United MileagePlus (Consolidated) - UA execs gobble the best food

IAH to LAX today. In the F cabin, the FA asked Ms Shark if she would take the salad option because all the UA execs upfront had requested the other option. Apparently she made the same rq of several pax.

So not only are there "changes you will like," but they could include gobbling all the tasty foods before the civilian F pax.

Were these execs as in "executives" or execs as in "Premier Execs" - the former name for what nowdays is Gold?

These were airline executives - corporate employees.

These were airline executives - corporate employees.

Where were they sitting in F?

I tend to defend UA quite bit here... But, this is pathetic [if true]... Arrogance and ridiculous amount of instilled self-importance mentality by those executives.

If it were me, I'll tell the FA to give me whatever they have left after taking care of our customers in F.

Wish Ms Shark had taken pix of these loathsome suits and pilloried them on the Web.

Can't blame the CO execs for that. UA execs did it all the time as well. Was on a FLT to ORD out if MIA (when MIA was a hub). FLT was delayed 4 hours - G Greenwald was in the IFCL with 2-3 flunkies and since it was already getting late, had their dinners brought from the A/C to the lounge. I was the only one in there w them but sitting far away. When we finally boarded, no fillet left (the UA execs ate them all before take off :(

I tend to defend UA quite bit here... But, this is pathetic [if true]... Arrogance and ridiculous amount of instilled self-importance mentality by those executives.

Presuming she was even referring to UA staff (which isn't clear - as others have said "exec" used to be a status level, so she couldn't have been referring to the fact that some 1K's or GS has requested higher).

Even then, who's to say it was the "Exec"s making this request, and not an FA simply trying to impress her "bosses" by giving them the meals they had asked for?

There's far too much unknown here to blame the "exec"'s.

Presuming she was even referring to UA staff (which isn't clear - as others have said "exec" used to be a status level, so she couldn't have been referring to the fact that some 1K's or GS has requested higher).

These were airline executives - corporate employees.

These were airline executives - corporate employees.

Well, everyone in First is equal now. 1K, Gold, Silver, the $69 upgrader and the full fare customer...Oh, and NRSAs, employees and buddy pass riders!*

*Except, of course unless you're sitting in the last 2 rows of F, where, merely by your seat location, you get worse service (not a meal choice, last to be served).

Say what you want about UA's old way of prioritizing meals, at least it was IN STONE that employees got last choice...I believe even NRPS/deadheaders.

This new airline doesn't give a squat about paying customers.

No surprises here. :td:

...Oh, and NRSAs, employees and buddy pass riders!*
I was recently corrected by a legacy UA employee that the Shares terminology for NRSA is PRSA. Not sure what the "P" stands for, but I will just assume it's for Premier, like everthing else at COdbaUA.

...This new airline doesn't give a squat about paying customers.
That's for sure.

Presuming she was even referring to UA staff (which isn't clear - as others have said "exec" used to be a status level, so she couldn't have been referring to the fact that some 1K's or GS has requested higher).

Even then, who's to say it was the "Exec"s making this request, and not an FA simply trying to impress her "bosses" by giving them the meals they had asked for?

There's far too much unknown here to blame the "exec"'s.

It's true that it was not clear to MsShark whether the FA was acting on her own initiative or whether she had been "directed" or "guided" by the UA execs.

But that's what the FA told her, and she didn't get the choice of food that she would have preferred. Not at the back in the F cabin, either.

IAH to LAX today. In the F cabin, the FA asked Ms Shark if she would take the salad option because all the UA execs upfront had requested the other option. Apparently she made the same rq of several pax.

So not only are there "changes you will like," but they could include gobbling all the tasty foods before the civilian F pax.

Days of old. Maybe 20 years ago....time flies but as a long flying AA guy who "kayaks" among all three carriers (AA, UA and now DL) I was in F when Bob Crandall the great CEO of AA came on board with his team. By god every customer was served first and then his team. I will never forget that. Was so impressed. This post says a lot to me.

Days of old. Maybe 20 years ago....time flies but as a long flying AA guy who "kayaks" among all three carriers (AA, UA and now DL) I was in F when Bob Crandall the great CEO of AA came on board with his team. By god every customer was served first and then his team. I will never forget that. Was so impressed. This post says a lot to me.

I just want to add one more thing. These are tough times for businesses and leaders of businesses must make tough decisions. I ride in F paying up over what my own business will pay. I take the charge. I look to my fellow CEO's and I do not have the ability to fly a private jet. So I do the legacies. I look to see who will give a good value. If this post is true from the original poster I'm damn mad. Ok no more posts for a few weeks but sounds like to old Russian politburo. I sure am not going to buy any UA stock. Enough. This is the ultimate "elitism". Again thank god I do not own any stock.

Ugh, regretting I own stock now. :'(

If true....I find this to be more than insulting....but this is the "New United"

Wish Ms Shark had taken pix of these loathsome suits and pilloried them on the Web.

For doing what? Getting their choice of meal by sitting towards the front of the cabin? :confused:

For doing what? Getting their choice of meal by sitting towards the front of the cabin? :confused:

Ok another post while I said I would not post one. Hey do you own a business.....probably so. But hey let's put the customer first. Maybe an old concept but important to some of us. Again old school here but this thread hit a nerve.

What one person considers tasty another may consider loathsome. What choices were these employees suppose to make?

What one person considers tasty another may consider loathsome. What choices were these employees suppose to make?

Going last :(

Not surprising. Wasn't unusual for deadheading PMCO employees to magically have exit row seats... (spare me the lecture on how I should be thankful they are there for our safety instead of offering those most comfortable seats to the paying pax)

ETA, here's a lovely example of some off duty FA's getting moved up to F with people on the waitlist...
http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/united-mileageplus-consolidated/1375175-shenanigans-sighted-times-two.html

You gotta wonder when the employees are going to realize there's this internet thing and you're not going to get away with this sh!t without being called out. (BTW, loved the FT'er who snapped the pics of the UA Club agent clipping her fingernails :D )

Great. That's great. They get the very best food - in F - and the rest of us get the scraps. We get to choke down another tapas box, with the stale crackers, and the hummas that comes out of the plastic tube.

Who are these execs? More importantly, do they think they are? Do the think they are the orphanage masters from the movie Oliver!?

Crass. Greedy. Selfish. Arrogant. And then they wonder why we dislike them so much.

Crass. Greedy. Selfish. Arrogant. And then they wonder why we dislike them so much.

Yep!

I'll take this a step further...TRUE story.

My company is hosting a dinner in a travel-to city next week. We'll have maybe 20 of our best customers there--and probably about 5 of us representing my company...

We've hosted dinners at this place before, and the restaurant staff, which doesn't even work for me, knows, JUST BEING POLITE that my staff and I will definitely order last.

And if they don't ask us last and said, "We only have 3 specials left" and three of my customers want the special? DAMN right they're getting the special...Or if for some reason they're short on food, I'll eat oysters and mushrooms if I have to...And I hate oysters and am allergic to mushrooms. Or I'd fill up on bread. Or just salad. Whatever. My customers come first.

