Looking out my office window

 
So I've been doing some temping work to bring in some cash while I attempt to land a more stable role. My current assignment is with ABN AMRO bank and this lunchtime I'm taking in the north-east view from the 27th floor while I chow down on a sandwich. It's pretty spectacular (the view I mean, the food is pretty ordinary).

The lush oasis of the Royal Botanical Gardens lies immediately below, its backdrop the various bays of Sydney Harbour that meander out into the Tasman Sea and beyond as far as the eye can see. The waters are calm but busy today - I can count almost 60 yachts and small recreational sailboats all of which are seemingly unfussed about which direction they go, whichever catches the best wind I guess. My eyes glazed over just for a moment as my mind escaped from sitting behind this desk to the lazing on the back of a boat with the sun and wind in my face, joining the steady stream of runners around the waterfront route through the gardens or the Touch@Lunch game that's happening in the Domain (a park on the opposite the Botanical Gardens on the other side of the Cahill Expressway) . Yahwell, back to reality...

Down to the left is the world famous Sydney Opera House sitting prominently and proudly on what from some angles appears to be its own island, overlooked by the colossal Sydney Harbour Bridge - two iconic symbols of a city and nation if ever there were. No surprise then that millions continue to flock to Sydney to ring in the New Year, the harbour area is a perfect setting for what is a dazzling fireworks display… *iff* (no I've not misspelt it) you can get a good spot to view it. But I'll save that insight for another time.

Warning: random tangent approaching. I wonder what was architect Jørn Utzon's inspiration was for his [Opera House] design. I admit I haven't a clue when it comes to art, or the Arts. The roof structures are commonly referred to as "shells" so perhaps he was a pasta lover. Funnily enough their tiles have the same sort of pastel matt light beige cream colour that cooked pasta takes on - despite all the images you've seen the building is in fact not white - so perhaps I'm actually onto something there. Having resigned in 1966 from the project amid much controversy and finger pointing, Utzon never returned to Australia to see the completed Opera House. He was apparently to do so in 2009 at the age of 90 but unfortunately died last November.

Completing the panorama is the cityscape of Sydney's Eastern Suburbs that stretches out to the east coast and the beaches of Bondi, Clovelly, Bronte and Coogee. Although it is completely built up and dotted with high rise buildings (even the occasional cluster of them) it's interesting to note the clumps of green that permeate the urban sprawl, making it look like they actually built around them.

I really could gaze out at this all day if there wasn't more work to be done. Must remember to bring my camera tomorrow...

What are you looking at?
 

Adventures in Aussie Touch Footie Part 2 - Fight! Fight! Fight!

 
I've been refereeing, on average a couple of nights per week, with the Eastern Suburbs Touch Association out in Sydney's Queen's Park. Easts run the largest Touch comp in Australia - the current summer comp has on average 16 fields going for 2 timeslots 4 nights a week with further games running on Saturdays.

It is in essence a "park" comp but every player young or old brings a *very* competent basic skill level, so even down in division 15 (it does exist) they know what they're doing. At the other end of the scale in the upper divisions teams have the added expectation of winning, not to the mention the step-up in intensity that goes along with it. Last night I ran a Mixed Div 1-3 game in which just a couple of minutes in I sensed I may have problems with some of the fellas. It wasn't until later I would learn both sides had known mouthy players and one side had even been "given a season off" in the past - they were also both apparently in poor positions in the standings for exactly what I can't recall but suppose relegation or qualification for finals - either way they were up for putting one over on the other.

The first half was an untidy affair with players being particularly lazy on the scoreline with onside and moving out off the line. Mid-way though both sides started committing clumsy, borderline-physical touches that stuffed up the attacking player's roll ball began to creep in more and more. Not enough to warrant anything more than penalties but I did warn both sides to clean it up before blowing to start the second half. It seemed to have the desired effect, that was until a blue player pushed a red player (guys both of them) off his roll ball. The red player though, went down like a European footballer, like he'd been shot simultaneously with having both his legs broken. Pussy! Yes it was a push, but nowhere near what he'd made it look like. I had to send the blue guy to the sin bin for the push but sent the red guy as well for cheating to milk a penalty. Both guys went without much dispute so maybe the message was hitting home now. Things went pretty smoothly again for a while, that was until the red side got a breakaway from mid-way inside their own half. With the red guy haring down the left link channel a blue guy managed to run him down coming across from the middle. But he didn't stop at a touch, he pushed the runner over. And that's where the "fun" started...

The red guy got to his feet, understandably annoyed, and threw the ball at the blue guy's head - American football style - but thankfully missed. Both players fronted up to one another, testosterone flowing, and traded obscenities and insults escalating to punches. The other guys from both sides of course got involved - some to break it up, others to do the opposite - including one blue player who crossed the field from his own sub box to throw a punch. Not a lot you can do except take a step back and watch - as a referee you're expected to provide a report on this stuff. The squabbling continued even after the teams separated as players just wouldn't shut up. After I regained a modicum of control, I binned the blue player for the initial offense. I didn't realize until later that this was actually the same blue player I'd sent earlier for the same offense - so he should actually have been sent off - but I rectified that with Tournament Control later. Good experience though and lesson learned: stop to take note of players you discipline. The red player who got pushed did get sent off, as did the second blue player - it doesn't matter what others do they can't react the way they did.

