Airlines do away with social distancing on board

Do not expect the middle seat or for that matter the seat next to you to be empty when you fly.

Back when the coronavirus started to take its toll on air travel, airlines had given assurances that the middle seat would be kept vacant or that there would be a limit on the capacity as a way to social distance in order to reduce possible infection of the disease.

It was easy then when the load dropped to as low as 95 per cent for many carriers as there was never a squeeze on seats. But as travel creeps back, airlines are finding it does not make economic sense to forgo revenue to keep seats empty, never mind the risk of exposing their customers to the hazard.

Courtesy Getty Images

Air Canada and WestJet will end their seat distancing policy effective 1 July. They are sheltering behind the guidelines of the International Air Transport Association (IATA) which deems this to be unnecessary while recommending other measures such as the wearing of masks.

Similarly American Airlines announced that it will open booking to full capacity. The same goes with United Airlines, although it will allow passengers to rebook on another flight if the capacity exceeds 70 per cent. It is not a decision any traveller will be happy to make at the last minute.

Across the Atlantic, Ryanair chief Michael O’Leary has called social distancing in seating “just nonsense”.

It seems contradictory if airlines and airports would encourage social distancing before and after boarding that they should deem the need as unnecessary on board which is an even smaller confined space within which passengers may be held for an inordinately long period of time. The IATA recommendation in this respect therefore runs counter to the guidelines set by several governments.

Transport Canada,for example, has said: “Operators should develop guidance for spacing passengers aboard aircraft when possible to optimize social distancing.” But, of course, “where possible” may become not possible if carriers are selling to full capacity unless it becomes mandatory to limit the capacity.

In the United States, the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee has urged airlines to maintain at least one seat between all passengers and cap seating at 67 per cent of capacity on narrow-body planes.

What then is the priority, you may ask? It seems it is up to the passenger to take the chances, but surely it must be in the interest of the community that everyone abides by the same set of health rules. Besides, contradictory recommendations can only cause confusion.

…but not Delta Air Lines

Courtesy Getty Images

Delta Air Lines though will continue to limit the capacity on board to no more than 60 per cent. Chief executive Ed Bastian said: “We need to make certain that we take all precautions for our people, for our customers, reinforcing wearing masks, social distancing, keeping our plans only at 60 per cent full, making certain every seat next to a customer is open, so you have space on board, and doing everything we can to be cautious in the face of the spread.”

Mr Bastian added that Delta will continue with the policy post-September, although the cap may change after that.

Like Delta, presently Southwest Airlines and JetBlue are also blocking middle seats or restricting capacity. Ryanair’s rival easyJet is also doing likewise.

Air travellers should know what to or not expect when they book with a particular airline to avoid disappointment and be prepared if they have any concerns about the current situation of flying during a global pandemic.

UK self-quarantine rule criticized

As countries ease up on reopening their economies, the question remains in doubt as to how soon the airline industry would return to normalcy. Any relaxation in travel restrictions that are in the offing seems to be deterrent in nature.

Courtesy Reuters

Most airports will require passengers to wear masks or some form of face covering and be subject to thermal temperature testing. These are easy to comply with. But when the United Kingdom announced that it would require any arrival from abroad with the exception of Ireland to self-quarantine at a private residence, that seems to tell non-residents not to visit.

Failure to comply would result in a fine of £1,000.

Questions have been raised about how non-residents may find accommodation with a private address. In its absence, the UK government has now clarified it would make the arrangement. This may well be academic as, indeed, why would someone visit a country if they had to stay quarantined for 14 days?

While many countries still require arrivals from abroad to self-quarantine, airlines with interest in the UK have criticized the proposal as a faux opening move that could only add to the woes of the industry which saw travel plummeting by as much as 99 per cent caused by the Covid-19 pandemic.

Ryanair chief executive Michael O’Leary was particularly critical, slamming the proposal as “nonsensical” and “unenforceable and un-policeable.” He said: “What we’re against are overly ineffective measures such as this nonsensical two-week isolation which applies if you’re not French or you;re not Irish.”

Mr O’Leary argued that the basis for exemption was not science based. The UK government has since backtracked on its decision for arrivals from France.

The Irish government warned Irish travellers that exemption to enter the UK does not mean they would be exempt from self-quarantine when returning to Ireland.