One could parse this analogy any way they want, and sure, it's not the exact same thing...but these people are representing the company, even if they didn't personally invite those people to fly with them that day. If I was a UA exec, I would definitely make it a point that MY CUSTOMERS got their chance at their choice of meals ahead of me.

As a hotel manager, I can say that this sort of behavior sets a very bad tone for staff in the service industry.

If the guys from Corp are superior to the paying customer and the FA's, no surprise that the FA's will turn around and provide crap service to passengers.

This is the service industry, not the "we are doing you a favor" industry.

Quite honestly, I find UA execs sitting in F as non-rev VERY irritating. If they were putting the customer first, and we have all agreed they are not, they would sit back in Y and allow pax with paying tickets to receive UGs.

This is just what I would expect from such a lousy airline.

As a hotel manager, I can say that this sort of behavior sets a very bad tone for staff in the service industry.

If the guys from Corp are superior to the paying customer and the FA's, no surprise that the FA's will turn around and provide crap service to passengers.

This is the service industry, not the "we are doing you a favor" industry.

I think the problem is that many at UA do not get "it" - that they are supposed to be in a service industry.

I think they believe they are in the "we get you from A to B, without killing you but not necessarily pleasantly or comfortably or on-time, business"

Guess what? You're not the only one who offers the service. Some do it a lot better. If they want to sit on their high horse and think the fact that they fly big jets all over the world means they have some higher purpose in the world, give this some thought:

It's a bit like, "Hey, US Postal Service, heard of UPS and FedEx?"

Say what you want about UA's old way of prioritizing meals, at least it was IN STONE that employees got last choice...I believe even NRPS/deadheaders.


Sort of. I think positive space F travelers (like senior management) are treated as revenue pax for all intents and purposes, but I could be wrong. Not that I agree with it...

Pass riders, deadheads and other non-revenue passengers in F are still prioritized after revenue passengers for meal choice.

Anyway, if true, definitely a lack of tact by these execs, or whatever they were. I think if I were traveling on company business on a domestic flight, I would make it a point to be in Y as often as practicable. As I recall, Gordon used to do the same thing. Doing otherwise communicates the wrong message, IMO.

Pass riders, deadheads and other non-revenue passengers in F are still prioritized after revenue passengers for meal choice.


Actually, this is not true any longer. Like real estate, it's "location, location, location" now.

I think people are missing the point, they are not owners they are employees, executives, but just employees. As employees of a company they have reached a rank where their compensation or perk includes first class travel. Would you be upset if they were employees of general motors? If my company is paying for me to sit in first I will gladly eat the food no matter if my employers name just happens to be on the side of the plane. I'd also find it troublesome if United encouraged other companies to fly their employees in first if they refused to do so for their own executives.

IAH to LAX today. In the F cabin, the FA asked Ms Shark if she would take the salad option because all the UA execs upfront had requested the other option.

what a nonsense. No matter who they are, if you sit in first row you get first choice. location as noted above determines whether you have a choice or not. and yes, you will be charged for a snack box.

Actually, this is not true any longer. Like real estate, it's "location, location, location" now.

It actually depends on the uniform the crew is wearing, if they are Continental employees it's location, if it United It's status. Until thay are on the same operating certificate they still have to followed approved flight manuals and training of their legacy carrier.

It actually depends on the uniform the crew is wearing, if they are Continental employees it's location, if it United It's status. Until thay are on the same operating certificate they still have to followed approved flight manuals and training of their legacy carrier.

Incorrect. Since sometime earlier this year, only GS are supposed to get their first choice on UA, no matter which uniform the employees are wearing. The "taking meals order by status" is history.

The "taking meals order by status" is history. however, some old UA staff stll accommodate 1Ks and make us feel appreciated and slightly over-entitled.

It actually depends on the uniform the crew is wearing, if they are Continental employees it's location, if it United It's status. Until thay are on the same operating certificate they still have to followed approved flight manuals and training of their legacy carrier.

The crews have been operating on the same Operations Manual/FAA Certificate for quite some time now. UA surrendered their certificate and CO altered theirs to a callsign of "United".

The only segregation between the airlines is union based, while each group hammers out a unified contract.

The FAA and the Operations Manual couldn't care less about meal preference orders. :rolleyes:

[QUOTE=redtailshark;19085661]IAH to LAX today. In the F cabin, the FA asked Ms Shark if she would take the salad option because all the UA execs upfront had requested the other option.QUOTE]

what a nonsense. No matter who they are, if you sit in first row you get first choice. location as noted above determines whether you have a choice or not. and yes, you will be charged for a snack box.

Not to mention the real problem here actually was the way it was handled by the F/A. There was no need to add " the execs" up front comment ( and we dont even really know what was meant by it). We don't ( and never will) know the true details of what happened. However, what we do know is the customer service issue ( and this post) would have not come up if the F/A hadn't commented and did the normal service with other passengers have taken the other meal option so this is the choice i have left for you.

Ten points:

First, UA executives are not alone in flying in F. Same is true with all other airlines.

Second, airline executives would well serve their company by not always sitting in the same place. F, C, E+, E... Window, center, aisle. They would understand their product more.

Third, Absolutely no problem with relief crew sitting in F. I want them as rested as possible.

Fourth, I have no complaints with deadheading crew sitting in F/C. They are the true frequent fliers and most deserve a break. Others might disagree.

Fifth, It would have been quite decent of the execs to ask the FA to please take their orders last.

Six, Sitting in the rear of the cabin, one should not expect much of a choice under the current system. Its simple supply & demand. Taking extra meals would simply be wasteful, both of $$ and food.

Seven, Taking orders by other than location, except in the case of those who ask the FA to return, makes no sense. To do it by status is hierarchy we don't need, and a waste of FAs time. What would make sense is to change the order in which it is done. On some flights do front to rear of the cabin, on other flights do rear to front.

Eight, FA should not have mentioned the UA execs.

Nine, Don't we have more important things to gripe about than this?

Ten, Don't we have more important things to do than gripe?

Days of old. Maybe 20 years ago....
... I was in F when Bob Crandall the great CEO of AA came on board with his team. By god every customer was served first and then his team. I will never forget that. Was so impressed.


As a Gate AAgent in the 1980's, I was puzzled once by the number of cleaning crews "scrubbing down" my gate area one evening. Not the middle of the night but during the day. Every inch being covered, cobwebs being removed, jetbridge walls being washed, the whole nine yards.

Then I get a call that my inbound flight is 10 minutes out, go ahead and go to the jetbridge to meet it (such a call was not standard procedure). I replied that I had a line of passengers at my gate, I'd continue serving them but will not "gate miss" my inbound. I was ordered to go to the jetbridge NOW because Crandall was onboard.

