PR preparation for the Borghetti replacement underway

[havick]

Quote:
The only complaint I have is the battle for overhead locker space

Airside valet bags are free in the US.

[Bula]

Prove it was unlawful....

[Sunfish]

I paid business class on my last flights in the U.S. and it made no difference. U.S. carriers (with the exception of PSW) were absolutely pathetic. Then add to that crappy terminals. and the TSA Gestapo. Then there is customs and immigration, which isn't any better.

I used American airlines and travelled in the U.S, for twenty five years from one end of the country to the other and I won't be going back because of the current American worldview that all air travellers are either criminals or potential terrorists. The stories of excessive use of force, intimidation, rotten reliability of service, abuse and outright theft are legion. Just ask Mem Fox what happened to her a few months ago. I've seen people abused myself and also copped some from an airport cop for changing queues at check in.

As for Red Jets comment:

Second - this was a case of a passenger disobeying a lawful instruction from aircrew after boarding, and the dude is no hero! This wasn't a tank bearing down on him at Tiananmen Square, he stubbornly refused to do as he was instructed and hence law enforcement officers were called in to physically remove him from the aircraft In a sane world populated by rational human beings he would be vilified and paraded before the courts, but in our Social Media driven discourse, he is held up as a victim Sadly the CEO of United was to gutless to stand up and defend his crew, and instead rolled over in a pathetic attempt to appease "public opinion". He should be ashamed of himself.

How is it possible that United even allowed more passengers on to an aircraft than there were available seats? Then "Red Jet" demonstrates the customer service attitude that has now made United airlines famous: - the customer is just a serf who should kowtow to the captain of the aircraft over a commercial matter that has nothing to do with the captain at all. United ground staff made a simply massive mistake and then compounded it by involving law enforcement, which seem s to be the only American response to problems these days.

To put that another way, the passenger removed was very lucky he wasn't shot and killed.

[AerialPerspective]

Originally Posted by Boe787

Yes indeed quite possibly more of the same!

Given the appalling standards of the US domestic Airline industry, I dont see how this golden boy who cut his teeth in the US industry, will improve things at Virgin, particularly for the staff!
US airlines have some of the lowest paid staff in Aviation!

It's interesting to note he is credited with saving the US industry, by for one charging for passengers checked in baggage!
And yet the only US Airline to have always been profitable, Southwest, doesn't charge for checked baggage?
Low fuel prices and the big three mergers over there have had a lot to do with the recent improvement in US carriers fortunes!

It's easy to determine... if he displays very little knowledge of the industry but works 'reaching out', 'going forward', talk about stuff and 'what that looks like', refers to the domestic airline game as the 'domestic aviation SPACE', ends everything with 'outcomes' and describes every outcome in terms of its 'impact' on 'the business' and can't speak an English language sentence without any of these weasel words then he IS more of the same.

I seriously don't get how management types don't see how unfathomably stupid they sound spouting this weasel word rubbish. Can't help themselves, have to work it into every release, every sentence and every conversation... cannot get up in the morning without 'going forward and shared values'.

It's all total piffle as the refreshingly sane Don Watson aptly describes it.

He started by thanking a gathering at Readings a few years ago to launch his latest book by saying "I know how hard it is for you to attend tonight, it's like asking Salmon to stop swimming upstream because I know you're all busy 'going forward' and it's hard to stop. I don't know how the human race survived for all these millennia, presumably we just all milled around for thousands of years without 'going forward' all the time.

[AerialPerspective]

Originally Posted by Sunfish

I paid business class on my last flights in the U.S. and it made no difference. U.S. carriers (with the exception of PSW) were absolutely pathetic. Then add to that crappy terminals. and the TSA Gestapo. Then there is customs and immigration, which isn't any better.

I used American airlines and travelled in the U.S, for twenty five years from one end of the country to the other and I won't be going back because of the current American worldview that all air travellers are either criminals or potential terrorists. The stories of excessive use of force, intimidation, rotten reliability of service, abuse and outright theft are legion. Just ask Mem Fox what happened to her a few months ago. I've seen people abused myself and also copped some from an airport cop for changing queues at check in.

