". Then, the Uber-PHB said "It's not because we shipped all our jobs to the lowest bidder, and It's Not My Fault".

    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity" -- or a combination of stupidity and greed.

  13. Re:Can someone explaing to me by Opportunist · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What I can't explain is why he is STILL the CEO.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  14. Pull The Other One by segedunum · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Cruz thinks he can get people to pay BA prices while slashing costs back beyond budget airline levels. He had form on this with Iberia. Meals cut, added extras cut on long haul flights, crew on zero hour contracts who aren't being paid with cancelled flights and all the IT staff within Britain being fired. No staff give a shit, and why should they?

    Fuck you Alex. I hope this kills BA off.

    1. Re:Pull The Other One by unixisc · · Score: 1

      Actually, just sell them off to itsjihad airways. That should fix it

    2. Re:Pull The Other One by Harold+Halloway · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I often recall this piece of sagely advice from guitarist Robert Fripp, talking to author Tony Bacon:

      TB: What advice would you give a young musician?
      RF: Never fly Air Iberia.
      TB: No, seriously.
      RF: Seriously. Never ever fly Air Iberia.

    3. Re:Pull The Other One by segedunum · · Score: 1

      ROTFL. Anyone can be an airline 'executive' by the looks of it. Maybe that could be outsourced?

    4. Re:Pull The Other One by mjwx · · Score: 1

      I often recall this piece of sagely advice from guitarist Robert Fripp, talking to author Tony Bacon:

      TB: What advice would you give a young musician?
      RF: Never fly Air Iberia.
      TB: No, seriously.
      RF: Seriously. Never ever fly Air Iberia.

      Guess who owns Iberia now?

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  15. There is an obvious solution by stevez67 · · Score: 1

    Outsource the CEO position and fire Cruz; see how he likes it.

  16. So the CEO says he "won't resign" by Scutter · · Score: 1

    Bet you anything that some more IT people get fired, though. Just keep firing IT people until all of your IT problems go away, BA!

    --

    "Tell me doctor, with all of your defenses, are there any provisions for an attack by killer bees?"
    1. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Bad IT people tend to get promoted into management and then worm they way into middle management. The only cure then is to get rid of middle management. When I worked at Cisco and a layoff got announced in October 2013, the Indian engineers were shocked that their middle management got targeted for layoffs. Three layers of middle management got eliminated, all paper pushers and no decision makers.

    2. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by fabriciom · · Score: 1

      No one is getting fired because everything is probably outsourced. They will just change IT service provider and blame whoever was the current provider.

    3. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      No, bad IT people get paid 50000$ a year at age 47 while their peers are married with children, make 6-10 times that wage, and don't feel the need to fabricate a life on Slashdot.

      That's too funny. My sysadmin peers on a nation-wide government IT project make $50K+ per year (engineers get $80K+ per year), most are ex-military and married with children, and none of have ever heard of Slashdot. And everyone has 20+ years of IT experience.

    4. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      In Silicon Valley, the kids pushing fries at Burger World make more.

      Your math is wrong. Minimum wage is $10/hour in Silicon Valley. I make three times more than that (thanks to an extra month of pay as a Christmas bonus). The CEO of Burger World is fighting tooth-and-nail to prevent minimum wage from rising to $15 per hour by 2019.

      The issue could be moot, however, if San Jose adopts the Cities Association of Santa Clara County recommended $15 minimum wage by 2019, which the city's representative to the association endorsed back in June in a non-binding vote. That schedule calls for an $11 an hour wage on Jan. 1, 2017, $13.50 in 2018 and $15 in 2019.

      http://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2016/09/30/san-jose-raises-minimum-wage-but-fine-print-once.html

    5. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      If someone making more than three times what you claim is "scraping by" in Silicon Valley, well, you don't need a lot of math.

      The math is simple. I have money left over after I pay the bills each month. People who make three times more money than I do and whine about it have money issues.

    6. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You have life issues.

      No, I live a modest lifestyle. Other people have issues with the way I live. That's their problem, not mine.

      How many times a month do you go to Goodwill?

      I gave a box of old clothes to Goodwill last month.

    7. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Then your blog/site should describe a week in your life. That would be very interesting.

      That's boring. Check out this thread if you want quality entertainment.

    8. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      What's boring about surviving in SV on 50k$?

