dcdavido

Every time I end up back on United, I'm constantly reminded why I left after the merger.

fjfv19

Your flight is 3 months away and the schedule change is causing a minor glitch. Deep breaths, it'll all be ok.

dcdavido

This is the issue: "This happens every weekend." If this were my firm, I do something to fix it. It is an obnoxious and a highly visible mistake. Not a one time deal - the process is clearly broken. And yet UA cares so little they allow it go on as business as usual. You could even make a business case that the number of calls they get complaining about the equipment change, or checking seats, etc... (even though there wasn't really an equipment change) must suck up a ton of time and could probably pay the salary of some intern to double check the data before they load.

It's not just this, this seems to be common across the board. Morale just seems to be through the floor at UA, or maybe it's a lack of empowerment, or something else is seriously wrong. You'd think someone somewhere within the organization would step up and say, this isn't right - let's fix it. Instead they allow it to occur week after week...

malgudi

I don't know why you get your "you know what" in a bunch for a flight that is 3 months away ... schedule changes happen all the time, I'm sure there are other things to get worked up about?

dcdavido

I posted it because I thought it was funny that they were reporting a TATL flight on a turbo-prop. I didn't realize that posting the wrong equipment was standard practice, probably one of the numerous "changes I'd like at the new United".

I know there are a lot of apologists on this board, defending UA at every turn and pointing out any issues opens you up criticism. To be clear, every large company has issues, and the competitors aren't necessarily better. But how can you have a problem that occurs week after week and be made aware of that problem and do nothing to fix it. Does that strike you as a bit odd?

mahasamatman

United's approach would probably be to disable access to the intinerary page from Friday evening through Monday morning. I don't know about you, but I prefer this purely cosmetic error.

I'd say there are 6,000 things that need fixing ahead of this.

malgudi

Exactly ...

You are not traveling for another 3 months ... pointing out this fact doesn't need a genius or an apologist

Are people that dumb to think they are going to Europe on a turbo prop???

mgcsinc

While I generally agree about the cosmetic issue, I actually think fixing schedule change notification should be a priority. Of course, before they go wrong sending notifications, they'd probably want to fix the cosmetic issue to avoid getting 1,000 calls from people afraid that they're now going to Europe on a bus...

God forbid people should want a website that doesn't suffer from a consistent, repeated, and embarrassing error.

Boo_Radley

The intersection of people who care about a/c type 3 months out and people who don't know that a TATL turboprop is an error is borderline non-existent. I would agree that, given United's very finite IT resources, this isn't a priority. Not even particularly embarrassing; I think it's sort of funny.

bmwe92fan

The way I look at it UA is simple - if this were Amex or Visa or MC hitting our bank accounts every day would we tolerate this level of incompetence? No - we wouldn't.

So I ask you to consider why we do from UA - because to me it is the same... We can make all the excuses we want every day - but the answer of "UA sucks the least" doesn't do it for me....

Boo_Radley

You have to compare non-mission critical stuff. Does Amex's payment processor work better than UAs future-schedule-aircraft-shuffle-o-matic? Yes, and it had better since it's mission critical. Compare it instead to Amex's MR site, which doesn't always set the world on fire, at least in my experience.

Boo_Radley

[Double Post]

Kacee

The thing is, when there's an obvious problem with the itinerary as shown on the website, it raises the spectre that there is or will be an actual problem with the reservation that will substantially impact travel. So I completely understand why someone might be concerned when their itinerary goes wonky, and I in fact tend to share those concerns when I see issues with my itineraries.

Is there an element of paranoia here? Perhaps. But it is the product of experience and absolutely justified, as demonstrated by the legion of reports of things going wrong due to UA IT issues and/or agent incompetence.

mgcsinc

^

djohannw

Well, if people actually board a turbo-prop in Portland, OR that should take them to what they expect to be Sydney, yet is called Sidney...then yes, people are stupid enough to think that. See here for details (in German, could not find any english source immediately).

Greetings - Dirk