UK Airport Operators Association chief Karen Dee suggested instead a risk-based approach with agreements between countries on a “bridge” for safe travellers who would then not be subject to having to self-quarantine. New Zealand and Australia were already considering such an air corridor between the two countries.

The UK proposal may come into effect next month, but Virgin Atlantic is not optimistic. The airline said the ruling would “prevent flights from resuming” before August because there “simply won’t be sufficient demand”.

On the other hand, the UK government may not be all too concerned about the take-up being slow if that’s what it takes to guard against a second wave of coronavirus infections.

Ultimately it is a question of whether the country is ready to open up and the measured risks it is prepared to take with reasonable safeguards in place.

Some airlines may not survive Covid-19

Anxiety is gripping the airline industry, the concern that some airlines may not survive Covid-19.

Particularly vulnerable are airlines laden with debt and are already struggling to stay afloat as well as small carriers which rely on seasonal traffic.

The dip in oil prices cannot make up for the drastic fall in demand for seats as people refrain from flying and as more countries impose travel restrictions and close their borders.

According to the International Air Transport Association (IATA), global airline revenue losses would rise above US113bn following the announcement of restrictions on travel from Europe into the United States.

Poland for one is suspending all international flights, and many other European countries are expected to take similar action to reduce travel.

Cathay Pacific has warned of financial losses ahead because of the coronavirus outbreak, adding to its woes of plunging profits in 2019 resulting from political unrest in Hong Kong.

Courtesy Getty Images

Korean Air has already sounded the alarm. The airline’s president Woo Kee-hong said: “If the situation continues for a longer period, we may reach the threshold where we cannot guarantee the company’s survival.”

Like many other airlines, Korean Air has suspended flights – as much as 80 per cent – and is asking staff to take voluntary leave. Ryanair may force staff to take unpaid leave.

Norwegian Air Shuttle CEO Jacob Schram said the airline has started talking to the unions about “temporary layoffs for flying crew members as well as employees on the ground in the offices.”

British Airways (BA) too is not ruling out cutting jobs. BA chief Alex Cruz said: “We can no longer sustain our current level of employment and jobs would be lost – perhaps for a short term, perhaps longer term.”

Uncertainty is the word. And that makes it all the more onerous for some airlines not knowing for how much longer they can afford keep their planes on the ground.

A bleak year for airlines

It looks quite certainly a bleak year for airlines as Covid-19 keeps people away from travelling. The outbreak has become more extensive than anticipated, short of being classified as pandemic by the World Health Organization.

Cutting capacity

Many airlines are cutting back or suspending services not only to destinations in China where the outbreak started but also across the world.

Among them are:

Courtesy Singapore Airlines

Singapore Airlines, which has cancelled almost 700 flights across its network through to May. Its low-cost subsidiary Scoot has cancelled all flights to China.

Cathay Pacific, which so far has seen flights reduced by more than 75 per cent till the end of March, with hints of more to be scrapped.

Qantas, which has reduced capacity to Hong Kong and suspended flights to Shanghai and Beijing. It is also reporting weak demand for seats on flights to Singapore and Japan as well. Capacity to Asian destinations will be reduced by 15 per cent until the end of May. Its low-cost subsidiary Jetstar is also adjusting capacity as a result of the weaker domestic market.

Air France, which has taken out flights to China until the end of March.

British Airways, which has cancelled not only flights to China but also more than 200 flights from London to destinations in the United States, Italy, France, Austria, Belgium, Germany and Ireland in the latter half of March.

Ryanair, which will cut up to 25% of flights in and out of Italy from 17 March to 8 April..Ryanair chief Michael O’Leary said: “There has been a notable drop in forward bookings towards the end of March, into early April.”

EasyJet, which is cancelling some flights because of “a significant softening of demand and load factors into and out of our Northern Italian bases”.

United Airlines, which has suspended flights to China and axed flights to South Korea, Japan and Singapore as demand across the Pacific has fallen by as much as 75 per cent. Delta Air Lines has also cancelled flights to China.

Air Canada, which has cancelled all flights from Toronto to Hong Kong until the end of April.

Middle-east airlines, which are affected by action taken by the Gulf authorities. Iran as the epicentre of the outbreak in the region has seen flights to its airports cancelled by neighbouring United Arab Emirates (UAE), Bahrain, Oman, Jordan, Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia.

Events cancelled

The threat of the disease spreading easily at public events has led to many of them being cancelled, which in turn will affect the airlines which would have enjoyed a boon in carriage numbers.

