Maximise your Avios, air miles and hotel points

SOLD OUT: Heathrow tells all airlines to stop selling ANY flights until 11th September

Links on Head for Points may support the site by paying a commission.  See here for all partner links.

The Summer air travel situation took a surprising turn on Tuesday when Heathrow effectively stopped airlines from selling any further seats for flights this Summer.

In an open letter, Heathrow CEO John Holland-Kaye said that the airport had realised that it was, effectively, no longer possible for it to offer the level of service it wanted this Summer and that something had to give. This is especially true for ground handling staff – albeit these are not employed by the airport – which are still chronically below the number required.

Kaye’s solution is to cap Heathrow passenger numbers at 100,000 per day for the Summer period, which they are specifying as ending on 11th September.

This would be fine, except that airlines have already sold an average of 101,500 tickets per day and seats are still on sale.

Effectively immediately, Heathrow has requested:

  • the closure for sale of all flights departing from the airport until 11th September
  • a reduction in the expected passenger numbers from 101,500 to 100,000 per day

Whilst airlines are not legally bound to follow this, Heathrow will respond by forcing airlines to cancel additional flights if they do not do so.

One way or another, only 100,000 people per day are flying from the airport this Summer.

Whilst not discussed in this letter, the airport is also believed to be considering restrictions on checked luggage and, as it did yesterday for same-day rebooking, banning airlines from rebooking passengers whose flights are cancelled, since this does not nothing to reduce passenger numbers in total.

Heathrow tells BA (and other airlines) to stop selling tickets for the Summer period

Here is the full statement:

“The global aviation industry is recovering from the pandemic, but the legacy of COVID continues to pose challenges for the entire sector as it rebuilds capacity.  At Heathrow, we have seen 40 years of passenger growth in just four months. Despite this, we managed to get the vast majority of passengers away smoothly on their journeys through the Easter and half term peaks. This was only possible because of close collaboration and planning with our airport partners including airlines, airline ground handlers and Border Force.   

“We started recruiting back in November last year in anticipation of capacity recovering this summer, and by the end of July, we will have as many people working in security as we had pre-pandemic. We have also reopened and moved 25 airlines into Terminal 4 to provide more space for passengers and grown our passenger service team.    

“New colleagues are learning fast but are not yet up to full speed. However, there are some critical functions in the airport which are still significantly under resourced, in particular ground handlers, who are contracted by airlines to provide check-in staff, load and unload bags and turnaround aircraft. They are doing the very best they can with the resources available and we are giving them as much support possible, but this is a significant constraint to the airport’s overall capacity. 

“However, over the past few weeks, as departing passenger numbers have regularly exceeded 100,000 a day, we have started to see periods when service drops to a level that is not acceptable: long queue times, delays for passengers requiring assistance, bags not travelling with passengers or arriving late, low punctuality and last-minute cancellations. This is due to a combination of reduced arrivals punctuality (as a result of delays at other airports and in European airspace) and increased passenger numbers starting to exceed the combined capacity of airlines, airline ground handlers and the airport.  Our colleagues are going above and beyond to get as many passengers away as possible, but we cannot put them at risk for their own safety and wellbeing.   

“Last month, the DfT and CAA wrote to the sector asking us all to review our plans for the summer and ensure we were prepared to manage expected passenger levels safely and minimise further disruption. Ministers subsequently implemented a slot amnesty programme to encourage airlines to remove flights from their schedules with no penalty. We held off putting additional controls on passenger numbers until this amnesty process concluded last Friday and we had a clearer view of the reductions that airlines have made.    

“Some airlines have taken significant action, but others have not, and we believe that further action is needed now to ensure passengers have a safe and reliable journey.  We have therefore made the difficult decision to introduce a capacity cap with effect from 12 July to 11 September. Similar measures to control passenger demand have been implemented at other airports both in the UK and around the world.  

“Our assessment is that the maximum number of daily departing passengers that airlines, airline ground handlers and the airport can collectively serve over the summer is no more than 100,000. The latest forecasts indicate that even despite the amnesty, daily departing seats over the summer will average 104,000 – giving a daily excess of 4,000 seats. On average only about 1,500 of these 4,000 daily seats have currently been sold to passengers, and so we are asking our airline partners to stop selling summer tickets to limit the impact on passengers.   