Now we're about 2 minutes gone at this stage with players still bickering when, mercifully, the full time hooter went. Strictly speaking, I should have played the penalty but since (i) I couldn't decide (yes I admit it) who should get it, and (ii) I'd had enough of the lot of them, I just ended the game. The guys involved in the scrap were still exchanging verbals by the time I'd quickly and quietly clarified my decisions to one of each team so I just left them to it.

In case you're wondering, the score was tied!
 

Keeping the air fair

 
While browsing for air travel routes around Australia I discovered Virgin Blue, one of the country's low fare / budget / no frills (delete as appropriate) airlines. Okay so I admit there's nothing novel about that given these airlines seem to be a dime a dozen these days - even Aer Lingus, the Irish national carrier, re-structured itself and its business & pricing models to compete with (read: avoid getting wiped out by) Ryanair and others of their kind.

The pricing model and strategy for such airlines seems to be that they publish a really low fare to get your attention (and your arse in the seat). Then as you advance through the booking process you realize that every passenger cost you can think of has been stripped out - handling charge or booking fee, airport tax, baggage fee, fuel surcharge, credit card fee - the list goes on. The latest one I've seen is the airport check-in fee. Some of these are more irritating than others.

When I originally started writing, I had intended simply to pose some rhetorical questions around fuel surcharges vs. the price of oil - but now that I'm thinking about it I feel a bit of a general industry rant coming on once I get done with that.

Fuel surcharge. As the price of oil began soaring to an all-time high of $147 a barrel last year, just about every airline was threatened and as a counter measure they sportingly passed the cost onto the consumer. Now, while Ryanair were implemented the model that others copied and I'll point the finger at for a lot of things, the fuel surcharge is one thing they did not do, though having said that I'm they covered it with some other charge - but I digress until later. I can accept the fuel surcharge in principle - if the cost of providing a service increases it's natural that the consumer purchase cost increases too. Here's where it gets interesting though. The price of oil has since plummeted, trading in the $33-$50 range at the time of writing. So shouldn't that generate the opposite impact on cost, with travel service providers lowering or even abolishing the fuel surcharge since oil prices are as low or lower than they were when it started? Last December, Virgin Blue announced that it was ending its fuel surcharge on domestic flights and reducing it on international flights for (it claims) the "second time in as many months". I wonder if and how many others will do the same...

Handling charge / booking fee. It's become generally accepted that being able to purchase tickets (of any kind) early and not having to queue is classified as a privilege or premium service. I get that. Let's consider for a moment the flip side of this, why businesses invest in technology, it's to reduce the demand on, or for, human labour. In this particular case, if a business deploys a web site able to service X number of concurrent ticket purchases, they avoid needing to have (and pay for) Y people to front counter or phone sales, etc. The majority of ticket sales are now done online, not necessarily anymore because people CHOOSE to but because they NEED to if they're to stand a chance of getting a ticket at all. I put it to you that the premium service I alluded to earlier is now the standard/regular service, not to mention that businesses must surely recoup the development costs reasonably quickly from savings on wages and income from booking fees. That being true I wonder why punters still foot the bill for it a purported benefit that actually no longer exists.

Airport check-in fee. GRRRRR! This one is Ryanair-specific unless I've not spotted another airline doing it. Ryanair now charges you to check in at the airport, which you *must* do if you have luggage, which you also get charged for, so it's a double whammy. And there was no attempted explanation or justification as there was with the introduction of baggage charges. Let's do some simple maths. In 2008, Ryanair carried 58.7m passengers. The capacity of a "single class" Boeing 737-800 aircraft, of which makes up mostly if not entirely comprised, is 189 passengers. Keeping the calculations simple and the numbers conservative, let's round up to 200 passengers per [one-way] flight and assume that just a *quarter* of them must check in at the airport due to baggage - in reality the number checking in at the airport for one reason or another is higher (just ask any passenger standing in line to check-in while staff deal with passengers who've not prepaid their baggage). So that's 58.7m passengers * 0.25 airport check-in ratio * €5 charge = €78m! That's a lot of extra money earned through charging for a facility that is core to service delivery. I find it unfathomable that this hasn't been challenged by European bureaucracy yet, but even if it was, they [airline] would probably just invent another method to get this money...

Baggage charges. When these charges were introduced, they were heralded as a saving for a purported majority of passengers who allegedly travelled with cabin baggage only and were "subsidising" those who did have checked baggage. General seat prices would be reduced, with those who chose to bring checked baggage paying for the extra service. I actually did think this was a great thing, until my cynicism took over when I didn't see a difference. There's a conspiracy theory that a chef only needs to dip the [red wine] cork in the gravy to call it red wine sauce - in the same way I suppose an airline needs to make just one seat available at a cheaper price to be able to claim a price reduction. Then we come to the charges, X when you register your bag (online) before travelling otherwise it's Y which can be up to double the cost. I don't believe for a second that the labour, technology or any other cost, varies depending on the timing of when a customer deciding to check in a suitcase - the suitcase still goes on a conveyor belt, loaded on a trolley, then on the plane and offloaded at its destination. Oh but there's the staffing and effort required to process the bag at airport check in. GARBAGE! The customer is already PAYING for their airport check in, so I wonder what other spin can be put on it.