Courtesy United Airlines

United Airlines for one has scaled back additional flights between San Francisco/Newark and Barcelona planned for the Mobile World Congress which has been cancelled.

Now all eyes are on the 2020 Summer Olympics to be staged in Tokyo.

Business travel, as noted by British Airways chief Willie Walsh, has been affected by the cancellation of large conferences. Some large corporations are also restricting executive travel.

International cruises, which pose a similar threat following the outbreak of the disease on the Diamond Princess docked at Yokohama, have also suffered from reduced patronage or cancellations, and this in turn reduces feeds from airlines from across the globe to the ports of call.

Reduced profitability

Expectedly airlines are predicting reduced profitability although some of them are optimistic about the impact as not being as drastic as it seems.

Air France-KLM warned its earnings would be affected by as much as €200 million (US$224 million).

Qantas said the COVID-19 outbreak would cost the airline up to A$150m (US$99m).

Air New Zealand expects the impact to be in the range from NZ$35 million (US$22 million) to NZ$75 million as travel demand to Asia drops.

Finnair is expecting a significant drop in operating profit this year.

Airlines which rely heavily on Asian traffic are naturally more affected, even more so budget carriers such as AirAsia and its long-haul arm AirAsiaX. Particularly vulnerable are airlines which are struggling to stay afloat, such as Norwegian Air Shuttle, which is cutting back on long-haul operations, and Hong Kong Airlines, which is 45 per cent owned by Hainan Airlines of the HNA Group, which itself is facing a sell-off by the Chinese government.

Cost cutting

Besides reducing or cutting capacity, expectedly many airlines are looking at cutting cost.

EasyJet is looking into reducing administrative budgets, offering unpaid leave, and freezing recruitment, promotion and pay rises.

Singapore Airlines is implementing paycuts of 10 to 15 per cent for senior executive management. General staff will be offered a voluntary no-pay leave scheme.

Cathay Pacific is asking employees to take unpaid leave.

Courtesy Airbus

Perhaps the impact is most felt at Hong Kong Airlines which has slashed in-flight services to a bare minimum and dismissed staff, targeting 400 of them.

What’s next?

While the industry contnues to grapple with the prolonged saga of the B737 Max jet predicament, the coronavirus outbreak could not have come at a worse time on its heels. In both cases, it is the uncertainty that poses the biggest problem. Soem airlines are pessimistic that the threat will blow over by the end of March, which is unlikely, while others are more cautious in their forecast, looking at the end of May. It is this uncertainty that makes one wonder if any of them might not survive the wait.

Protecting the consumer rights of air travellers

This article was published in Today, 25 October 2019.

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/protecting-consumer-rights-air-travellers

2019 Skytrax World Airline Awards: Who are the real winners?

It’s that time of the year when the airline industry is abuzz with the Skytrax World Airline Awards announced recently at the Paris Air Show.

There are surveys and there are surveys, if you know what I mean. Skytrax, which launched its survey back in 1999 (according to its website) is generally viewed with some regard. It is said that more than 21 million respondents participated in the 2019 survey.

But what can we read of the results?

Which is the real winner: Qatar Airways or Singapore Airlines?

Qatar Airways switched places with last year winner Singapore Airlines (SIA) to be the world’s best airline.

As far back as 2010 until now, the two airlines have been ranked one behind the other in the top three spots, except in 2012 when Asiana came in second place between Qatar the winner and SIA in third position. In the ten year period, SIA came behind Qatar in eight years, except in 2010 when SIA was second and Qatar third, and last year when the Singapore carrier became the world’s best ahead of Qatar in second placing.

It looks like a tight race between Qatar and SIA for the top spot, and going by the survey results, Qatar has outranked SIA. It has become the first airline to have won the award five times, one more in the history of the awards.

But SIA is still ranked ahead of Qatar for first class and economy class.

In the first class category, Qatar is not even a close second to SIA in first placing but fifth behind Lufthansa, Air France and Etihad as well

In the economy class category, Japan Airlines is tops followed by SIA and Qatar in second and third placing respectively.

Besides SIA has the best premium economy in Asia, second only to Virgin Atlantic worldwide. But,of course, Qatar does not offer that class of travel.

Additionally SIA tops for cabin crew, and Qatar is farther down the list in 9th position.