A protege whisked him off the plane, I barely saw him. Talking to the Premium F/A, she said the catering was amazing. Some items she wasn't exactly too sure how to serve. She said the dessert was not SkyChefs, but a Black Forrest Cake from some bakery.

Years later, working in the rAAmp tower, the term "COB" (Crandall On Board) was a common phrase. We made all the notifications and would juggle gate assignments to ensure his flight would taxi straight to the gate.
The circus act was assinine.

To give credit to your point of view ....
I had heard many times that while Crandall was "positive space" and his favorite seat was 5B, he would gladly take a cockpit jumpseat if needed for an oversold flight or even to accommodate another "non-rev".

Having talked to the man briefly, IMHO, the circus acts were never ordered by him. It was nervous nelly VPs / Managers that were making sure he had no idea what it was like to fly on AA :(

T
Fifth, It would have been quite decent of the execs to ask the FA to please take their orders last.


Sure, and it would also be decent of people who are flying in F thanks to complimentary premier upgrades to ask the FAs to serve *them* last as well just so those who are actually paying F fares for F seats can have their choice of meal :D

Anyone paying an economy fare, sitting in F, and complaining that they aren't getting their choice of meal is pretty much the definition of "over-entitled".

As a Gate AAgent in the 1980's, I was puzzled once by the number of cleaning crews "scrubbing down" my gate area one evening. Not the middle of the night but during the day. Every inch being covered, cobwebs being removed, jetbridge walls being washed, the whole nine yards.

Then I get a call that my inbound flight is 10 minutes out, go ahead and go to the jetbridge to meet it (such a call was not standard procedure). I replied that I had a line of passengers at my gate, I'd continue serving them but will not "gate miss" my inbound. I was ordered to go to the jetbridge NOW because Crandall was onboard.

A protege whisked him off the plane, I barely saw him. Talking to the Premium F/A, she said the catering was amazing. Some items she wasn't exactly too sure how to serve. She said the dessert was not SkyChefs, but a Black Forrest Cake from some bakery.

Years later, working in the rAAmp tower, the term "COB" (Crandall On Board) was a common phrase. We made all the notifications and would juggle gate assignments to ensure his flight would taxi straight to the gate.
The circus act was assinine.

To give credit to your point of view ....
I had heard many times that while Crandall was "positive space" and his favorite seat was 5B, he would gladly take a cockpit jumpseat if needed for an oversold flight or even to accommodate another "non-rev".

Having talked to the man briefly, IMHO, the circus acts were never ordered by him. It was nervous nelly VPs / Managers that were making sure he had no idea what it was like to fly on AA :(

You will see that at almost any company of folks covering their A$$ for the CEO. Crandall had his flaws, but he was pretty well known for giving up seats, meals etc to paying passengers. AA also had a much less generous policy for positive space business travel on the carrier. You essentially had to be a senior VP or above, otherwise even business travel you went stand by for corporate travel. Rare in the industry at the time.

There's nothing new here, just further evidence that there is no sense of moral or ethical guidance coming from high places. There's no loyalty to the customer, just the delivery of a service. And that's a real shame, because there are so many things that can be changed, that don't cost money, that would make United a far better airline than it is today. Or will be tomorrow.

Walk in the customer's shoes for a bit. Why has that become such a foreign concept? Treat people the way you'd like to be treated. Trouble is, I think there's a real island mentality in higher management. We used to joke about executive bathrooms and special keys. How quaint. Today's successful executive might not be successful because he or she understands the needs and desires of the customer, but rather because he or she understands those of the other executives.

The internet may have made this inevitable. Understand the customer? Which one; there are millions, and they all seem to have a voice! And "product" is no longer seen as being nearly as sexy as financial services and making money by taking tiny pieces from millions of transactions.
Sure, and it would also be decent of people who are flying in F thanks to complimentary premier upgrades to ask the FAs to serve *them* last as well just so those who are actually paying F fares for F seats can have their choice of meal :D

Anyone paying an economy fare, sitting in F, and complaining that they aren't getting their choice of meal is pretty much the definition of "over-entitled".There's something to be said for the fact that we're asking executives to place great value and have deference towards a product they supply as a freebie to many. Could anyone have known that getting rid of e500s was such a terrible idea? If UDU or whatever it's presently called was a "solution" for the "problem" of empty seats in F while some "deserving" high-value customer was stuck in Y... wow.

Seven, Taking orders by other than location, except in the case of those who ask the FA to return, makes no sense. To do it by status is hierarchy we don't need, and a waste of FAs time.


Can't say I agree. And what "time" are you referring to? An extra 60 seconds reading Us Weekly?

Disgusting. Employees shouldn't be getting any type of special treatment at all, let alone F and even J. They should all be put in E.

Can't say I agree. And what "time" are you referring to? An extra 60 seconds reading Us Weekly?

Time the s/he could be delivery food for one. It may not be much on a 737 but could add up quickly on a WB.

Can't say I agree. And what "time" are you referring to? An extra 60 seconds reading Us Weekly?

Nor do i agree. Again this is largely a SHARES issue in that it's much more difficult to identify by status or for fare paid then the functionality UA had built into Apollo over the years.

however, some old UA staff stll accommodate 1Ks and make us feel appreciated and slightly over-entitled.

While some of them still do, it's not the official policy any more under "new" United.

As iluv mentioned already, you need to get very front rows if you want to have your 1st meal choice unless you are GS...

Disgusting. Employees shouldn't be getting any type of special treatment at all, let alone F and even J. They should all be put in E.Was there supposed to be a smiley in there? Employees shouldn't be treated like cattle. That's one of the issues here... employees aren't seeing the guidance or respect they should have, from management or even the customers. Employees from most (all domestic?) airlines have always had flying perks that helped offset the relatively-low pay for the job. And there should never be an assumption, at the outset, that an employee isn't deserving of respect. Not in the airline industry, or any other. They may earn that through their actions, but you've got to give people a bit of room to play their part in the world and do it well.

Hmmm. Don't normally get involved in these debates, but here's my $0.02. I am an employee of a company. We have clients. We have lunches with these clients with catered food. Under no circumstances would I ever think about taking the last turkey sandwich if the client wanted it. I always wait until the client takes what he/she wants and then I choose from what's leftover, regardless of how I feel about my employer. It just seems like common sense to me.

Was there supposed to be a smiley in there? Employees shouldn't be treated like cattle. That's one of the issues here... employees aren't seeing the guidance or respect they should have, from management or even the customers. Employees from most (all domestic?) airlines have always had flying perks that helped offset the relatively-low pay for the job. And there should never be an assumption, at the outset, that an employee isn't deserving of respect. Not in the airline industry, or any other. They may earn that through their actions, but you've got to give people a bit of room to play their part in the world and do it well.

Where did I say they should be treated like cattle? All I said they shouldn't be put upfront and shouldn't get any type of special treatment. F and J should be reserved for paying passengers, not employee nonrevs.

however, some old UA staff stll accommodate 1Ks and make us feel appreciated and slightly over-entitled.