“By making this intervention now, our objective is to protect flights for the vast majority of passengers at Heathrow this summer and to give confidence that everyone who does travel through the airport will have a safe and reliable journey and arrive at their destination with their bags. We recognise that this will mean some summer journeys will either be moved to another day, another airport or be cancelled and we apologise to those whose travel plans are affected.   

“The airport will still be busy, as we are trying to get as many people away as possible, and we ask you to bear with us if it takes a little longer to check in, go through security or collect your bag than you are used to at Heathrow.  We ask passengers to help, by making sure they have completed all their COVID requirements online before they come to the airport, by not arriving earlier than 3 hours before their flight, by being ready for security with laptops out of bags and liquids, aerosols and gels in a sealed 100ml plastic bag, and by using e-gates in immigration where eligible. We are all recruiting as fast as we can and aim to return to the excellent service you should expect from the UK’s hub airport as soon as possible.”   

Category

General

Comments (292)

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

  • N says:
    12 Jul12 July 11:56

    Loooooooool

    • N says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:00

      I appreciate this doesn’t add much to the discourse, or is very useful, but the situation is completely obscene and the incompetence and lack of planning is actually extremely “Loooooooool”.

  • TGLoyalty says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:00

    So the great employee cost reset they thought they were getting during covid has turned round and left a great white size hole in their operation.

    Can’t say they don’t deserve it.

    • Al says:
      12 Jul12 July 13:22

      They would rather lose Millions in revenue then admit their staff cost cutting was a mistake.

    • AJA says:
      12 Jul12 July 13:38

      The trouble is we passengers are suffering as a result. If it was just painful for HAL and the airlines I’d be happier.

      • meta says:
        12 Jul12 July 14:31

        They were boasting about their predictions that travel won’t bounce back until 2024-25.

        They have staff, but apparently can’t train them🙄 I wonder whether passengers should actually start taking HAL to court over the mess. Plenty of evidence of mis-managment.

    • The Original Nick. says:
      12 Jul12 July 19:20

      The Same as most other businesses…

  • Chas says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:11

    “banning airlines from rebooking passengers whose flights are cancelled” – how do they think that they can ban airlines from complying with the law (not that the airlines are good at complying in the first place….

    The airlines must think that they’ve had a field day, as everything can now be blamed on LHR. I’d imagine that they would claim “exceptional circumstances”, but what are people’s views as to whether this will be valid, as it will be up to the airlines to decide which flights to cancel…

    • Callum says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:22

      They’re not banning them from rebooking, they’re banning them from rebooking from LHR. Very bad service to the airline involved, but it doesn’t stop them re-routing you from a different airport.

      I was thinking the same with the extraordinary circumstances. The blanket “it’s cos of Covid” was always a bit of a grey area, but I’d say that the airport specifically banning the airline from putting you on the flight definitely falls under extraordinary circumstances. How could it not really?

    • Mark says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:28

      The right to reimbursement or rerouting is not subject to the “exceptional circumstances” get-out. If banned from rebooking anyone “earliest opportunity” may mean after the 11th September though, or to/from an airport other than Heathrow….

      Crossing my fingers that our flight from Heathrow on the 7th September is not impacted. I don’t think I want to go anywhere near an airport until then….

      • Rob says:
        12 Jul12 July 12:54

        There were 10 people in the Aer Lingus lounge yesterday when I was there. All very manageable.

        • Mark says:
          12 Jul12 July 14:13

          That’s not necessarily representative though and people’s experiences will vary. 18th June departure from T5 saw the BA South Lounge very busy (with queues for the toilets) and a fairly significant delay due to a shortage of cleaners for the aircraft though it was otherwise fine. Our return flight into T2 was surprisingly smooth, though for the first time ever we made a list of our case contents in anticipation of a potential claim following the massive baggage delivery issues in mid-June. On the basis that the cap is designed with sufficient headroom to ensure a consistent reliable service that may be fine for those who are then able to travel, but that hasn’t been the case in recent weeks.

          • AJA says:
            12 Jul12 July 14:28

            I have taken to photographing the contents of my luggage before I pack it as an aide memoire and I leave an itinerary visible on the inside together with the addresses of my hotel(s) in case it doesn’t reach the destination with me.