But Qatar wins for business class, followed by ANA and SIA in second and third placing respectively. So it seems there is heavier weightage for this segment which has become probably the fiercest battleground for the airlines. First class included, it also suggests the halo effect of the premium product, but it is the business class that is the primary focus in today’s business.

It also attests to the impact of the recency factor. Qatar obviously impresses with its cubicle-like Qsuite that comes with its own door to provide maximum privacy. Quad configurations allow businessmen to engage in conference as if they were in a meeting room and families to share their own private space. And there is a double bed option.

Which brings up the importance of having to continually innovate and upgrade the product to stay ahead in the race.

The top ten listing: Consistency equals excellence

The ranking does not shift much from year to year. Besides Qatar and SIA, there are some familiar names: All Nippon Airways (3rd this year), Cathay Pacific (4th), Emirates (5th), EVA Air (6th) and Lufthansa (9th). So there is not much of a big deal as airlines switch places so long as they remain in the premier list.

Hainan Airlines (7th) is making good progress, moving up one notch every year since 2017. Qantas (8th) is less consistent, moving in and out of the top ten list, Thai Airways retained its 10th spot for a second year.

It is no surprise that the list continues to be dominated by Asian carriers which are generally reputed for service. You only need to look at the winners for best cabin crew: Besides SIA, the list is made up of Garuda Indonesia, ANA, Thai Airways, EVA Air, Cathay Pacific, Hainan Airlines, Japan Airlines and China Airlines. With the exception of Qatar, no other airline outside Asia is listed.

If you to look to find out how the United States carriers are performing, scroll down the extended list of the 100 best and you will see JetBlue Airways (40th), Delta Air Lines (41st), Southwest Airlines (47th), Alaska Airlines (54th), United Airlines (68th) and American Airlines (74th).

Home and regional rivalry

Rivalry between major home airlines or among competing regional carriers is often closely watched.

Air Canada, placed 31st ahead of rival WestJet at 55th can boast it is the best in North America. That’s how you can work the survey results to your advantage.

ANA (3rd) has consistently outdone arch rival JAL (11th). In fact, ANA has been the favoured airline in the past decade till now. It has Japan’s best airline staff and best cabin crew. Across Asia, it provides the best business class. Internationally, it provides the best airport services and business class onboard catering.

Asiana (28th) is favoured over Korean Air (35th ).

The big three Gulf carriers are ranked Qatar first, followed by Emirates (5th) and Etihad (29th).

Among the European carriers, Lufthansa (9th) leads the field, followed by Swiss International Air Lines (13th), Austrian Airlines (15th), KLM (18th), British Airways (19th), Virgin Atlantic (21st), Aeroflot (22nd), Air France (23rd), Iberia (26th) and Finnair (32nd).

What about low-cost carriers?

Worthy of note is how some budget carriers are ranked not far behind legacy airlines. AirAsia (20th) is best among cohorts. EasyJet (37th) and Norwegian Air Shuttle (39th) are not far behind the big guys in Europe. Among US carriers, Southwest Airlines (47th) is third after JetBlue (40th) and Delta (41st).

Also, pedigree parents do not necessarily produce top-ranked offshoots. Placed farther down the list are SIA’s subsidiary Scoot (64th) and the two Jetstar subsidiaries of Qantas – Jetstar Airways (53rd) and Jetstar Asia (81st). So too may be said of so-called regional arms. Cathay Pacific’s Cathay Dragon is ranked 33rd, but SIA’s SilkAir is way down at 62nd.

Pioneer of the modern budget model Ryanair is ranked 59th.

Down the slippery road of decline: Aisana Airlines and Etihad Airways

If it is difficult to stay at the top, it is easy to slip down the slippery road of decline. Asiana and Etihad are two examples.

Asiana was ranked world’s best airline in 2010 and became a familiar name in the top ten list up to 2014, after which its ranking kept falling: 11th (2015), 16th (2016), 20th (2017), 24th (2018) and 28th (2019). Its erstwhile glory has been whittled down to being just best cabin crew in South Korea.

Etihad did reasonably well for eight years until 2018 when it was ranked 15th, and a year later suffered a dramatic decline to the 29th spot. That, despite beating Qatar to be this year’s best first class in the Middle East.

As I stated at the onset that there are surveys and there are surveys. Some are not specifically targeted , whether its interest is business or leisure for example. There is always an element of subjectivity and bias in the composition and weightage, and this renders no one reading as being definitive. At best, we can read across several creditable surveys to know with some conviction how the airlines really measure against each other.