As for Red Jets comment:



How is it possible that United even allowed more passengers on to an aircraft than there were available seats? Then "Red Jet" demonstrates the customer service attitude that has now made United airlines famous: - the customer is just a serf who should kowtow to the captain of the aircraft over a commercial matter that has nothing to do with the captain at all. United ground staff made a simply massive mistake and then compounded it by involving law enforcement, which seem s to be the only American response to problems these days.

To put that another way, the passenger removed was very lucky he wasn't shot and killed.

They didn't. They filled the aircraft then decided they wanted 4 of those seats for crew. They didn't follow their own rules which say when someone refuses, you increase the offered compensation to a point where they accept... let's face it, by putting those crew on board, they were perhaps saving hundreds or at least tens of thousands in delay and accommodation costs so what's one or two thousand dollars to entice a pax to give up their seat. What they did instead was typical heavy handed American solution to everything. All I can say is I wish it had happened to me because I'd quite like to retire.

[parabellum]

Second - this was a case of a passenger disobeying a lawful instruction from aircrew after boarding

We need go no further, the instruction came from the ground staff, not aircrew, who should have known that attempting to offload a well behaved passenger who has been accepted for the flight, issued a boarding pass and has boarded the aircraft, simply because you want his seat to accommodate a positioning crew, is not a lawful instruction from anybody, it is a request which the Doctor declined. The problem is an internal one for the airline to solve. Quite why a member of the positioning crew wasn't told, for 45 a minute flight, "It is the jump seat or nothing, exigencies of the company override" I doubt we will ever know.

In all probability the lawyers for the Doctor won't even bother themselves with the niceties of ticketing, boarding, offloading etc. they have all they need to pursue GBH, serious injury, humiliation, loss of earnings etc. a video, a hospital report and the statement of the CEO UAL.

[itsnotthatbloodyhard]

Quite why a member of the positioning crew wasn't told, for 45 a minute flight, "It is the jump seat or nothing, exigencies of the company override" I doubt we will ever know.

Probably because, like it or not, a certain minimum standard of seating for duty travel is usually a contractual requirement. Given the choice of the jump seat or nothing, the crew member concerned would most likely have been entitled to say 'nothing'.

[Trevorof]

Full service airline

I read the newspaper article and laughed that JB had turned it into a full service airline.

A tiny bag of pretzels instead of a QF muffin or sandwich, and on what would be a meal time flight on QF still pretzels?
I came back in February from DPS as the only available flight to get out was with Virgin. An hour in the French couple behind requested blanket and pillow. Of course they were told none on board or available. Their response was an incredulous "none"! Even J* carries limited stock for sale.

Perhaps full service in Business class but definitely budget in the back

[parabellum]

Probably because, like it or not, a certain minimum standard of seating for duty travel is usually a contractual requirement. Given the choice of the jump seat or nothing, the crew member concerned would most likely have been entitled to say 'nothing'.

Fair enough. Have worked for three majors and given the circumstances of the flight in question, refusing the jump seat would have been classified as, "Neglecting the best interests of the company", a possible sacking offence in all three cases.

[Icarus2001]

they have all they need to pursue GBH, serious injury, humiliation, loss of earnings etc. a video, a hospital report and the statement of the CEO UAL.

All of which is on the two "police" or security agents.

Had he got out of his seat and exited the aircraft as asked and as the other three passengers did then none of that would have occured.

Self inflicted.

[The Bullwinkle]

Originally Posted by parabellum

Fair enough. Have worked for three majors and given the circumstances of the flight in question, refusing the jump seat would have been classified as, "Neglecting the best interests of the company", a possible sacking offence in all three cases.

This raises two points, certainly as far as Australian airlines go:-

Firstly, if I'm required to pax in order to commence a duty, I'll insist on a seat in the cabin as I have a responsibility to ensure that I'm in a fit and proper condition to operate the following flight or series of flights.

Secondly, ground crew can't just demand that anybody can ride in the jump seat.
Only the Captain can decide if anybody is going to ride in the jump seat and it should never be assumed that the seat will always be available.
There are several reasons why having somebody in the jump seat would be inappropriate.

A stuff up by the ground crew does not constitute an emergency for the flight crew!

