Thomas Woldbye, the chief executive of Heathrow Airport, found himself at the center of controversy after it was revealed that he was sleeping when the airport was forced to shut down due to a power outage caused by a fire at a nearby electrical substation. An inquiry conducted into the incident disclosed that senior staff were unable to reach him as attempts to contact him failed because his bedside phone was set to silent mode. This confusion led to a significant operational disruption as no flights operated from Heathrow until around 18:00 GMT on March 21.
The closure affected an astounding 270,000 journeys, a situation Lord Deighton, the chairman of Heathrow, characterized as resulting from “an unprecedented set of circumstances.” In an effort to improve operational reliability in the future, he made it clear that the airport’s infrastructure would be reassessed and enhanced. The incident has drawn attention not just for its immediate impacts but also for the procedural lapses that allowed such a disorganization during a serious situation.
In light of the disruptions, Heathrow commissioned an inquiry—a review led by Ruth Kelly, a former transport secretary and now an independent board member of the airport. The findings from the Kelly Review indicated that Woldbye was not involved in the crucial decision made by the airport’s chief operating officer, Javier Echave, at 01:15 AM on March 21 to suspend operations until 23:59 later that day. This raises questions about communication protocols within such a pivotal organization. Woldbye reportedly first learned of the incident at approximately 06:45, when he received a debrief from Echave.
Severely criticized for being out of touch during a critical time, Woldbye expressed grave regret over not being reachable that night. According to the review, alerts termed F24 alarms were sent to his mobile phone during the early hours, urging the activation of emergency protocols, yet he did not respond due to the absence of a second means of contact and his phone’s silent setting.
The response from Heathrow’s management was swift, as they initially defended the actions of their senior leadership team during the incident. A spokesperson categorically stated that Woldbye and his leadership team were effectively fulfilling their roles throughout the crisis, though this was later contested by the report’s findings. The Sunday Times provided the first account claiming that Woldbye was asleep during the crisis, leading to contrasting narratives regarding the events of that night.
In the wake of the investigation, recommendations for operational improvements suggested that a backup contact method should be in place to reach key personnel during critical incidents. Despite the chaos, the review concluded that Heathrow’s protocol was reasonably efficient and that the decision to cease operations was necessary to safeguard the safety and security of everyone involved.
The report found that Heathrow’s responses to the unprecedented challenges caused by the fire were prudent, and it was indicative that alternative choices would likely not have mitigated the significant disruptions endured by airlines and passengers alike. The airport’s contingency plans and infrastructure capabilities were assessed as being resilient, although officials had previously deemed the likelihood of such a catastrophic power failure as low.
The ramifications of March’s shutdown involved substantial financial losses for airlines and left hundreds of thousands of travelers stranded. Critics have pointed fingers at the management’s directive to shut down operations, particularly because the National Energy System Operator (Neso) reported that power had been restored seven hours prior to the resumption of flights, highlighting potential lapses in situational awareness or communication. As people await the final investigative report from Neso, which is expected by the end of June, this incident underscores the importance of maintaining operational readiness in the face of unforeseen circumstances. The fallout may lead to lasting changes in how airports prepare for and manage emergencies moving forward.