Read also:

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/can-singapore-airlines-overtake-qatar-worlds-best-airline

New MAX issues will keep jet on the ground

Courtesy Getty Images

Just as you think all that’s left remaining to be said of the Boeing 737 MAX 8 saga is waiting for the Federal Aviation Administration Authority of the United States (FAA) to announce the lifting of its grounding, new developments – whether directly or indirectly related – continue to stand in its way, making the delicate job of regaining customer’s confidence even more challenging.

Even as one is willing to put past issues aside – issues such as poor oversight and shoddy work at the Boeing plant, FAA’s laxity at certification, tardy reaction to warnings by pilots of potential issues with the MAX – adding new ones can only shake that confidence. What other beasts are out there to be discovered?

Latest, Boeing is warning airlines about potential flaws on the wings of some 737 jets including the MAX. More than 300 aircraft across the world may be affected, said to be the result of “improper manufacturing process” leading potentially to premature failure or cracks of the faulty parts. The aircraft manufacturer’s transparency is to be appreciated, but coming after two fatal crashes of the Max jet with a definitive conclusion still pending is unfortunately ill-timed. Of course, it is good to know that Boeing is committed to giving attention to the potential problem top priority.

Going forward, Boeing may have fixed the software glitch of the MAX, but airlines and regulators are still grappling with the issue of pilot training. Boeing, FAA and US carriers such as American Airlines, Southwest Airlines and United Airlines all of which are big Max customers do not think simulator training is necessary, believing training on computers or tablets is sufficient for seasoned pilots.

It recalls how Boeing had said pilots familiar with the B737 aircraft would know what to do and that there were procedures in place to handle the kind of malfunction that some pilots had reported to have encountered. Ethiopian authorities had insisted that the pilots of the ill-fated Ethiopian Airlines flight had followed the procedures but were unable to control the aircraft.

Boeing too had said it would make an already safe aircraft “safer”, so to the lay traveller, why not be “doubly” sure?

Canada is one country that had said the US proposal of computer-based training which some pilots had received in the transition from the older B737 jet to the Max was not good enough. According to a Reuters report, Canadian Transport Minister Marc Garneau said: “It’s not going to be a question of pulling out an iPad and spending an hour on it. Simulators are the very best way, from a training point of view, to go over exactly what could happen in a real way and to react properly to it.”

Airlines favouring simulator training include Ryanair and Ethiopian Airlines.

According to some industry sources, part of the MAX’s appeal was that it did not require costly simulator training. Again, the old question surfaces, if at all it is pertinent, what price safety?

It looks like the MAX will have to stay on the ground longer than expected.

Is the Boeing Max ready to fly?

Courtesy Boeing

Airlines looking forward to fly their fleet of Boeing B737 Max 8 aircraft have just got their planned schedules jiggered up by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)’s announcement that it may take up to a year before the jet is cleared again for commercial flights.

According to the BBC, FAA chief Daniel Elwell said: “If it takes a year to find everything we need to give us the confidence to lift the (grounding) order so be it.”

It may be read that underlying this is the FAA’s understanding that time is needed to regain the world’s trust – in both the aircraft and the FAA as regulator. While Boeing seems ready to sign off the improved jet, saying it has finished updating the pertinent flight-control software, FAA in an apparent redeeming move following censure of its lax oversight is assuming control as the final authority to certify the jet’s safety.

According to Bloomberg, Mr Elwell added at a meeting with representation from across the globe, “If there is a crisis in confidence, we hope this will help to show the world that the world still talks together about aviation safety issues.”

In Boeing’s favour, some airlines have voiced their support of the Max. Understandably so, particularly if the airline owns a sizeable fleet of the jet. American Airlines (AA) for one is confident of an “absolute fix” but CEO Doug Parker was also quick to add, “But…it’s not for us to decide whether or not the aircraft flies. It needs to be safe for everyone.” The airline, which has a fleet of 24 Max jets, has cancelled thousands of flights and has now cancelled Max schedules through mid-August.

Another airline which has pledged its commitment to Boeing is Singapore Airlines (SIA). The airline is pledging its commitment to purchase 39 Dreamliner jets and its re-commitment for a previous order of 30 planes. Although this is not related to the Max aircraft of which its subsidiary SilkAir has six of them, it gives Boeing a boost of confidence after reports of shoddy production and poor oversight at the Boeing plant in North Charleston surfaced, and following grounding of some Dreamliner jets because of problems with the Rolls Royce Trent engine fitted to the aircraft.

