Institutional accountability

ANTHONY DJ GAFOOR

TO WHAT extent are public bodies and institutions and the people who work for them accountable to the public? There are several bodies in TT that take it upon themselves to investigate a complaint internally with the obvious challenge that such bodies may seek to cover up wrongdoing on the part of its employees so as to preserve their reputation.

A case in point is Caribbean Airlines Ltd (CAL). It is now virtually impossible to lodge a complaint against the airline by speaking to someone. If one attempts to do so, it seems that the policy is to refer one to its website to lodge a written complaint.

If you are fortunate at all to receive a bland acknowledgment, what then seems to follow is a promise of an internal investigation, almost inevitably followed by various platitudes that the airline seeks to ensure that one’s complaint will be taken into account by a nameless person and then reassurances that the airline offers excellence in its service delivery.

This “fake apology” is couched in such a way as to be based on the complainant’s perception that s/he has received poor service, ie, “we are sorry that you feel you did not receive the service you expected.”

However, if a member of the cabin crew seeks to issue instructions which are unreasonable or make no sense, it seems that, as passengers, we are not entitled to question it and if we do we are then deemed to be endangering lives or disobeying instructions with the resultant outcome that airport security can be alerted, with very little scope for such people being willing to offer a fair hearing or to listen to the passenger’s perspective.

It’s almost as if one can employ robots to do the job of cabin crew since it seems that one’s concerns simply fall on deaf ears without the slightest intention to do any more than paying lip service to what passengers have to say.

Such matters are however governed by both domestic and international law and best practice and thus no entity, let alone a state entity supported by taxpayers’ contributions, should act as a law unto itself.

In such instances, the attempt to dumb down legitimate complaints by reference to standard platitudes does nothing to reassure a passenger (who is in effect the most important person since it is our tickets that ultimately result in profitability or loss) that a complaint will be taken seriously.

Why, for example, thank us for choosing CAL at the end of a journey followed by the standard jargon that “we know that you have a choice?” To simply tell a passenger that his or her complaint will be looked into and thereafter to be informed that it was looked into and that the concerns will be brought to another employee’s attention can in fact instill no realistic confidence in the process nor that a complaint has properly been investigated.

In essence, this is simply a case of “himself to himself” since there is no independent investigation which takes place outside the airline itself or to whom a complaint can be referred, such as an ombudsman or other independent entity.

Moreover, no disclosure is given as to any report(s) which may or may not have been prepared and no access is given to any statements or information which may or may not have been taken into account in investigating the matter. In effect, a passenger’s complaint simply falters and is ultimately ignored.

However, should Caribbean Airlines have a complaint against a passenger, the book can be thrown at him or her in terms of being threatened or even charged with a purported offence and detaining the person in custody or being warned of such unless a complaint is dropped. Yes this actually happens.

As a concerned citizen who fully understands that the airline business is globally competitive, it is a pity that there is no real avenue for redress by a passenger but the airline can, on the other hand, take steps to report someone based on entirely spurious grounds without recourse to a fair, objective and impartial hearing.

One understands that many state-owned or public agencies and entities would wish to have an opportunity to investigate a complaint initially. What is sorely lacking is the ability of an aggrieved person to realistically challenge that decision further, save through litigation when any reports or statements can be obtained through the process of discovery and inspection of documents in the event that civil proceedings are embarked upon.

However, if CAL truly wishes to pride itself on the service it offers, what can be the objection to ensuring transparency and accountability in its operations so that there is a proper avenue afforded to a passenger to speak to an appropriate representative and, if a written complaint becomes necessary, to ensuring that the complainant is given access to any prepared report and the documentary or evidential basis for that report with the ability to challenge same to an independent arbiter should that become necessary?

There is no point in boasting about profitability if ultimately domestic, regional and international customers are given a raw deal. Many of us choose CAL whether based on the fact that it may be the only or most convenient carrier to certain destinations or due to wanting to support our own institutions.

However, a comparative analysis of scheduled flights with other airlines in the region indicates that CAL is not the most competitive carrier cost wise nor even in terms of baggage allowance. Hence there must be other bases for us to continue to use this carrier rather than out of some sense of customer loyalty or to accumulate air miles.

It is high time for CAL to be more accountable to the people of TT rather than putting layers of bureaucracy between the passenger and those who manage it.

As Nova Scotia-based consumer advocate Gabor Lukacs, a specialist in fighting for passenger rights, puts it, “Many of the good values we have as Canadians…we are respectful, we are patient, we are kind to each other…the airlines are exploiting those against us….Currently the airlines can do almost what they want unless someone is willing to stand up to them and fight them in court.” (Haydn Watters, CBC News, December 21, 2016)

Indeed the same can be said for the people of TT as things currently stand. This must change!