I still don't get why anyone would believe that a 1K/GS would ever feel over-entitled. The face that someone would utter those words are beyond me.

What is going on at UAL? Maybe, I'm reading the forums to much because I'm starting to loathe them.

Hmmm. Don't normally get involved in these debates, but here's my $0.02. I am an employee of a company. We have clients. We have lunches with these clients with catered food. Under no circumstances would I ever think about taking the last turkey sandwich if the client wanted it. I always wait until the client takes what he/she wants and then I choose from what's leftover, regardless of how I feel about my employer. It just seems like common sense to me.

I think you hit the nail right on the head!

What you/I see as common business sense the clowns at UA see as over-entitlement.

Where did I say they should be treated like cattle? All I said they shouldn't be put upfront and shouldn't get any type of special treatment. F and J should be reserved for paying passengers, not employee nonrevs.

Lol! Sorry bub, but if those seats are going empty (after every eligible upgrade has been processed) then it will go to the Nonrevs. End of story. Sourgrapes much?

ps- I agree that execs should not get special treatment at all.

Why is this surprising. Happened on the old UA as well. It's wrong but not indicative of the COdbaUA mentality. Just indicative if many execs

Crass. Greedy. Selfish. Arrogant. And then they wonder why we dislike them so much.

This kind of thing went on at UA well before the merger. Don't you remember the rash of Employee Class threads a few years ago, describing employee takeovers of F cabins (often while elites were denied upgrades), with virtual company parties up front while paying customers had to beg for minimal service?

Then and now, the principal mission of United Airlines was/is to assure the comfort of the employees of United Airlines. Passengers are way down the list, and Smisek didn't introduce that idea. He's just made things worse by rolling out an explicitly adversarial, even punitive, attitude towards customers.

There's nothing new here, just further evidence that there is no sense of moral or ethical guidance coming from high places. There's no loyalty to the customer, just the delivery of a service.

This, especially the "nothing new here" part.

Though I generally agree with what has been said, I am also sympathetic to the FA's situation. To be honest, if I were the FA, I would probably cater more to the company's executive than the generic passenger, other things equal. It is up to the executives and organizational culture to instill the feeling among FAs that such catering is misplaced.

Lol! Sorry bub, but if those seats are going empty (after every eligible upgrade has been processed) then it will go to the Nonrevs. End of story. Sourgrapes much?

That may be, but hey, I'm just stating my opinion. I just don't think employees should be able to ride for free upfront and expect the same care and treatment as real passengers. I've seen some pretty boastful nonrevs that act obnoxious while flying on UA and heck, even AA.
They should be happy that they can fly around willy nilly for little to no money.

Actually, this is not true any longer. Like real estate, it's "location, location, location" now.

If so, that is utterly absurd. There is no conceivable rational explanation for prioritizing pass riders or deadheads over revenue pax for ANYTHING, upgraded or not. Positive space, yes. NRSA/deadhead, not even close.

I don't believe this was "the CO way" either.

I was on a PMUA flight when one of Tilton's boys and his whole non-rev family of 5 came up and snagged the remaining F seats ahead of Premiers.

The meal story bothers me less because it seems like they always run out of the good meal anyways because they only load 2 cereals to every 14 eggs or 2 pastas and 14 beefs. But I guess I should be lucky I even get an upgrade.

IAH to LAX today. In the F cabin, the FA asked Ms Shark if she would take the salad option because all the UA execs upfront had requested the other option. Apparently she made the same rq of several pax.

So not only are there "changes you will like," but they could include gobbling all the tasty foods before the civilian F pax.

Ridiculous. I work for a Fortune 500 company. We get an employee discount at our stores. Everyone from the lowest ranking staff all the way up to the highest ranking C-level execs has been trained to always let customers go first.

I've already lost faith in UA due to horrible customer service experiences post-merger. Hearing your story reiterates that these horrible customer service experiences start at the top of the chain.

I for one never want the FA nor any pax to know what type of fare I purchased, any more than I want a stranger to see my pay stub. And while FAs are provided with pax status -- its right on the manifiest printed by SHARES -- I would be rather miffed to ever get my meal service before the pax sitting next to me. You might call it appreciation of status, I would call it inappropriate on the airline's part and a sense of over entitlement on the passenger's part.

Each day I read FT, I become more and more sypmathetic to the plight of not just UA rank and file employees, but to senior management as well. Such whining they hear each day.

Was there supposed to be a smiley in there? Employees shouldn't be treated like cattle. That's one of the issues here... employees aren't seeing the guidance or respect they should have, from management or even the customers. Employees from most (all domestic?) airlines have always had flying perks that helped offset the relatively-low pay for the job. And there should never be an assumption, at the outset, that an employee isn't deserving of respect. Not in the airline industry, or any other. They may earn that through their actions, but you've got to give people a bit of room to play their part in the world and do it well.

Agree, and while the exact titles of the execs in question will never be known, it's a pretty common benefit across many companies and industries to fly top management in a premium cabin. There are sound business reasons for this. Wouldn't expect airlines to operate differently here.

That said, it would have been gracious for the execs to ask to be served last. But who knows what the FA told them? I bet the execs had no idea their choices were depriving other passengers of first meal choice.

Agree, and while the exact titles of the execs in question will never be known, it's a pretty common benefit across many companies and industries to fly top management in a premium cabin. There are sound business reasons for this. Wouldn't expect airlines to operate differently here.

That said, it would have been gracious for the execs to ask to be served last. But who knows what the FA told them? I bet the execs had no idea their choices were depriving other passengers of first meal choice.

+1 - As someone who has F/C travel (in certain circumstances) as part of my compensation package I cannot agree that "employees" should never travel F/C. I am sure it's easy for an airline to give premium seats (when traveling on business) as part of their executive compensation packages (vs. more $).

I also agree with the idea above that the execs had no idea that their own meal choices we're depriving others of their choices. I suspect this is just an FA who is trying to negativley influence the customer's view of their employer (as we've seen through numerous other examples here on FT). As someone who does not work in the customer facing portion of my business, I do understand putting customers first, but when I'm exposed to situations outside of my function I may not know all the details of how to do that. In other words, maybe these were government affairs or finance execs who have no idea how meal service on-board works. Should they have asked? Yes, but they were likely focused on other things (as most of us are when on business travel).

I also agree with the idea above that the execs had no idea that their own meal choices we're depriving others of their choices. I suspect this is just an FA who is trying to negativley influence the customer's view of their employer (as we've seen through numerous other examples here on FT). As someone who does not work in the customer facing portion of my business, I do understand putting customers first, but when I'm exposed to situations outside of my function I may not know all the details of how to do that. In other words, maybe these were government affairs or finance execs who have no idea how meal service on-board works. Should they have asked? Yes, but they were likely focused on other things (as most of us are when on business travel).But execs shouldn't be so disconnected from the real world that they have no clue about the basics of their business's interface to the customers.