          • The Original Nick. says:
            12 Jul12 July 19:27

            Both North and South Galleries lounges have been very busy over the last 4 months I’ve been. I really don’t understand why people are not advised to go over to the BA lounge in Concourse B at T5 to help out and free up seats.

      • Nicky says:
        12 Jul12 July 20:02

        Surely it would be a good argument that for the first few days it can be referred to as ‘exceptional circumstances’ how long can they claim that for? I would argue that after about a week it is no longer an exceptional circumstance

  • Yorkieflyer says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:12

    Heathrow airport is beyond a joke, worth recalling the £4bn dividends paid out in the 10years pre pandemic, the refusal of the owners to inject capital to support the business in the last couple of years and their insistence on maintaining a return to shareholders by attempting to surcharge airlines to support their revenue shortfalls and pay for capital investment.
    The regulator, the CAA, of this monopoly as the UK’s hub airport has singularly failed to be robust enough.
    The really shocking thing is I almost feel sympathy for British Airways. A clear argument for nationalising it in my view, a critical part of the UK’s infrastructure mismanaged, bled dry and poorly regulated.

    • Callum says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:24

      I find the whole “private but heavily regulated” system very bizarre. Either let it be run privately, or as you say, nationalise it (the option I’d definitely prefer)

      • JDB says:
        12 Jul12 July 12:29

        I’m not sure what makes you think any government would run it better, but more importantly the airport would inevitably get starved of investment. When capital projects need to be funded out of a limited pot and ministers have to decide between hospitals, schools and an airport who will get funding, guess which project won’t get the go ahead…

        • degsy says:
          12 Jul12 July 12:49

          Presumably on the basis they couldn’t run it any worse? It’s a complete sh1tshow.
          And as far as I can see, Heathrow Airport seems to have been ‘starved of investment’ being run as a private company.

          • Rob says:
            12 Jul12 July 12:57

            Have you actually been to airports in other countries? You will struggle to find better facilities that T5 and T2. Even T2, built on a far lower budget than T5, was over £2 billion.

          • BlueThroughCrimp says:
            12 Jul12 July 14:30

            The Government of Singapore owned Changi blows anything we have out of the water.

          • Rob says:
            12 Jul12 July 14:34

            Singapore is like the Middle East though – the airport and the airline are economic status symbols.

          • BlueThroughCrimp says:
            12 Jul12 July 14:44

            And a load of the status symbol buildings in the City and abouts are build with money from the East.
            Shame they didn’t extend that to airports.

          • Callum says:
            12 Jul12 July 15:18

            Rob, what experience do you get in T2/5 that you wouldn’t get in any half-decent airport anywhere in the world?

            I’m in agreement that they’re nice terminals, I’m struggling to see what makes them a worldwide stand-out though? Especially if you’re considering the mass market and not what a small subset of business passengers with large wallets can access.

          • Rob says:
            12 Jul12 July 16:24

            Nothing, just done smarter and classier.

          • Thywillbedone says:
            13 Jul13 July 07:10

            It’s the same reason you generally get a mediocre (at best) in any private equity owned restaurant chain …everything is optimised to hit an absolute bare minimum standard just short of you making a complaint.

        • Rob says:
          12 Jul12 July 12:53

          There is no simple answer. The current system is probably a decent hybrid, since – by giving a fixed return on investment – it encourages the airport to invest in new facilities instead of sitting on its monopoly position. However, you then come to issues over ‘dual till’ and (literal) gold plating of what is built, plus the issue of how you encourage cost control on the spending when the goal is to spend more.

          • Yorkieflyer says:
            12 Jul12 July 13:02

            the current system is the worst of all options in my humble opinion. If you really wanted to be radical why not sell each terminal of separately and have a separate authority running the remaining infrastructure…. oh we tried that with the railways!

          • Rhys says:
            12 Jul12 July 13:48

            This is how the US system works, and some of their airports are awful!

        • Yorkieflyer says:
          12 Jul12 July 12:59

          and currently the customers pay upfront for investment much the same way as water companies to ensure guaranteed returns to shareholders for largely risk free investments.

