by Simon on March 10, 2010
As the trial of Thomas Cook Reps, Richard Carson and Nicola Gibson, continues at Greek pace in Corfu, it is rather unfortunate that at least one major news organisation has changed Richard and Nicola’s job title from Holiday Representative to Health and Safety Inspector, which is a bit like calling a student who has a Saturday job in Clark’s a Podiatrist. It is clear whose side the media are on.
Meanwhile, Sharon Wood, the dead children’s mother said in court:
It was Thomas Cook’s job to check the gas appliances on a regular basis. It’s their responsibility to make sure everything is safe. They should have protected my children.
Wood was clearly briefed by her lawyers to come out with such an emotive statement, yet it does highlight how crazy the law is in relation to tour operators. So Thomas Cook are responsible for the safety in a property they don’t own or run? Strictly speaking, under the EC Package Travel Directive of 1993, the operator is legally responsible for the components of the package.
However, how can an operator be responsible for safety at a property when it has no control over staff employed, maintenance carried out and in most instances is probably not even informed of any reported problems. You could argue that all the above could be covered in the fine detail of contracts, but these are the same contracts that allow operators to counter-claim for any liabilities.
If the EC directive was more specific and more realistic both sides would have less opportunities to abdicate their responsibilities and the consumer would be offered real protection. For example, by decreeing that operators must do a health and safety inspection prior to the holiday being sold and at regular intervals thereafter the consumer would at least know what the operator was doing. The inspection must then be signed by a director and not just a rep or supervisor.
In another worrying development for operators Inghams was found liable in the skidoo case I wrote about here. Both cases could have worrying implications for the industry. If I was a rep again I wouldn’t want anything to do with Health and Safety unless I had far more comprehensive training than anything any operator currently offers. As far as tour operators are concerned, are they only going to sell excursions such as skidoo trips if they can vet all staff, have copies of training manuals and check all the equipment of a third-party supplier. Is that practical?
by Simon on February 11, 2010
Usually, the problems Greece is experiencing would be good news for tourists. The next logical step with an economy so far gone would be for the government to devalue its currency and tourists would see real value until inflation kicked in.
Except that can’t happen because Greece is in the Euro. It looks like Greece will receive some sort of bail out from the EU, but there will be a price to pay. With no capacity to set its own monetary policy the pressure is on Greece to reduce its deficit and the only way the Greek government can do this is to raise taxes and attack its workers’ living conditions.
The Telegraph joked that raising taxes is futile because tax-avoidance has long been a Greek national sport. This may be true, but it must be closely followed by striking, an activity where the Greeks make even the French look like amateurs. Today saw many workers, including taxi drivers, strike across Greece.
Amidst all the current uncertainty, one thing is almost predictable; Greece will plunge even deeper into recession this summer. So what effect will this have on tourism? Will there be strikes and civil unrest? From a financial point of view prices could well drop and with reduced domestic demand, hotels will be keener than ever to have UK visitors.
The weakness of the Greek economy and the PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece, Spain) in general will at least serve to keep the Euro comparatively weak against sterling, which will be good news for UK travel companies. They’ll just have to deal with the air-traffic control strikes when they happen!
Photo by jonrawlinson
by Simon on February 11, 2010
Tourism bosses in Oxford are reportedly preparing for a rush of visitors who want to follow the Oxford trail of Alice in Wonderland as the new Tim Burton film hits cinema screens.
But will there be a rush of eager visitors, or just a trickle of curious fanatics? One of the problems Oxford faces is that being a Tim Burton film Oxford is unlikely to look much like Oxford and being a Tim Burton film it’s likely to be loved by the critics but watched by relatively few people. Also, I’ve not seen the film yet, but isn’t the whole point that the first couple of minutes Alice is in Oxford but mostly she’s in Wonderland?
While it’s true that resorts can benefit from the bandwagon of publicity a new film brings with it, how many films have made a lasting difference to a resort? I can think of a few resorts where being featured in a film has had a really lasting impact, but in the majority of cases the initial excitement is dampened by a relatively small boost in numbers. So what should a resort look for when they agree to have a visit from a director?
Have an iconic setting – if your location looks like nowhere else, it’s more likely to stick (Portmeiron, The Schilthorn).
Make sure it has a happy ending - a lot of people will see Precious, but it’s not going to make them want to go to New York City.
Make sure it’s a musical – two of the most successful film tie-ins (The Sound of Music and Mama Mia) were musicals. Not only are musicals generally upbeat but they also have theatre productions which keep the film in people’s minds.
If all else fails support everything - if you’re a big city like New York you know that for every grim portrayal such as The Book of Eli there will be a Sex and the City.