Perhaps UA would benefit from a "Take in walk in the customer's shoes" program. In other fields, we'd call this an "empathy" program, something to sensitize execs and other employees to the trials and tribulations, good things and bad things, that the customer goes through.

Then again, didn't the Geneva Convention outlaw torture? If not that, there are probably OSHA or other labor laws that would prevent a company from forcing their employees to go through what we do sometimes. :eek:

Where did I say they should be treated like cattle? All I said they shouldn't be put upfront and shouldn't get any type of special treatment. F and J should be reserved for paying passengers, not employee nonrevs.That's your opinion. Mine is that they've earned the opportunity to sit up front sometimes, and that the whole UDU thing has convinced elites that they "own" that front cabin. Well, we don't. We get, as a benefit, whatever UA throws our way. If non-revs are displacing customers paid F customers, yeah, that would be ridiculous. But rarely is that happening.

A GS stuck in a middle E- seat at the back of the plane is another issue that needs to be worked on, but its resolution doesn't require that we treat UA employees as undeserving of a seat up front once in a while.

A GS stuck in a middle E- seat at the back of the plane is another issue that needs to be worked on, but its resolution doesn't require that we treat UA employees as undeserving of a seat up front once in a while.

Overworked and underpaid UA employees - sure! Handsomely rewarded UA execs who are responsible for the product offered in all cabins - not so much.

Disgusting. Employees shouldn't be getting any type of special treatment at all, let alone F and even J. They should all be put in E.

Let me get this straight: all UA employees including high-ranking executives need to travel in economy?

How many giant companies of comparable size to UA make all their employees travel in economy? Are we suggesting that it's okay for your company, which doesn't own a gigantic fleet of airliners, to fly you around in F/J, but it's not okay for an airline, which gets F/J seats effectively free, to do so? That's a really weird way of looking at things.

Look, ultimately the details of employee and executive travel privileges are a matter for negotiation between shareholders and executives (or, to put it another way, between capital and labor ;) ). If you're not a major shareholder it's really none of your damn business.

I repeat my previous complaint that apparently some people seem to think that United is a charity run for the benefit of those who fly more than 100,000 miles a year.

Let me get this straight: all UA employees including high-ranking executives need to travel in economy?

How many giant companies of comparable size to UA make all their employees travel in economy? Are we suggesting that it's okay for your company, which doesn't own a gigantic fleet of airliners, to fly you around in F/J, but it's not okay for an airline, which gets F/J seats effectively free, to do so? That's a really weird way of looking at things.

Look, ultimately the details of employee and executive travel privileges are a matter for negotiation between shareholders and executives (or, to put it another way, between capital and labor ;) ). If you're not a major shareholder it's really none of your damn business.

I repeat my previous complaint that apparently some people seem to think that United is a charity run for the benefit of those who fly more than 100,000 miles a year.

The point here is that if the executives have no interest about what life is like behind the curtain, they should neither be travelling with neither work for the airline. And if they don't even have an interest in what things are like in front of the curtain for passengers who don't work for the airline, the company is truly doomed.

I think people are missing the point, they are not owners they are employees, executives, but just employees. As employees of a company they have reached a rank where their compensation or perk includes first class travel. Would you be upset if they were employees of general motors? If my company is paying for me to sit in first I will gladly eat the food no matter if my employers name just happens to be on the side of the plane. I'd also find it troublesome if United encouraged other companies to fly their employees in first if they refused to do so for their own executives.

It's these same executives that make the decision not to have enough meals on the flight for all FC passengers, then they take all the good food. Are the paying customers really missing the point?

The point here is that if the executives have no interest about what life is like behind the curtain, they should neither be travelling with neither work for the airline. And if they don't even have an interest in what things are like in front of the curtain for passengers who don't work for the airline, the company is truly doomed.Very few people in the US, and likely the world, have nearly as much respect for people producing a "product" as they do for people who have a truly white-collar existence, making money manipulating numbers and exploiting swings in those numbers. The execs don't want to think about planes & passengers. They want to think about numbers that add up to better numbers. Planes & passengers & facilities get in the way. They break down, they complain, they crumble. Who needs the aggravation?

There are days when I truly understand that concept. Days when I'm dodging one bullet after another, when "customers" keep me from getting things done. Days when I'm so busy I wish they could simply write down what they want, slip it through the mail slot, and I'll decide if it's worth dealing with or not. On days like that, sure, just dealing with numbers and trying to out-smart someone else has appeal.

Thankfully, I don't have too many days like that, and my biggest reward has always been a smile and thank you from a customer and sometimes a story about how getting them riding has made a huge positive change in their life. But to get there I have to get past those times where it seems like all I'm doing is putting out fires. I have to focus on all the good things that are happening, despite the fact that my talents are so often used to fix things that went wrong.

An airline exec? How would someone get a handle on hundreds, thousands, maybe a million issues and complaints over a years time? Why would they want to? What's the reward for doing so? The reward would likely be going home with a smaller paycheck because you focused on metrics that didn't directly impact your pay.

And let's say you bring in a new customer service VP and offer to pay them a big bonus if they reduce customer complaints. Who's going to help them achieve that? What's their incentive? Unless EVERYONE has that bonus opportunity, it's not going to fly.

But execs shouldn't be so disconnected from the real world that they have no clue about the basics of their business's interface to the customers.


I wouldn't say that knowing meal perference order is the basics of the business. They likley know that UA serves free food and booze in F and that F Pax get to board first etc ect ect. To think they know that food is rationed front to back or that UA does not carry enough for everyone to get their first choice is pushing it. It's almost like expecting an exec. to know how to dive in and make a change to a reservation in SHARES. Details are for the staff, big-picture is for the executives. Management has to bridge the gap.

I wouldn't say that knowing meal perference order is the basics of the business. They likley know that UA serves free food and booze in F and that F Pax get to board first etc ect ect. To think they know that food is rationed front to back or that UA does not carry enough for everyone to get their first choice is pushing it. It's almost like expecting an exec. to know how to dive in and make a change to a reservation in SHARES. Details are for the staff, big-picture is for the executives. Management has to bridge the gap.This isn't about serving meals front-to-back.

The reason I don't buy that is because Airline management is in the fortunate position of actually getting to use/experience their product. Many in management don't get to do that. If you're upper management at US Steel, what's your interface with the product? Nil. But an airline exec is likely experiencing the product on a regular basis. How ridiculous would it be to not expect one to pay attention to what the product experience actually is? The real-world product experience you're providing both your best and Kayak customers?

We need to get real here. There's no way that an exec working for United, or any other airline, doesn't know that customer complaints in the industry are way of of whack for product in general. And that the low-hanging fruit is often in presentation and attitude, two items that add negligibly to the bottom line of expenses.

It's an amazing opportunity. Taking your product for a test-drive on a frequent basis. How could you allow that opportunity to be wasted?

For doing what? Getting their choice of meal by sitting towards the front of the cabin? :confused:

seriously, you see nothing wrong with non-rev employees taking meal choices ahead of revenue customers?