[parabellum]

All of which is on the person who instigated the physical stuff, (UA Staff) by calling for security and then trickles down to the Airport Security thug who did the manhandling.

Icarus - If someone tells you to do something that is in all respects intrinsically wrong do you go ahead and do it? No, thought not. Self inflicted? Nonsense.

The Bullwinkle - Yes, I realise only the captain can release the jump seat and would have expected the ground staff to have cleared this first, for a 45 minute flight I would expect the same company crew to cooperate, as mentioned, acting in the best interests of the company.

[C441]

Quite why a member of the positioning crew wasn't told, for 45 a minute flight, "It is the jump seat or nothing, exigencies of the company override" I doubt we will ever know.

Was a jumpseat/s available?

You're assuming the jumpseat/s wasn't already being used.

[coaldemon]

Wow now that is thread drift. Although talking to a few of the VA boys they think that may be the approach taken if they were indeed found in J Class.

[AerialPerspective]

Originally Posted by coaldemon

Wow now that is thread drift. Although talking to a few of the VA boys they think that may be the approach taken if they were indeed found in J Class.

Oh please, don't talk about the war... that dumb policy whereby a crew member can't sit there even if it's the only seat left and they aren't in uniform and to move people around will cause a delay but the CEO won't travel anywhere else... pathetic... If I'm a customer I want my Pilot(s) to have the most comfortable and least fatigue inducing seat possible if I'm on the next aeroplane they're flying... I don't however give two you know whats whether their CEO is tired or not or whether his 'prestige' is affected or he doesn't want to get what looks like expensive Italian suits crumpled... a complete case of someone creating a rule which many may consider understandable if it applied to everyone but then making an exception for oneself is just a joke... and likely the other 'top' execs only get it as well because if they didn't they wouldn't have left their previous employer. This to me from the outside seems to be indicative of the skewed priorities and lack of operational focus at that company... where the CEOs comfort is more important than avoidance of crew fatigue or am I being too harsh???

[The Bullwinkle]

Originally Posted by AerialPerspective

Oh please, don't talk about the war... that dumb policy whereby a crew member can't sit there even if it's the only seat left and they aren't in uniform and to move people around will cause a delay but the CEO won't travel anywhere else... pathetic... If I'm a customer I want my Pilot(s) to have the most comfortable and least fatigue inducing seat possible if I'm on the next aeroplane they're flying... I don't however give two you know whats whether their CEO is tired or not or whether his 'prestige' is affected or he doesn't want to get what looks like expensive Italian suits crumpled... a complete case of someone creating a rule which many may consider understandable if it applied to everyone but then making an exception for oneself is just a joke... and likely the other 'top' execs only get it as well because if they didn't they wouldn't have left their previous employer. This to me from the outside seems to be indicative of the skewed priorities and lack of operational focus at that company... where the CEOs comfort is more important than avoidance of crew fatigue or am I being too harsh???

You nailed it!

[Red Jet]

How is it possible that United even allowed more passengers on to an aircraft than there were available seats? Then "Red Jet" demonstrates the customer service attitude that has now made United airlines famous: - the customer is just a serf who should kowtow to the captain of the aircraft over a commercial matter that has nothing to do with the captain at all. United ground staff made a simply massive mistake and then compounded it by involving law enforcement, which seem s to be the only American response to problems these days.

To put that another way, the passenger removed was very lucky he wasn't shot and killed.

Look - I am in no way defending the lack-lustre customer service in the US or their trigger happy gun culture. My point is simply this - they (United) stuffed up and boarded a full airplane and then realised they HAD to position 4 crew on the flight in question. It was extremely poorly handled by United without a doubt, but there was obviously a prelude to the viral videos that those of us who weren't on the plane are not privy to, and after 4 volunteers were sought and they had found no takers at $800 dollars per seat, the only reasonable way to proceed should have been to keep upping the bid until they found someone. The fact that they didn't is a major stuff-up and worthy of all the critique coming their way.

