the CAA said - Heathrow Airport
the CAA said - Heathrow Airport
the CAA said - Heathrow Airport
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
CAP 1027<br />
Chapter 5: Operating Expenditure<br />
• Potential changes to SQR standards - changes to SQR<br />
standards for direct passengers have been discussed throughout<br />
<strong>the</strong> CE process including reductions in standards that could yield<br />
opex savings. It was subsequently agreed that such changes<br />
would not be made.<br />
• Alignment of transfer and direct passenger SQR standards -<br />
<strong>the</strong> SQR standard for transfer passengers should be aligned with<br />
<strong>the</strong> existing Q5 standard for direct passengers. This was estimated<br />
to increase opex by £15 million over Q6. 26 HAL subsequently<br />
altered <strong>the</strong> harmonisation proposal to be opex and capex neutral<br />
(<strong>the</strong>se proposals are discussed in more detail in chapter 12).<br />
5.3 Notwithstanding <strong>the</strong> agreements above, <strong>the</strong>re were disagreements<br />
between HAL and <strong>the</strong> airlines on a number of o<strong>the</strong>r issues including.<br />
• Pensions - <strong>the</strong> potential for reductions to HAL’s pension costs.<br />
• Future opex efficiency targets - The airlines considered <strong>the</strong> 1.2%<br />
efficiency for underlying opex included in <strong>the</strong> IBP to be insufficient<br />
and wanted more ambition in HAL’s plans so that <strong>the</strong> cost base<br />
would remain flat in nominal terms. 27 The airlines also stated that<br />
solutions currently in development should not be considered part of<br />
<strong>the</strong> 1.2% underlying opex target.<br />
• Terminal related opex - <strong>the</strong> airlines were concerned about <strong>the</strong><br />
level of HAL’s opex projection for Terminal 2 relative to costs in <strong>the</strong><br />
o<strong>the</strong>r terminals.<br />
• Security - <strong>the</strong> airlines were keen for HAL to explore <strong>the</strong> potential<br />
for process efficiency improvements fully. This included: <strong>the</strong> use of<br />
agency staff to assist with passenger processing in peak times;<br />
apparently low security passenger flow rates in some terminals;<br />
and <strong>the</strong> potential for improvements to HAL’s security rostering<br />
efficiency.<br />
• O<strong>the</strong>r costs - <strong>the</strong> airlines questioned HAL’s projected levels of<br />
expenditure on professional fees, insurance, rent, rates and utilities.<br />
26<br />
The FBP includes an alignment using a different passenger standard. This change is not<br />
expected to have any impact on costs.<br />
27<br />
This target has been raised to 1.4% in HAL’s FBP.<br />
April 2013 Page 66