The OP's wife was overly courteous - in the same position, I would have refused the salad and demanded the employees give up their meal choices even if I had to get up from my seat and confront them to their faces.

This is beyond wrong.

seriously, you see nothing wrong with non-rev employees taking meal choices ahead of revenue customers?

The OP's wife was overly courteous - in the same position, I would have refused the salad and demanded the employees give up their meal choices even if I had to get up from my seat and confront them to their faces.

This is beyond wrong.

I'm really rather confused.

Is the situation that the employees got served *out* of the usual front-to-back order, or is the situation that the employees got served *in* the usual front-to-back order?

I do not have a problem with execs sitting up front, as long as it is within reason. If F is already full, take a different flight. Don't bring a family of 4-5 and filling up half of the F cabin, particularly on routes where there are tons of paid F traffic. I think the execs+1 family/close friend should be able to fly for free for leisure travel, but if they want to bring more family members they should pay for the seat. Just my opinion.

As for the food choices, if you work for the airline, you should get your choices after all customers. Irregardless if the customer was upgraded or flying in paid F. Just the same with non-revs, they get what is left, the same principle should apply to executives unless they actually paid for the ticket.

Before anyone bashes me thinking I am over-entitled... I do fly in paid F a few times a year. Nope not award, paid.

I'm really rather confused.

Is the situation that the employees got served *out* of the usual front-to-back order, or is the situation that the employees got served *in* the usual front-to-back order?

Doesn't matter - nonrev employees should have their order taken last regardless of where they sit. No exceptions. When I nonrev'd I was lucky to get a meal or drink at all, let alone first choice.

I'm really rather confused.

Is the situation that the employees got served *out* of the usual front-to-back order, or is the situation that the employees got served *in* the usual front-to-back order?

The point here is not about the meal ordering process. It is about who should have the first choice the an UA executive on a non-paid fare or a high revenue customer.

UA execs gobble the "best food"
--> We're talking domestic first class, so clearly it is a (very) relative matter of "best"... ;)

It fills you up and keeps you going, but...

seriously, you see nothing wrong with non-rev employees taking meal choices ahead of revenue customers?

The OP's wife was overly courteous - in the same position, I would have refused the salad and demanded the employees give up their meal choices even if I had to get up from my seat and confront them to their faces.

This is beyond wrong.If a UA employee has earned (yes, I said earned) a seat in F, I think they should be served meals in whatever order is normal. If that's front-to-back and they're all in the front and people in the back are griping, that's an issue with the new meal order process, not non-revs getting first-choice. For UA employees who have earned that seat only. My assumption is that rules are in place that keep flights from being overwhelmed by non-revs flying for non-UA-business at the expense of paying customers.

If a UA employee is non-crew flying on business for UA, I see things very differently. That person should be deferential to the needs of those around him or her, obviously imho.

If a UA employee has earned (yes, I said earned) a seat in F, I think they should be served meals in whatever order is normal. If that's front-to-back and they're all in the front and people in the back are griping, that's an issue with the new meal order process, not non-revs getting first-choice. For UA employees who have earned that seat only. My assumption is that rules are in place that keep flights from being overwhelmed by non-revs flying for non-UA-business at the expense of paying customers.

If a UA employee is non-crew flying on business for UA, I see things very differently. That person should be deferential to the needs of those around him or her, obviously imho.

How do we define "earning" - an employee who purchases their own tickets?

How do we define "earning" - an employee who purchases their own tickets?

I would define "earned" as something that was negotiated as part of a compensation package (presumably in lieu of additional $)

Doesn't matter - nonrev employees should have their order taken last regardless of where they sit. No exceptions. When I nonrev'd I was lucky to get a meal or drink at all, let alone first choice.

Respectfully, I am guessing there is a lot of daylight between your past non-rev travel arrangements, and the corporate travel policy for top management at most Fortune 100 companies.

I think there is a big difference between non-revs who are traveling own their own time as a pass benefit and non-revs who are positive space traveling on business. The majority of us here on FT travel as a result of our jobs we all likely have our own travel policies to which we have to adhere. For some that is lowest priced Y, some is any Y ticket, some is mixed Y/C/F, and others is all C/F. I fall into the mixed category and I specifically negotiated that into my compensation package (others in my group did not and perhaps get paid more $). I assume most management / executives have comp packages that include more than just insurance, retirement, & base pay. I would bet that many large companies (likely dependent on industry) fly their management around in F.

I think there is a valid argument about if the UA Executives should have passed on their meal choice or not; but I am very surprised at all the discussion about if they should be in F in the first place. An earlier poster pointed out that UA claims to be marketing to the premium business traveler (who presumably flies in F) it would be kind of ironic if they didn't fly their own executives in F.

Respectfully, I am guessing there is a lot of daylight between your past non-rev travel arrangements, and the corporate travel policy for top management at most Fortune 100 companies.

Positive space 'must ride' passes given to employees grant a seat - common sense (lacking in current UA management) dictates the employees defer meal choices and even seat selection to the benefit of paying customers....an airline executive or manager demanding (or even accepting) a meal choice, seat assignment or other product amenity at the expense of a paying customer should have their discretionary pass privileges suspended....and I'd have no problem saying such right to their face.

Positive space 'must ride' passes given to employees grant a seat - common sense (lacking in current UA management) dictates the employees defer meal choices and even seat selection to the benefit of paying customers....an airline executive or manager demanding (or even accepting) a meal choice, seat assignment or other product amenity at the expense of a paying customer should have their discretionary pass privileges suspended....and I'd have no problem saying such right to their face.

Should a GM executive do the same if he/she notices another PAX has a GM key on their key ring?

I think passes associated with Company travel are more likley "allocated" to an employee instead of buying them a ticket on another airline. My guess is that most would rather be home than flying.

Positive space 'must ride' passes given to employees grant a seat - common sense (lacking in current UA management) dictates the employees defer meal choices and even seat selection to the benefit of paying customers....an airline executive or manager demanding (or even accepting) a meal choice, seat assignment or other product amenity at the expense of a paying customer should have their discretionary pass privileges suspended....and I'd have no problem saying such right to their face.

I would agree with this. I dont argue that at a certain level in the food chain you get F. However, any smart business i know allows their actual paying customers to get first choice of things like meals etc.

That being said, what a lot of folks without inside knowledge also dont get is that on business travel for airline employees ( for the big 3 at least i know for sure), the're respective department is changed internally for it. Airlines get that revenue passengers are displaced by taking up the seats for company business travel, so they have internal travel budgets for each department. Your department generally get's X dollars for travel, and the air travel is billed against that, generally at full Y. When that budget it gone, your done with travel for the year. This is a recognition of the fact that it costs the company money to be taking up revenue seats.

Should a GM executive do the same if he/she notices another PAX has a GM key on their key ring?

I think passes associated with Company travel are more likley "allocated" to an employee instead of buying them a ticket on another airline. My guess is that most would rather be home than flying.