What isn't cool - is that once they had crossed the Rubicon and decided to RANDOMLY pick 4 guests, who were then INSTRUCTED to disembark the aircraft, the only option available to you is to comply with this instruction! As per aviation law, if the instruction came from aircrew, and by civil law if it was issued by the law enforcement officer. The customer in question refused to comply with the instruction and 3 customers (while most probably fuming under the collar) grabbed their hand luggage and left, while the good Doctor elected not to do it, and was physically fighting a lawful ejection from the aircraft.

Think this through guys - if an airline had to rescind the option of involuntarily disembarking a passenger after boarding, it would become completely unworkable and it would descend into anarchy. There are a number of reasons why this could become necessary, including Weight & Balance issues, performance issues, computer glitches where 2 boarding passes with the same seat number has been printed out (has happened to me personally more than once) and of course - upon reversal to manual procedures the chances of this occurring increases. There could be problems discovered with travel document deficiencies, Trump could throw a tantrum and issue a decree banning persons holding a passport of a particular color, etc.

So, if it ever happens that a person in uniform addresses you onboard an aircraft and says: "Sir (or Madam), you will need to get your hand luggage and follow me!" you just bloody well do it, however pissed off you are! There is no other option open to you, but then afterwards - by all means go on social media and pour as much bile as you like onto the airline for their shitty customer service, - but you HAVE to do what you are told. An instruction to collect your hand luggage and disembark the aircraft is a lawful instruction - there can be no doubt about that in my opinion (needless to say - I'm only expressing MY opinion and you are free to hold a contrary one). Just know this - if I instruct you to disembark an airplane on which I am crew and you fail to comply, I will also call in law enforcement if available, otherwise I will handcuff you, and contain you until such assistance can be found. The passengers were not asked to get up and undress or dance a polka! There was nothing frivolous about it and as pissed off as the Doctor would have felt - if they had "abandoned" the attempt to get the Doctor off BECAUSE he refused, and then picked someone else - imagine the downfall of that! There is a ranking order onboard an airplane for a very good reason, the instruction issued was entirely reasonable and under the circumstances were deemed necessary by the airline and the ensuing law enforcement officer. It's in the fine print on any IATA carriers ticketing conditions (carriage is not assured even if boarding pass has been issued and the plane has been boarded, or words to that effect).

[Planemike]

There is no other option open to you, but then afterwards - by all means go on social media and pour as much bile as you like onto the airline for their shitty customer service, - but you HAVE to do what you are told.

Errrr..... Why? If you are not misbehaving and have a valid boarding card, just stay where you are.

Originally Posted by Red Jet;974536
[QUOTE

the instruction issued was entirely reasonable and under the circumstances were deemed necessary by the airline and the ensuing law enforcement officer. t

).[/QUOTE]

Tough luck on the airline, they have to make alternative arrangements to move their personnel......

I just amazes me that there are people out there who think it acceptable to throw passengers off aircraft because it suits the airline.....

[AerialPerspective]

Originally Posted by Red Jet

Look - I am in no way defending the lack-lustre customer service in the US or their trigger happy gun culture. My point is simply this - they (United) stuffed up and boarded a full airplane and then realised they HAD to position 4 crew on the flight in question. It was extremely poorly handled by United without a doubt, but there was obviously a prelude to the viral videos that those of us who weren't on the plane are not privy to, and after 4 volunteers were sought and they had found no takers at $800 dollars per seat, the only reasonable way to proceed should have been to keep upping the bid until they found someone. The fact that they didn't is a major stuff-up and worthy of all the critique coming their way.

What isn't cool - is that once they had crossed the Rubicon and decided to RANDOMLY pick 4 guests, who were then INSTRUCTED to disembark the aircraft, the only option available to you is to comply with this instruction! As per aviation law, if the instruction came from aircrew, and by civil law if it was issued by the law enforcement officer. The customer in question refused to comply with the instruction and 3 customers (while most probably fuming under the collar) grabbed their hand luggage and left, while the good Doctor elected not to do it, and was physically fighting a lawful ejection from the aircraft.

Think this through guys - if an airline had to rescind the option of involuntarily disembarking a passenger after boarding, it would become completely unworkable and it would descend into anarchy. There are a number of reasons why this could become necessary, including Weight & Balance issues, performance issues, computer glitches where 2 boarding passes with the same seat number has been printed out (has happened to me personally more than once) and of course - upon reversal to manual procedures the chances of this occurring increases. There could be problems discovered with travel document deficiencies, Trump could throw a tantrum and issue a decree banning persons holding a passport of a particular color, etc.