Read also:

https://www.todayonline.com/commentary/grounding-boeing-max-and-dreamliner-planes-how-can-singapores-airlines-reassure-customers

It’s good to have friends, indeed. But while it’s not yet known if airlines such as AA and SIA have sought or will seek compensation from Boeing, others which have made known their intention include Norwegian Air Shuttle, Ryanair and the big three Chinese carriers of Air China, China Eastern Airlines and China Southern Airlines. A strongly worded report from the Chinese Global Times newspaper said: “We must use punishment and tell the Americans their practice of using concealment and fraud to extract benefits from others, while benefiting themselves, is unfair.”

Size matters in the air

Courtesy Getty Images

Ryanair chief Michael O’Leary predicted that “within the next four to five years you are seeing the emergence of four or five large European airline groups.” He even named the airlines, Ryanair among them in a mix of full-service and low-cost operators: Lufthansa, IAG (International Airlines Group which owns British Airways, Iberia, Aer Lingus, Vueling and Level), Air France-KLM and, probably, Easyjet.

This sentiment has been opined before by others at a time when mergers, assimilations and acquisitions across the industry were trending as competition broke barriers of entry and intensified, and so-called safe niche markets became every player’s game.

Air France-KLM as the name suggests is a merger of the two European airlines in 2004. Rival British Airways (BA) viewed it as a step in the expected direction, predicting further consolidation within Europe. And in 2011 IAG came into being when BA and Iberia merged. BA chief executive Willie Walsh said at the time that the merger would enable the airline to compete effectively with low-cost carriers.

So there came a time when budget carriers began to pose a threat to full-service airlines, with Ryanair leading the pack. Many of the legacy airlines today have adopted the budget model of charging for ancillaries, and introducing a basic economy class to keep cost-conscious travellers from switching. However, many low-cost carriers have become victims of the competition – the reason why Mr O’Leary named only one other carrier, EasyJet, as a probable survivor.

EasyJet, founded in 1995 and headquartered in London Luton, UK, is Ryanair’s closest rival which has grown and spread its wings across Europe. It too has made a number of acquisitions which include Swiss TEA-Basle and Go.
Elsewhere around the world, the vibes are not unfamiliar, New in the circuit is Air Canada’s interest in Sunwing and Cathay Pacific’s interest in Air Hong Kong Express, And where acquisitions and mergers are not on the plate, airlines are working to form alliances that are more than mere code-sharing. Qantas did it in 2013 with its tie-up with Emirates, and now Malaysia Airlines and Japan Airlines have applied for waiver of government restrictions to form an alliance that will enable easier connections between the two carriers.

It looks like size matters in the air.

Etihad Airways goes green: Working towards zero single-use plastic

Courtesy Etihad Airways

Etihad Airways marked Earth Day (22 April) by becoming the first Middle East airline to operate a flight without any single-use plastic item on board. This is commendable considering that the carrier uses some 27 million single-use plastic coffee cup lids every year. So on the flight from Abu Dhabi to Brisbane, passengers got to eat their coffee cups as well.

Etihad says it is committed to improving its environmental policies beyond the Earth Day flight. The carrier hopes to be able to reduce usage of single-use plastic by 80 per cent by the end of 2022. No fewer than 95 such items will be replaced.

Tony Douglas, Group chief executive officer, said “as a leading airline, it’s our responsibility to act on this, to challenge industry standards and work with suppliers who provide lower impact alternatives.”

H.E. Mohamed Mubarak Fadhel Al Mazriuei, Group chairman, said: “This step is an extension of Etihad’s pioneering environmental efforts. Inaugurating 2019 with the locally sourced biofuel flight and the operation of the longest single-use plastic free flight are testament to our commitment to leading effective change towards sustainability.”

Now that should set an example for other airlines to emulate if they are serious about saving the environment. In fact, some airlines are already doing their part.

Portuguese charter airline Hi Fly is already flying plastic-free since December.

Alaska Airlines, which in 2011 declared a policy to go green when it launched 75 commercial flights using biofuel and replaced traditional holiday card with e-cards, has ceased using plastic straws.

And Ryanair has pledged to scrap single-use plastic by 2023.

We wait to hear what other airlines will do. Action speaks louder than words.