There is no correlation between the GM example and the concept of a positive space pass for management.

so we're talking, August 8, 2012, IAH-LAX? Which flight? I dont show any employees in First Class on any IAH-LAX flight.

Where did I say they should be treated like cattle? All I said they shouldn't be put upfront and shouldn't get any type of special treatment. F and J should be reserved for paying passengers, not employee nonrevs.

Suggesting that they should be put in E on United is the same as suggesting that they be treated like cattle.

There is no correlation between the GM example and the concept of a positive space pass for management.

Sure it does, my point was that when UA management travels on business they are doing just that; traveling on business. It just happens that they work for the same company that owns the airline. I wouldn't be surprised if one part of the company was "paying" another (as grahampros suggests above) in which case they are, in fact, customers.

There are times when Company employees are "on" and times when they are not. I would argue that, if not for the FA's comments, no one would have known that these guys worked for UA. Unlike crew/FAs/others who fly in uniform or with UA badges/IDs these guys sound like they were traveling just like any other traveler the only difference being how their tickets were paid for.

My comment about GM is that, when not in a customer facing function, most businesses don't go out of their way to cater to their customers. I would expect that these folks were simply going from A to B as part of their non-customer facing function at UA. They did not expect or intend to be identified by customers as UA employees since they were not serving in that function. While it would have been nice of them to defer to customers on meals, seats, etc. they may not (and likely should not) know about the precise part of the UA operation and did not realize they were impacting other customers. But for the FAs comment to the OP, no one would have known any wiser.

so we're talking, August 8, 2012, IAH-LAX? Which flight? I dont show any employees in First Class on any IAH-LAX flight.

Which could hint at the point i made earlier. We have no idea what was meant by "execs" in this context. It could have been status passangers, execs from another company, who knows.

I don't doubt the OP herd the term, but i do doubt exactly what it meant. It goes back to the F/A shouldn't have made the comment in the first place and we wouldn't have had to get into a debate with so little facts on the situation at hand.

Folks love to jump to conclusions, but the smart ones know how unreliable what you can hear from flight crews or postings on the internet.

Sure it does, my point was that when UA management travels on business they are doing just that; traveling on business. It just happens that they work for the same company that owns the airline. I wouldn't be surprised if one part of the company was "paying" another (as grahampros suggests above) in which case they are, in fact, customers.

There are times when Company employees are "on" and times when they are not. I would argue that, if not for the FA's comments, no one would have known that these guys worked for UA. Unlike crew/FAs/others who fly in uniform or with UA badges/IDs these guys sound like they were traveling just like any other traveler the only difference being how their tickets were paid for.

My comment about GM is that, when not in a customer facing function, most businesses don't go out of their way to cater to their customers. I would expect that these folks were simply going from A to B as part of their non-customer facing function at UA. They did not expect or intend to be identified by customers as UA employees since they were not serving in that function. While it would have been nice of them to defer to customers on meals, seats, etc. they may not (and likely should not) know about the precise part of the UA operation and did not realize they were impacting other customers. But for the FAs comment to the OP, no one would have known any wiser.

That's simply not the way non-revving works - and I've nonreved with enough carriers as both standby and positive space to know the rules are fairly uniform throughout the industry.

I find the portion I bolded just incredulous. Every employee is given a set of rules and procedures on utilizing nonrev tickets regardless of priority. The higher the employee's rank, the more common sense they should be using to ensure paying customers are taken care of ahead of them, *especially* if they are on a positive space must-ride pass and have already displaced another customer.

There is simple ZERO excuse for this to have occurred, period. The employees' meal orders should have been taken last without question....and as I stated before, if I was on this flight and my meal choice was taken by a nonrev, I would have spoken up right then and there. As a nonrev myself, I always, always made sure my meal, drink or seat choice was not inconveniencing a paying customer as I never knew who was watching or reporting my actions on board and I did not want to lose my privileges.

That's simply not the way non-revving works - and I've nonreved with enough carriers as both standby and positive space to know the rules are fairly uniform throughout the industry.

I find the portion I bolded just incredulous. Every employee is given a set of rules and procedures on utilizing nonrev tickets regardless of priority. The higher the employee's rank, the more common sense they should be using to ensure paying customers are taken care of ahead of them, *especially* if they are on a positive space must-ride pass and have already displaced another customer.

There is simple ZERO excuse for this to have occurred, period. The employees' meal orders should have been taken last without question....and as I stated before, if I was on this flight and my meal choice was taken by a nonrev, I would have spoken up right then and there. As a nonrev myself, I always, always made sure my meal, drink or seat choice was not inconveniencing a paying customer as I never knew who was watching or reporting my actions on board and I did not want to lose my privileges.

We don't actually know what happened. If the dates are correct as reported by the OP there were zero employees in the F cabin on the flight according to an insider report above.

And nonrev and positive space business travel are completely different things on any number of levels of priority.

...And nonrev and positive space business travel are completely different things on any number of levels of priority.

No, actually they are not. Positive space business travel *is* nonrev - the difference is the priority on getting a seat vs a standby pass. Positive space does not mean getting first meal choice, getting your seat choice, etc. In fact, if a revenue passenger has a problem with a seat (ie recline broken, entertainment not working, etc), the passrider (standby or PS) should be moved into the damaged seat and the revenue customer moved to the passrider's seat.

I find it interesting that those with no airline employment experience are suggesting what nonrev passride policies dictate. I might not be privy to the current United Employee Pass Ride manual, but I highly doubt there is an allowance for an employee regardless of rank to receive service priority for *anything* over a revenue customer - the only priority is getting *a* seat. If the United Employee Pass Ride manual permits executives to ride positive space for any reason, and while doing so, take first meal choice, the best seat assignments, etc etc, there is something seriously flawed in this company.

so we're talking, August 8, 2012, IAH-LAX? Which flight? I dont show any employees in First Class on any IAH-LAX flight.

:-:

There it is! lol. Therein lies the quintessential issue with people who assume! The fact that this has even the possibility of it not being a nonrev/exec at all, is really telling!

Suggesting that they should be put in E on United is the same as suggesting that they be treated like cattle.

Oh please, United E isn't that bad. If you want to see real "cattle" experience, I suggest you try out WN.

Over entitled Executives.

Oh please, United E isn't that bad. If you want to see real "cattle" experience, I suggest you try out WN.

Hey, I'm just connecting the dots for you between your "they should all be put in E" comment and the reply that they "shouldn't be treated like cattle".

Oh please, United E isn't that bad. If you want to see real "cattle" experience, I suggest you try out WN.Any implication that you need to compare UA to others in order to quantify its shortcomings is absurd. Might have been true 3 years ago. Today, UA stands on its own. Promises vs service delivered is all you need to look at.

Oh please, United E isn't that bad. If you want to see real "cattle" experience, I suggest you try out WN.

WN seat pitch 32-33. UA seat pitch 31.

At least the cows on WN can have longer legs.

WN seat pitch 32-33. UA seat pitch 31.