So, if it ever happens that a person in uniform addresses you onboard an aircraft and says: "Sir (or Madam), you will need to get your hand luggage and follow me!" you just bloody well do it, however pissed off you are! There is no other option open to you, but then afterwards - by all means go on social media and pour as much bile as you like onto the airline for their shitty customer service, - but you HAVE to do what you are told. An instruction to collect your hand luggage and disembark the aircraft is a lawful instruction - there can be no doubt about that in my opinion (needless to say - I'm only expressing MY opinion and you are free to hold a contrary one). Just know this - if I instruct you to disembark an airplane on which I am crew and you fail to comply, I will also call in law enforcement if available, otherwise I will handcuff you, and contain you until such assistance can be found. The passengers were not asked to get up and undress or dance a polka! There was nothing frivolous about it and as pissed off as the Doctor would have felt - if they had "abandoned" the attempt to get the Doctor off BECAUSE he refused, and then picked someone else - imagine the downfall of that! There is a ranking order onboard an airplane for a very good reason, the instruction issued was entirely reasonable and under the circumstances were deemed necessary by the airline and the ensuing law enforcement officer. It's in the fine print on any IATA carriers ticketing conditions (carriage is not assured even if boarding pass has been issued and the plane has been boarded, or words to that effect).

Pretty much what I've said regarding the legal aspect. What UA did was woeful but I think the words you are looking for are along the lines of (or words to the effect), the carrier reserves the right to alter the times, the dates, the method of carriage and/or the carriers involved in the services and the equipment to be utilized for any reason it sees fit.
You are correct about thinking it through. Something that used to happen at the most recent airline I worked for was downgrades from A330 to 737 (737 having fixed J class section as opposed to the other mob). If this happens enroute, e.g. in ADL on a transcontinental service (as used to happen at Ansett sometimes, from 767 to 737 or A320), the pax won't all fit on the aircraft so the pax who have boarded and are in transit are selected usually at random and placed on a later service. There's not point when the aircraft which is terminating stops at the gate in refusing to disembark. There are other issues as well... a slide goes U/S and the pax load has to be reduced. If this legal right to take pax off an aircraft is removed I can see some real cockups happening... airline forced to fix/replace the slide in situ, flight delayed to the point where crew are out of hours and now EVERYONE has to get off. Like I said elsewhere. An aircraft is property. You have a right as does a company to order someone off your property for whatever reason even if you've invited them there. If they refuse it's trespass. I've been told this by Police and by Security management at a previous airline. I remember saying at the time that if it was me, I wouldn't have been happy but I would have got off the aircraft and then raised hell with the airline management afterward.
The problem with the US these days is that if you simply argue once off the aeroplane or even at the counter over a baggage allowance, without raising your voice or acting in a threatening manner in any way but rather reasoned, measured discussion, there is still every chance in that country that you will be handed over to Police for 'becoming abusive'. I am so sick of hearing the US (a country I used to admire once) talking about their freedom, etc. when in fact they are every bit a third rate Police State these days. They have tens of thousands of police forces and they're all armed, they're mostly badly trained and over react totally in just about every circumstance. If anyone disagrees with that then I suggest they watch the tape of the African American man changing his tyre on the side of the road who was shot 6 times by a Police officer, effectively for nothing.
It is this culture that caused this incident... I mean, the 'Chicago Aviation Police' what the hell is that??? Do they also have a 'Chicago front curb, terminal entry police' and a 'car park police' as well... pathetic.
No one I believe thinks it's acceptable for a passenger to be taken off a flight because of the airline's requirements but it is legal and anyone who thinks it's not is living in lala land. It may not be good business practice, it may not be practical but it is legal. The only difference in this case was that the word was obviously received after everyone had boarded.

[The name is Porter]

Talking about their freedom, etc. when in fact they are every bit a third rate Police State these days.

You, and anybody else that propagates this view really are an idiot. You clearly haven't spent any time in the US. That, or you just love your nanny state existence.