      I have $50K+ day job that pays all the bills. A night and weekend side business that produces cash flow. My typical week is no different than any other SV schmuck working 120+ hours per week at a start up.

    9. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      What cash flow?

      :)

    10. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      you're going at it with that other ugly bucket of stupid loser.

      That's not me. Someone registered "criemer" (notice that the "e" and "i" are switched around and user id is 4M+) since "cdreimer" can only post two comments per day with a zero karma. Being a n00b is such a bitch. I stay out of these threads and laugh from the sidelines.

    11. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Ever heard of him?

      TTL Cookbook by Donald E. Lancaster. I bought a copy last month since I got back into through-hole electronics as an adult.

    12. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      If you have money issues, you think food and shelter, out of work for two years, etc.

      I'm actually at the self-actualization level of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. By living a modest lifestyle, I can focus on who I want to be and not on what everything think I should be.

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs#Self-actualization

    13. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 2

      Besides the fact that you are wasting your time, and can simply get an Arduino and blow away anything you could make from TTL chips?

      When I learned electronics in the early 1990's, you couldn't simply dropped in a microcontroler and program your way out of it. (An FPGA was a bit different but I never got far enough in electronics to use that.) I was surprised how much of the old electronic theory came back when I started building circuits again. Maybe some day I'll get around to building a Z80 computer from scratch.

    14. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      Then trust me, the only thing thinking you should be someone else ... is your floor.

      Thanks for reminding. I put the 2017 picture.

    15. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      It was called a VIC-20 or a Commodore 64. Your pal Lancaster even recommended it.

      The 6502 wasn't a microcontroller. And you didn't drop a VIC-20 or C64 into a circuit design.

      If you want to go "full retro" and "through hole", you should build a TV Typewriter, and sell it to some cassette-listening hipster douche in your area.

      I want to build a Z80 computer to run WordStar on C/PM.

    16. Re:So the CEO says he "won't resign" by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 1

      You posted in almost half the posts in this thread.

      The threads that asshats start without my knowledge to make fun of me. Those I'm staying out of. So far there are a half-dozen such threads. The funny thing is that you asshats are so eager to jump my fat ass that you don't stop to see if you're attacking the right person.

      And making a DMCA complaint is your definition of "laughing from the sidelines"?

      I'm protecting my pen pen name with the DMCA take down notice. That's business. If you want attack me, reply to "creimer". Don't create bogus accounts like "cdreimer" or "criemer" to confuse people. Grow a pair and stand behind your opinions.

  17. Re: Can someone explaing to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Maybe it wasn't a single supply, but rather a series of failures over the last 6 months which never got fixed.... and then the last one failed as well.

  18. Please do the needful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Please do the needful and let me put my point.

    Time to resign.

    Oh, and insource. Your data is your most precious resource.

  19. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

    "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"

    I still insist that everybody has that backwards

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  20. Re: Can someone explaing to me by __aaclcg7560 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Maybe it wasn't a single supply, but rather a series of failures over the last 6 months which never got fixed.... and then the last one failed as well.

    Or some forgot to plug in the monitoring cables for the redundant power supplies? I worked at a company where a hallway suddenly smelled like an open sewer for several weeks. What made it mysterious was that no sewer line went through that part of the building, leaving the building owner and plumber puzzled about the source. The smell came from leaking batteries inside a redundant UPS in the network closet on the other side of the wall. Since the monitoring cable wasn't plugged in, the one-man IT department didn't know that the UPS stopped working a long time ago.

  21. Governance failure by Martin+S. · · Score: 2

    He is right that "Outsourcing Not To Blame".

    Power might of well have been the trigger, but the scale of the outage indicates much bigger problems afoot. The root cause of this turning out to be poor IT Governance, those big picture processes that prove the resilience is designed in, tested and proven. That is a failure of IT management.

    IT treated as a cost centre, everything is outsourced on a lowest cost basis. Those suppliers are further whipped into line by crude metrics by managers that got a leg up by doing things quickly or cheaply, not properly. I see this kind of lack of concern for proper governance every day, address this lack of proper governance is by far the most difficult challenger I face as a consultant working in QA.

    The NHS failure was exactly the same thing, the attack was the trigger, the root cause of the collapse of IT was governance failure by very senior management failure to ensure resilience was built in and proven.