My parents visited me in Berlin from Dublin last year, flying with Ryanair. The charge for a suitcase each (don't forget the mandatory airport check in) came to €52 - that was €8 per baggage piece and €5 check-in fee per person per flight. I sent them off to Dunnes Stores to buy two small cabin sized suitcases at a total cost of €40 that they can use over again. At the time of writing, Ryanair now charges €10 for pre-booked baggage.

Card payment fee. This is the other one that really grates with me - it actually doesn't only apply to airlines anymore - it seems every merchant is doing this now and in my opinion it should be considered unfair business practice. In addition to all the booking and handling charges, airlines (and increasingly other sellers) have started charging a fee for using a card to pay them. I am fine with passing on reasonable cost of sales to the customer, but I have two issues with this. Firstly, the charge (around €5 or equivalent) isn't per transaction, it's per sector per person. Consider a family of 4 taking a return flight, that's an additional €40 charge for paying with a credit card. This might go up or down if you travel with Virgin Blue, as apparently (in a similar vein to baggage charges), there's additional effort in accepting payment for international flights than domestic if you read between the lines of their fees schedule. Which brings me to my second issue... for many airlines, payment by card the only option, particularly when purchasing online. If you're going to do that then GIVE CUSTOMERS AN ALTERNATIVE OPTION. Ryanair (and others I'm sure) renamed their credit card fee to read "payment handling fee", which to me reads like they'll charge regardless of payment method: so for example if you were to walk into their reservations center (assuming you can find one) and pay cash you might want to bring an extra couple of notes. It's a bit of a paradox really. A consumer must of course pay for a service to avail of it, but now they must pay the provider extra so they will accept their payment? I don't know about you, dear reader, but that's a new economic concept to me.

I know I've used Ryanair for many examples in this and I can just imagine the sort of public tongue lashing response their PR/media team would put out if and when they were to read it, lampooning both the author and the competition ("these are our terms, you're free to travel with whichever service you choose" ... sound familiar?) I express general observations and experience having been fortunate to travel quite a bit in my life so far. Many airlines now do the similar things and have similar practices - Ryanair was simply the innovator and it's said that imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, so I do tip my hat to them for their creativity. At the same time, I reserve the right to not necessarily have to like the results...

After all that, there's also an argument that Ryanair and airlines of their kind, unlike many others, are an easy target for criticism because they do itemize their charges to the extent they do. I acknowledge that and so, credit where it's due, there is transparency to the customer (even if it's generally not completely transparent until they come to pay). I don't doubt that all these businesses and industries are operating within legislation so I wonder perhaps if that's the root problem... lack of explicit, clear, consistent legislation on what is and isn't appropriate practice from the consumer's perspective. The general public seems to accept it all one way or another - again I'm not sure if that's out of choice or necessity - so perhaps I'm just blowing hot air this time! In any case...

Rant over. Class dismissed :-)
 

Happy New Year (?)

 
While walking home from Sydney's Circular Quay having watched what I could see of the New Year fireworks - just a 20 minute walk - I counted 7 ambulances pass by with sirens blaring, presumably carting some unfortunate or irresponsible revellers off to hospital. That's an ambulance roughly every 3 minutes. In fact, I don't think the chorus of sirens quietened down until a further half hour after I got home.

Before continuing, this is certainly *not* a commentary on Sydney or even Australia, but more general thoughts about society - Sydney just happens to be the latest place I've observed what I just described. I'm also pretty confident a large number of cases were tourists, given the status and attraction of Sydney's New Year festivities and the numbers that flock here each year.

I said "unfortunate or irresponsible". Now don't get me wrong - I am all in favour of going out to drink and be merry. It's just sad that invariably some overdo it with "innocent" people usually suffering consequences. There are always accidents/incidents where people are in the wrong place at the wrong time - these are unfortunate. But it's not an unfair assumption that on this night (or any "night out", festive or otherwise) most cases are alcohol - or these days, unfortunately drug - related where people have gone beyond their limits, spoiling their own night and that of others too. You only have to watch one of the myriad of police reality or CCTV shows to validate that. Government advertising campaigns now resort to using "shock" as a deterrent - bloody images of people screaming in pain - in an attempt to get through to people. But when just about everything we see on TV contains special effects now I wonder how much of it really hits home. Maybe we simply don't care. I just read a number that just 78% of EU drivers surveyed believe drink driving is dangerous - a very specific alcohol sub-topic but it infers volumes as to how society thinks about it in general.

So after much ado, I get to my point. I extend my respect and admiration to volunteer medics around the world who staff ambulances as well as A&E/ER doctors & nurses - all of whom selflessly give up their own New Year celebrations (or any other festivity) and generally work through the night taking care of the rest of us when we can't or won't take care of ourselves. Happy New Year to you.