Budget does not mean 'heartless'

I refer to your report, {Group wants aerobridges at KLIA 2}, and it's disheartening to read that the disadvantaged have to stoop to such strong measures to get the Govt to look into their grievances.

In my view, the nation's premier budget airline, in its bid to become a global leader in budget air travel, has seen fit to sacrifice its CSR objectives (Corporate Social Responsibility) for the sake of the bottom line, and has left us wondering if achieving profitability and a high income status should be done at the expense of the poor and the disadvantaged.

I have been using this budget airline since its inception, for business and private purposes, and I have seen it deteriorate from a friendly and warm airline to an airline that rushes and cajoles its passengers just to make a few dollars. In the beginning, pregnant women, children and the elderly were boarded before the other passengers. This compassionate gesture has been removed, although I observe that it is still being followed by other budget airlines (Cebu Pacific for example).

I had also twritten to the CEO of that airline to ask him to provide for hand cleaning soap in the toilets, as hygiene and cleanliness was also overlooked in the beginning. When I again wrote in to suggest that passengers be given seat numbers to reduce rushing and pushing (as the priority to board for pregnant ladies,children, etc was withdrawn), the CEO replied that ALL BUDGET airlines operate on a "numberless" seat policy. A few months down the road, the airline offered seat number bookings AT AN EXTRA COST.

Of course we know now of the other 'benefits' that have been removed or shifted into the 'paying category', like front row seats, check in luggage, "administration" fee, the list is long.

Suffice to say, I think it is ironic that, for Malaysia to endeavour to achieve high income status, and by extension a better standard of living, to have to downgrade the construction of KLIA2 to an international airport without aerobridges, which is the perfect way for passengers to embark and disembark in ALL weather conditions. It is a double irony that the decision NOT to have aerobridges is apparently made following the request of the budget carrier, IN ORDER TO HELP IT MAINTAIN ITS TURNAROUND TIME!!!

It is quite clear to me, if the decision not to have aerobridges is upheld, the Govt, as well as the National Budget carrier is treating air travel passengers just as a cost centre for profit, and nothing else.

Does Malaysia want to become a nation without soul?