  22. Evaluation Problem - double handicap by FeelGood314 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IT is hard and how it works is invisible to those who don't understand it. BA might be screwed. Not only have they outsourced IT but it looks like they don't have the expertise anymore to even evaluate the quality of their IT or even prioritize and fund what their IT should be doing. So now not only is BA not good at IT they are doubly handicapped in that at least from their CEOs statements they can't even evaluate IT.

  23. Computer Glitch...Really? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It makes me wonder if with the unusual frequency the airline industry is experiencing "computer glitches", that they are actually getting hacked and are trying to cover it up!

  24. he has no incentive to tell the truth by cats-paw · · Score: 1

    none whatsoever.

    they obviously fucked up. he's going to blame it on somebody else.

    we won't find out the truth until they fire the scapegoat who will then reveal all.

    as soon as the non-disclosure agreement they signed to get their layoff package expires.

    --
    Absolute statements are never true
  25. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by hey! · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Oh, there's incompetence here, but it's not the India that's the problem.

    In my experience India has an incredible number of talented, capable people, but like talented capable people everywhere they cost more than ignoramuses. But even a country of a billion people has a finite pool of top-notch talent. On the other hand India does have an almost limitless supply of subpar talent, and Indian businessmen are enterprising to a fault. If a Western CEO jis willing to shell out good money for sub-par people, there's a killing to be made.

    So who, exactly, is the fool in this scenario?

    The British Airways debacle was an instance of a catastrophic failure being brought on by an unusually but statistically predictable event. Therefore, the new vendor the CEO brought in wasn't up to the job he hired them for. That's the CEO's fault, end of story.

    The real problem is that people who are good at IT operations make their job look too easy. A fool looking at the lack of drama in a well-run data center is apt to mistake that for the job being easy.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  26. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by Tablizer · · Score: 1

    people who are good at IT operations make their job look too easy. A fool looking at the lack of drama in a well-run data center is apt to mistake that for the job being easy.

    This is so true. The Instant Hero gets all the credit, where all the small preventative actions that keep the system oiled, consistent, and clean get mostly ignored. Make a list of preventative actions and mention them at your next performance review. You have to sell the idea that prevention is powerful.

    And sometimes keeping a clean system requires saying "no" when somebody wants something custom or special without any real justification beyond "we like it that way" or "don't question my authority". Those who dole out special favors and ego-enhancing customization are often rewarded even if they complicate the system in the longer run.

  27. Back in the day at BA... by Dr_Ish · · Score: 2

    In the 1980s, I interviewed for an entry level graduate position with BA, to work with their IT systems. Their people were arrogant and ignorant. When I asked them what languages their systems were written in, the HR droids had no clue. I never got a call back and I am very glad about that. Although the corporate culture has probably changed many times since then, it seems that their attitudes have not improved any. The fact that the head honcho will not take responsibility now is no surprise. I bet he will keep on taking his over-inflated salary and bonuses though.

  28. Re: Can someone explaing to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I've see a note with some details.
    There were institutional issues with out of date software on network devices, and a L2 network stretched across both DCs.
    The power outage caused a switch to fail, which had to be replaced and reconfigured from incomplete documentation. Multiple other devices failed to restart cleanly, due to the failed network, poor systems management and incorrect startup sequencing. The outsourcing staff took a "just reboot it" approach to failures.
    From what I read, it took over 10 hours for the network to converge and stabilize, and even then application servers needed to be correctly sequenced.
    The old in-house staff had not managed and documented existing systems which were not well designed, and the new outsourced staff did not have the skills and experience to recover the charlie-foxtrot.

  29. Re: Spanish Inquisition by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    At least we get a comfy chair!

  30. We detected a CME hit over the weekend on the 27 by CaptnCrud · · Score: 1

    It seemed weak but produced a strong G3-class geomagnetic storm, several other outages occurred as well...but you don't see even a hint of it in any MSM.

  31. If this fucker resigns.... by h4x0t · · Score: 1

    it had better be related to me not receiving my fucking bag!

    FIGURE IT OUT, Fuck head! It's a bag! I need it! I'm in fucking Ghana for fuck's sake!