At least the cows on WN can have longer legs.

Southwest pitch is now 31" and has reduced recline by 1 inch.

Southwest pitch is now 31" and has reduced recline by 1 inch.

... while increasing personal space with the new Evolve seats. It does help to tell the whole story. :rolleyes:

Evolve Seats (http://www.blogsouthwest.com/blog/meet-evolve-new-southwest-interior)

Getting back to the point of this thread. The few times I have sat up front on AS the FA always took the dinner orders from there own MVP flyers before others. As it should be!

But that's what the FA told her, and she didn't get the choice of food that she would have preferred. Not at the back in the F cabin, either.Come back to Delta. I'll talk to Jeff and see if that 635K NRT-SIN award is still available for you. :D

David

Where did I say they should be treated like cattle? All I said they shouldn't be put upfront and shouldn't get any type of special treatment. F and J should be reserved for paying passengers, not employee nonrevs.

Maybe I can help shed some light on this.

I grew up non-revving on UA and I fly for one of their regional partners and there are basically 2 ways to get into first for me.

1. Deadhead/Positive Space(must ride). IF (and that is a HUGE if with UDU) there are seats available in F, then you will find me at the very bottom of the upgrade list. I am however allowed to select a seat before the flight with a confirmation number and it can be E+ or an exit row.

2. Non-revving. Again a huge IF there are available seats after all UDUs on domestic flights, I can pay a fee and get a F seat. Never, ever, ever, EVER have I seen or been put ahead of status-holding passenger on the upgrade list domestically.

International is usually easier since there are not free upgrades. I again pay a set dollar amount (varies with class of service) and get an available seat (again after any elite upgrades).

I was raised old-school by my father (a UA pilot) and I still dress nice when flying FC international and do my absolute best to be unseen. I also verbally make sure all revenue pax have been served first (the FAs usually do that anyway).

I know the mainline sUA pilots have different rules and are positive-spaced in first sometimes if a flight is over a certain amount of time to the training center, but most of the time you won't notice them because they have a ticket and are not in uniform. I hope this clarifies some.

Just a little bit to add from my own experience recently. While it is not as bad as mrs. Shark's example, I too did run into an incident on a 2-3 hour flight. Seated in first around me are UA crew, I knew because they all wore tags onto the plane, and only removed them after sitting down.

I was seated up front in row 1, so I got my food choice. However, I did notice that FAs would constantly stop by to ask the crew sitting beside me and behind me if they wanted more to drink (they also carried the bottle of wine ready to top it up for the one beside me), and totally ignore me in the process. This happened about 3-4 times during the course of the flight. Seriously, what type of rotten service is this?

...Seated in first around me are UA crew, I knew because they all wore tags onto the plane, and only removed them after sitting down.

...FAs would constantly stop by to ask the crew sitting beside me and behind me if they wanted more to drink (they also carried the bottle of wine ready to top it up for the one beside me), and totally ignore me in the process. This happened about 3-4 times during the course of the flight. Seriously, what type of rotten service is this?

That's typical UA Employee Class service, I'm afraid. I've seen it too. It's hard to enjoy the F experience when a paying passenger is made to feel somewhere between an irritant and an afterthought.

Its entertaining to watch everyone get so worked up over something perceived 3rd hand. The OP didnt even see this, it was a spouse who perceived something and then reported it back. The 2nd post was a good question, the FA might have been referrencing higher status passengers by "execs". Who knows. But its posted here on Flyertalk, so it becomes fact.

The truth is, there are probably many times you have been with UA employees or executives on a plane. And they liklely arent the ones that make decisions based on provisioning an aircraft and making sure you have the meal you wanted. But they often fly for business too and the policies for their travel are not really up to you to decide whats right and wrong. When I was an airline employee, I knew that as employees we put our revenue customers first when traveling. From my friends that still work there, I can confirm this has not changed. Meals are not always boarded in an equal order so you never know if people's preferrences will have one choice more popular than others. Of course, when you get one choice of meals instead of two, you will get red in the face and you will naturally go to internet forums and vent about it with little red emoticons or thumbs down symbols.

I personally have never understood why airline meals are such an item of contention. Working in the industry, I learned just how unhealthy those things are. In fact, most of the airline employees I know that are in inflight wont eat them anyway unless they are crew meals. The nutritional value of them and the preservatives involved to keep them "fresh looking" for hours in a food truck put them a few notches below a frozen hungry man dinner. But I think that the onboard meal is one of the few remaining luxury items left in the airlines. The fact that you can have a meal onboard at 36,000 feet reminds us of the glamourous flying days. And it definitely creates a stronger definition between classes of service. If you dont believe me, look at the threads of people that compare first class upgrades on flights without meal service. They will say its only a bigger seat and maybe a free drink. But seriously, if having the equivalent of a happy meal thrown at you while you are just in a bigger seat makes you feel more important, then so be it.

Employees of companies get perks. Thats a fact. You just may not see it all the time. You think a hotel employee always gets an inferior room as you? Do you think that a popular retail item has never been discounted with an employee cost? Or that it never has been pulled out of inventory altogether so an employee can purchase it?

Come back to Delta. I'll talk to Jeff and see if that 635K NRT-SIN award is still available for you. :D

David

David, don't make me laugh! :p

Actually the award in question was PHL-FCO. A notorious event even in the sordid history of DL SM under impresario Jeff:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/delta-skymiles/1084559-new-world-record-even-dl-sm-best-class-alright-6.html

No doubt NRT-SIN was/is just as bad.

UA flyers have just no idea at all about how outrageous this was.

Today I see that PHL-FCO for 7/6-7/9/13 (closest approximations for next year to the original investigation) is now available in J for 150k SM - much more reasonable. Does this mean that now DL is

best in class

instead of

:-: best in class :-: ?

Its entertaining to watch everyone get so worked up over something perceived 3rd hand. The OP didnt even see this, it was a spouse who perceived something and then reported it back.

Point of correction. True that it involved MsShark - who was upgraded while I was not - but there was no "perception" involved.

She was directly asked by the FA whether she would accept one of the options - which she didn't care for - and given the reason that UA execs on board preferred the other option.

Point of correction. True that it involved MsShark - who was upgraded while I was not - but there was no "perception" involved.

She was directly asked by the FA whether she would accept one of the options - which she didn't care for - and given the reason that UA execs on board preferred the other option.

but there were no United executives or officers or employees in first class.

but there were no United executives or officers or employees in first class.

The more the OP posts, the more questionable it get's. You dont ask will you accept when there is one option left. Happens to all of us in F sometimes dont get your choice, oh well.

So far evidence suggests UA execs had nothing to do with this.

This is turning into Saladgate...

The more the OP posts, the more questionable it get's. You dont ask will you accept when there is one option left.

Sure you ask it. Otherwise, once one option is fully ordered, the remaining pax wouldn't be told anything. A plate of food would simply show up at their seat?!?

While you might think OP doesn't have a clue about what they're talking about that's an asinine statement to make.