        • Callum says:
          12 Jul12 July 13:27

          Leaving aside the fact I didn’t say anything about the government running it better…

          The airport wouldn’t “inevitably” get starved of investment. While you seem to be imagining that the entire government runs off a single current account with every entity scrapping to get their share, you could very easily run it as a government owned independent company with it’s own budget – i.e. exactly as it is now without the focus on dividends, and exactly how public transport works very successfully in numerous countries.

        • Track says:
          12 Jul12 July 20:48

          @JDB. They will issue get debt for capital investments at cheaper rates at that (implicit government guarantee behind).

          Private ownership of public utilities typically means they get loaded with debt and it goes into stuff like shareholder dividend and leveraged buyouts. Those operators or PE companies surely charge for the privilege.

      • Mouse says:
        12 Jul12 July 14:52

        The obvious solution for me would be for the main airlines operating out of the airport to run it as a joint venture, which gives a good balance between motivation to invest to provide an attractive product for their customers and motivation to keep costs down to remain competitive on price

    • JDB says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:32

      @Yorkieflyer if you have an ISA or a pension do you equally support the idea that your investments in shares shouldn’t be allowed dividends/a return on the investment? One of the shareholders is the (UK) Universities Superannuation Scheme; are university lecturers/staff really not allowed a return?

      • Yorkieflyer says:
        12 Jul12 July 12:56

        It’s the fact that it’s a natural monopoly, much like the water companies, if privatised they require heavy regulation to prevent them exploiting customers and making excess profits. In many parts of the capitalist world ther is an acceptance that such utilities should be state owned and it’s not a Left/Right argument.
        The USS is a poor example to use frankly, a huge deficit as a result of a mismatch between benefits and contributions for years!

      • Callum says:
        12 Jul12 July 13:35

        I think this is a great illustration where ideological differences cause stalemates in discussions like this because one side can’t understand the motivation of the other.

        Is the idea that someone would be arguing for the greater good instead of personal enrichment really that shocking to you? I’m unaware if any of my funds contain HAH shares, but yes, I would happily lose all future dividends from it if it results in a better public service.

        Privatisation can be amazing, but in essential public infrastructure – particularly when operating without meaningful competition – I am wholly against it.

      • Track says:
        12 Jul12 July 20:55

        @JDB Rofl you are really making it ideological by invoking ‘poor teachers’ comment.

        I have USS statement of funding on my desk — it is severely under-funded, requires universities to put up substantial amounts of money.

        It is nowhere clear tho, that people who will pay into / make up USS shortfall for the near future, will actually benefit from this or anything alike when it is their turn to retire. Far from guaranteed..

    • AJA says:
      12 Jul12 July 13:08

      It’s not so much the dividends paid out when the business was doing well its the lack of investment and support of the business during the pandemic that I find shocking.

      Holland-Kaye has been going on and on over the last 12 months and more bleating that the government was holding HAL and the airlines back because of the imposed travel restrictions when in reality now that things have opened up it is plain to see they were not as prepared as they claimed. It also beggars belief that they had the temerity to blame the government for the delays in issuing airside passes when in fact it is their own fault with the lot up in Scotland holding things up.

      • numpty says:
        12 Jul12 July 13:17

        what ‘lot up in Scotland’ is it you are referring to? Narrow it down for me.

        • Colin MacKinnon says:
          12 Jul12 July 13:21

          Legacy BAA staff in Glasgow tasked with airside permits. Nothing to do with politics!

        • AJA says:
          12 Jul12 July 13:28

          The place where HAL actually does its checks and issues the airside passes for LHR. HAL obviously decided it was cheaper to locate the staff in Scotland than to have them in a back office on site at LHR.

    • Track says:
      12 Jul12 July 20:44

      Hear, hear!

    • Alex Sm says:
      13 Jul13 July 08:51

      Why couldn’t it be a status symbol in the UK? It will fit perfectly well into the government narrative of #MakeBritainGreatAgain and #GlobalBritain

  • George K says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:12

    Heathrow is really the worst airport masquerading as a world class one.

    • Thor says:
      13 Jul13 July 11:50

      You really need to travel more if you think that LHR is bad…
      As examples CDG, LAX, JFK, NBO, AUH, MUC are all major international hub airports which are much worse in almost every aspect…

  • WillPS says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:13

    Fools.