  32. outsourcing = cheaper labour by felixrising · · Score: 1

    The company I worked for is outsourcing... They replaced 10 people with 40, the 10 people were highly educated and experienced local staff. The 40 people are two grades below the original staff and inexperienced with moderate education. This is how the outsourcing company intends to make money, by reducing employment costs. Now the new staff are utterly clueless on several subjects, notably what actually happens on the data center floor, how things are plugged together and how they should be plugged together properly. After a 3 month ongoing delay hooking up a few servers.. they finally called in an experienced local staffer to finally resolve it. 6 hours later, all done. The issues identified showed that they had been unplugging active connections and patching in the new ones, overwriting network configs without backing them up, misconfiguring network switch interfaces... even getting stuck on basic things like switch interface administratively down and wondering why its not working... basically the inexperience and poor decision making was slowly reducing redundancy on the network and distributed nature of the new teams meant that knowledge of those changes was too distributed for anyone to put it together what was happening.. eventually this would lead to an outage. See OP. Outsourcing companies are in a race to the bottom. The sales guys need to undercut, so they under spec the employees... its cut throat and it's irresponsible. The fact is, the CEO in this case was warned of the risks, giving something to someone else to manage for less money introduces a swathe of new risks that no clause in a contract will mitigate, only penalise. Your company is still going to experience reputational damage. Preaching to the choir.

  33. Re:Can someone explaing to me by ArchieBunker · · Score: 1

    He cut costs and made shareholder's money. Who cares about customer satisfaction...

    --
    Only the State obtains its revenue by coercion. - Murray Rothbard
  34. I'm Sorry... by sycodon · · Score: 1

    ...we have to cancel your flight, but we are experiencing computer problems and our computer staff is currently asleep. We will contact them as soon as it is working hours in India.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  35. Karma by sycodon · · Score: 1

    It would be delightful Karma if this is a result of the "training staff" conveniently forgetting to tell them of a devilish bug that they weren't allowed fix because there was a rather simple work around.

    A work around that is documented somewhere. Now if they could just remember.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
  36. *ism not really at fault by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Venezuela is an example of a single point of failure.
    It doesn't matter what system of government they have, so long as they rely on oil the consequences of a price war with Saudis who can get oil out of the ground at less than one third of the price are kind of obvious.
    Russia didn't cope well either so an oligarchy is not the answer either.

  37. Why not? It's passenger booking not rocket science by dbIII · · Score: 1

    Really?
    Don't dumb yourself down - think about the process that failed (which was not anything to do with avionics, fuel allocation etc etc). What makes loading passengers into a aircraft far more difficult than emergency medicine?

  38. The CEO needs to do the needful - quit. by sethstorm · · Score: 1

    Perhaps if they didn't offshore the staff and/or outsource to a benefit-dodger agency, they might have some competent people.

    There's plenty of Britons that would have done the job better, but the company makes the fatal mistake of offshoring.

    --
    Twitter supports and protects racists - by smearing their critics with the "Hate Speech" label.
  39. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by gnasher719 · · Score: 1

    Then, the Uber-PHB said "It's not because we shipped all our jobs to the lowest bidder, and It's Not My Fault".

    What has Uber to do with this? And if they are involved in any way, we can be sure it's not just their fault, they did it intentionally.

  40. Re:Can someone explaing to me by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Shareholders.

    They started to notice that dissatisfied customers inform others and create a HUGE backlash in social media, which in turn makes people turn their backs to the company. Which translates into lost sales.

    And that's pretty tough for airlines where you have HUGE fixed costs and rather insignificant per-passenger costs. Every empty seat you're flying around hurts you. Why do you think they overbook like crazy?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  41. Re:What happened to identifying the source of erro by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

    I'm fairly lucky to be in a position where people get this. Our current team plans almost to a fault. Documentation gets done along with the work, and everything is well padded for time. It's boring around here. People are cheerful and nice. Sometimes people slide in late, and sometimes people slide out early.
     
    Having worked in a "firefighter" shop before, where everyone was always scrambling to put out fires, I'm shocked by how much more we accomplish. On the few occasions where we have flare-ups, lots of people are available to assist, because we all have some capacity in our jobs. What's fascinating is that someone will say, "Well, I have about 4 hours of time I can give you over the next week, but I can't do more than that. Will that be enough?" Then you're trying to figure out if that's likely enough time to help, not enough to make a difference, and whether or not you need someone else.
     
    Professional, no-drama, well planned out. There's a good chance that any new bosses will come from among our ranks, as that's been tradition for a decade or so. My only fear is if that doesn't happen. We're either going to continue being awesome, or it's downhill all the way. Not a lot of up to go from here.

    --
    Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
  42. Dog bites man by Fudoka · · Score: 1

    It's hardly headline news when a CEO doesn't accept responsibility for something