Standard Ground Handling Agreement
For Standard Ground Handling Agreements (where ground services are provided as a bundle to another carrier for an agreed price), there is not a logical charge code in which to charge the entire cost.
This was raised at IATA SIS workshop in Beijing, where IATA suggested we itemise every service provided under each respective charge code with a value of $1, and the remainder lumped under one of the codes, to be agreed bilaterally.
e.g.; Baggage $1, Catering $1, Cleaning $1, Passenger Handling $997
We don’t think this is a very elegant solution – there must be a better way. Ideally, Standard Ground Handling should have its own charge code within ‘Ground Handling’ - can/should this be referred to the Misc WG as this must be a common question from many carriers?
|
 |
Dear Russell,
We have asked this question before directly to RAWG. And the answer provided by Bruno is to use the following:
Charge category : Ground Handling
Charge code : Ramp Handling
You may also refer to RAM Chapter A13, Attachment D 6.21.
Quote
If all ground handling services are provided as an undifferentiated whole (i.e. there is no breakdown provided, and all services are included as a single line item), then this Charge Code is to be used.
Unquote
Best rgds,
NRY
From:
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2011 4:46 AM
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement
For Standard Ground Handling Agreements (where ground services are provided as a bundle to another carrier for an agreed price), there is not a logical charge code in which to charge the entire cost. This was raised at IATA SIS workshop in Beijing, where IATA suggested we itemise every service provided under each respective charge code with a value of $1, and the remainder lumped under one of the codes, to be agreed bilaterally. e.g.; Baggage $1, Catering $1, Cleaning $1, Passenger Handling $997 We don’t think this is a very elegant solution – there must be a better way. Ideally, Standard Ground Handling should have its own charge code within ‘Ground Handling’ - can/should this be referred to the Misc WG as this must be a common question from many carriers? |
|
Thank you Nurul Ayu for your reply to Russell's question.
As a supplementary statement to this, we understand the proposed solution as discussed in Beijing may not be the most ideal one. In addition to this, you can also discuss directly with your interline partners and agree on a different approach in how these Ground Handling services can be billed.
Best regards
From:
Posted: Friday, May 06, 2011 5:14 AM
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement
Dear Russell,
We have asked this question before directly to RAWG. And the answer provided by Bruno is to use the following:
Charge category : Ground Handling
Charge code : Ramp Handling
You may also refer to RAM Chapter A13, Attachment D 6.21.
Quote
If all ground handling services are provided as an undifferentiated whole (i.e. there is no breakdown provided, and all services are included as a single line item), then this Charge Code is to be used.
Unquote
Best rgds,
NRY
From:
Posted: Thursday, May 05, 2011 4:46 AM
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement
For Standard Ground Handling Agreements (where ground services are provided as a bundle to another carrier for an agreed price), there is not a logical charge code in which to charge the entire cost. This was raised at IATA SIS workshop in Beijing, where IATA suggested we itemise every service provided under each respective charge code with a value of $1, and the remainder lumped under one of the codes, to be agreed bilaterally. e.g.; Baggage $1, Catering $1, Cleaning $1, Passenger Handling $997 We don’t think this is a very elegant solution – there must be a better way. Ideally, Standard Ground Handling should have its own charge code within ‘Ground Handling’ - can/should this be referred to the Misc WG as this must be a common question from many carriers? |
|
Hi all,
An update from the last Miscellaneous Working Group discussion on this topic: Each line of the service should be entered under the appropriate charge code indicating all (mandatory) information required as per the related charge code, but with a zero value.
The bundle price of the service should be reported as an AddOnCharge amount to the 0 line value.
Hope this is clear.
Regards,
Ashley |
|
Hello,
I would like just to have a definitive position about this issue. Do we have the choice between:
- using a unique charge code (Ramp handling), since this possibility is clearly mentionned in the ISPG, and is the most practical way to bill handling services package.
- and using the method suggested in your last mail (according to the last misc working group discussion).
Thank you in advance for your reply
From:
Posted: 11/9/2011 1:51 PM
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement
Hi all,
An update from the last Miscellaneous Working Group discussion on this topic: Each line of the service should be entered under the appropriate charge code indicating all (mandatory) information required as per the related charge code, but with a zero value.
The bundle price of the service should be reported as an AddOnCharge amount to the 0 line value.
Hope this is clear.
Regards,
Ashley |
|
Hi Habibi, Yes – that’s correct, as we do not impose a specified billing procedure for this item, this should be done as per your company’s discretion and also in mutual agreement with your bilateral billing partner(s). Rgds, Ashley From: habibir
Posted At: December-14-11 6:05 AM
Posted To: SIS Forums - Rules, Policies, & Codes
Conversation: Standard Ground Handling Agreement
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement I would like just to have a definitive position about this issue. Do we have the choice between: - using a unique charge code (Ramp handling), since this possibility is clearly mentionned in the ISPG, and is the most practical way to bill handling services package. - and using the method suggested in your last mail (according to the last misc working group discussion). Thank you in advance for your reply From:
Posted: 11/9/2011 1:51 PM
Subject: Standard Ground Handling Agreement Hi all, An update from the last Miscellaneous Working Group discussion on this topic: Each line of the service should be entered under the appropriate charge code indicating all (mandatory) information required as per the related charge code, but with a zero value. The bundle price of the service should be reported as an AddOnCharge amount to the 0 line value. Hope this is clear. Regards, Ashley
|