  • pigeon says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:13

    Wow. Are the Heathrow managers really expecting BA to pull the last minute fares from sale? To lose out on £10k LHR-JFK sales? For the next two months?

    What a joke.

    • Paul says:
      12 Jul12 July 19:21

      Not at all, they’re expecting them to cap the number of seats. Logically BA should absolutely continue to sell “£10k LHR-JFK” seats as you put it, and find some typically cheaper short haul flights to cancel to comply with the cap. I agree it’s a joke however.

  • Sussex bantam says:
    12 Jul12 July 12:14

    What restrictions on checked baggage ?

    • Rob says:
      12 Jul12 July 12:22

      Whatever they decide … could be no bags on short haul, could be one bag per person. Not clear yet and indeed may not happen if these caps are effective.

      • J says:
        12 Jul12 July 12:23

        Are you entitled to a refund if bags are dropped from the booking?

        • Rob says:
          12 Jul12 July 12:37

          BA may disagree but I’d argue it was part of the implied contract when you booked so yes.

          • lesscleverandrew says:
            12 Jul12 July 12:46

            Restricting baggage for so many holiday flights could therefore make things much worse. Summer of chaos at Heathrow?

          • Rob says:
            12 Jul12 July 12:48

            No, makes it better. The pinch point is baggage handling. Sending out aircraft with no luggage is the easiest way to fix things. Security, check-in etc isn’t actually too bad – I flew from T2 yesterday and it was manageable.

          • Yorkieflyer says:
            12 Jul12 July 13:05

            I wonder whether bags are complimentary though?!

          • AJA says:
            12 Jul12 July 13:20

            @Rob You were lucky Monday is a better day to travel than the weekend. It took over 45 minutes to go through fast track security at T5 on Sunday at 12:15pm (not First Wing). The queues for ordinary security were even longer. But it wasn’t helped by the fact that the left hand security scanner in Fast track was being operated by a trainee. Obviously they have to train them at some point but when the queue just to enter the point where they scan your boarding pass stretches back to the doors it’s time to realise that you need to stop training and put someone on who knows what they are doing.

          • Mark says:
            12 Jul12 July 14:26

            But do they then restrict hand baggage as well? If not, they’ll either end up having to gate -check bags anyway or insist people leave them behind… Of course if they do ban flight consolidation rebooking as well and the airlines end up with half empty flights that might solve that problem, but I really can’t see them putting up with that.

          • NigelthePensioner says:
            13 Jul13 July 05:52

            Under the Geneva Convention (1948), I doubt it!

      • lcylocal says:
        13 Jul13 July 08:55

        This would get complex though. What about young families? Or people with some disabilities? Could start throwing up Equality Act issues. Also there will be a lot more gate check bags which will be a headache in itself presumably as they don’t go through the automated system. I’m not saying it won’t happen but it’s far from simple.

    • kk says:
      12 Jul12 July 19:13

      we pay so much to use this airport and they get so much in profit and dividends, why do we have to suffer this nonsense. these people in management should be heavily penalised.

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

New to Head for Points?

Welcome!  We’re the UK’s most-read source of business travel, Avios, frequent flyer and hotel loyalty news. Let us improve how you travel. Got any questions? Ask them in our forums.

Latest Forum Posts

Get 40,000 bonus points (worth 40,000 Avios) and £300 dining credit with The Platinum Card

Check reward flight availability instantly for free!

See a whole year of reward seat availability on one page at SeatSpy.com

Get £10 when you spend £150 on your free Currensea card

Booking a luxury hotel?

Our luxury hotel booking service offers you GUARANTEED extra benefits over booking direct. Works with Four Seasons, Mandarin Oriental, The Ritz Carlton, St Regis and more. We've booked £1.7 million of rooms to date. Click for details.

SME? SPECIAL OFFER TO 12TH MAY EARN POINTS WORTH 30,000 AVIOS WITH CAPITAL ON TAP

Get 20,000 bonus points, four airport lounge passes and your first year free with American Express Gold

The UK's biggest frequent flyer website uses cookies, which you can block via your browser settings. Continuing implies your consent to this policy. Our privacy policy is here.

Got it!