Comprehensive List of Expected Changes/Lost Functionality when United Moves to SHARES
Jan 2, 2012, 2:23 pm
#61
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Aug 2003
Programs: UA 1K 1MM (finally!), IHG AMB-Spire, HH Diamond
Posts: 60,155
Agree on your point that this lack of capability (which is the same as WN I found out the hard way) needs to be validated.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:23 pm
#62
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: WAS
Programs: UA Silver, Marriott Titanium, Nexus, GE
Posts: 2,122
I'm rather ignorant to the backend details, but since the merger I did some reasonable amount of flying on CO this year. I've made a couple observations that do support Channa's points:
1) Any issue with a CO agent seems to require inordinately large amounts of typing and time relative to equivalent UA agents. I'll presume that the two sets of agents are equally competent when drawing conclusions.
2) Several times I've had agents tell me things about upgrades or standbys that just weren't true. For example, they've claimed to add me to an upgrade list and then the next agent says that I'm not on it. Either the first agent never did it or the system screwed it up.
3) The upgrade system is incredibly confusing/opaque. Even when EUA is working correctly, it's still a bit baffling. With the sweeps it's impossible to tell the difference as R can be >0 but no one is upgraded until the next sweep.
This IBM mainframe thing is scary. I had no idea what an old-fashioned system they were using. They must spend fortunes custom-building everything. Lots of businesses have learned the hard lesson of getting stuck with legacy systems that end up impossible to maintain. Sometimes the problem is that no employees under 60 know to program them at all.
1) Any issue with a CO agent seems to require inordinately large amounts of typing and time relative to equivalent UA agents. I'll presume that the two sets of agents are equally competent when drawing conclusions.
2) Several times I've had agents tell me things about upgrades or standbys that just weren't true. For example, they've claimed to add me to an upgrade list and then the next agent says that I'm not on it. Either the first agent never did it or the system screwed it up.
3) The upgrade system is incredibly confusing/opaque. Even when EUA is working correctly, it's still a bit baffling. With the sweeps it's impossible to tell the difference as R can be >0 but no one is upgraded until the next sweep.
This IBM mainframe thing is scary. I had no idea what an old-fashioned system they were using. They must spend fortunes custom-building everything. Lots of businesses have learned the hard lesson of getting stuck with legacy systems that end up impossible to maintain. Sometimes the problem is that no employees under 60 know to program them at all.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:24 pm
#63
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Programs: UA former 2P
Posts: 33
The intent of the OP is clear - raise a bunch of points that neither he, nor anyone else can confirm or deny at this stage and phrase it as a helpful "warning" to PMUA FF members. Incredibly misleading at best - in my view it is downright deceptive. We simply do not know what policies will be in place going forward.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:26 pm
#64
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
Before everybody gets too upset, even the OP was asking for someone in CO to verify the information. This is only one person who talked to a Service Director at DEN. Nothing is verified.... If it is statistically the same as UA's then what's the big deal. If it is really worse than UA and this information is correct then it is a big deal and should be looked at. But let’s not jump to conclusions without facts.
I think the information needed to decide if this is that big of a deal is both the delayed bag rate (which I think is public information) as well as the length of time to resolve delayed bags. My hypothesis would be that the lost/delayed bag rate is could be the same but with a tracking system UA could do a better job at resolving issues. In fact, I've waited at airports before when an agent can confirm my bag is on a flight that is arriving soon (due to a scan when it was loaded). Without this information I would be unlikely to wait around and it could be hours before it is delivered.
I also think UA can attach messages to individual bag tags so when they are scanned they can be rerouted from wherever they are. I am not sure if CO can do this if their process has less scanning. A good example here is recently when flying XXX-FRA-SFO-SBA my bag missed the FRA-SFO flight. I was only in SBA for a morning meeting and was then headed back to BOS. My bag was routed to BOS from FRA (according to the new tag FRA-IAD-BOS) and was waiting for me vs. chasing me to SBA and back.
I think this is another example of pure customer service systems. I don’t know if it saves UA any money and obviously cost more (programing, scanning hardware, and additional labor to scan) but increases their customer service. My (somewhat uninformed) sense is the new UA is doing a lot more cost/financial benefit analysis which may make some of the UA features miss the cut.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:29 pm
#65
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K/MM, AA GLD
Posts: 1,707
PMUA is #9 with a 2.76 reports per thousand passengers mishandled baggage rate.
PMCO is #10 with a 3.17.
Skywest is #11 with 3.25.
ExpressJet is #13 with 3.85.
Mesa #14 with 3.95.
ASA #15 with 3.99.
For all of 2010, PMCO was #6 with 2.65 reports per thousand passengers.
PMUA was #8 with 3.4.
Regionals down the list.
(data from http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...bruaryATCR.PDF)
Probably won't see full-year 2011 data until February of 2012.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:30 pm
#66
Join Date: Feb 2006
Programs: UA, Starwood, Priority Club, Hertz, Starbucks Gold Card
Posts: 3,952
It really does seem that we are headed for the stone age.I could never figure out why PMUA only handed out paper certs at stations but phone agents were able to issue ecerts. This is one change I will like.
Last edited by sinoflyer; Jan 2, 2012 at 2:36 pm Reason: merge
Jan 2, 2012, 2:35 pm
#67
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 17,970
I'd rather take them to the airport and do it in person to minimize any mail delay or loss. Oh well.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:37 pm
#68
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 57,520
Last month (or November, I forget exactly) when I on the line with a UA CSR, without any prompting from me whatsoever, I was advised by the CSR not to fly the first week of March, on account of that was when the SHARES transition was going to take place.
Now, that could have been the grumblings of a dissatisfied employee. But several PMUA CSRs have posted about SHARES as well, and they don't have very complimentary things to say about it.
Maybe everything will be rosy and bright come transition time. But given UA's continued silence about what functionality will and won't be available, you can't blame customers from being apprehensive.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:37 pm
#69
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Minneapolis, MN (MSP)
Programs: DL DM, UA 1K MM, Subway Club Member
Posts: 1,988
It's a little hard to tell because the regionals are broken out from mainline, but http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...cemberATCR.PDF has October 2011 data:
PMUA is #9 with a 2.76 reports per thousand passengers mishandled baggage rate.
PMCO is #10 with a 3.17.
Skywest is #11 with 3.25.
ExpressJet is #13 with 3.85.
Mesa #14 with 3.95.
ASA #15 with 3.99.
For all of 2010, PMCO was #6 with 2.65 reports per thousand passengers.
PMUA was #8 with 3.4.
Regionals down the list.
(data from http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...bruaryATCR.PDF)
Probably won't see full-year 2011 data until February of 2012.
PMUA is #9 with a 2.76 reports per thousand passengers mishandled baggage rate.
PMCO is #10 with a 3.17.
Skywest is #11 with 3.25.
ExpressJet is #13 with 3.85.
Mesa #14 with 3.95.
ASA #15 with 3.99.
For all of 2010, PMCO was #6 with 2.65 reports per thousand passengers.
PMUA was #8 with 3.4.
Regionals down the list.
(data from http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...bruaryATCR.PDF)
Probably won't see full-year 2011 data until February of 2012.
These numbers are good to know, but to really understand the impacts we need to see the relationship between lost & delayed bags and the amount of time needed to get a delayed bag to its destination. I don't know how much detailed tracking would reduce mishandled bag reports (I assume they don't check to see if bags are missing before pushing from the gate or if they do they don't hold planes for them) but I would expect the tracking helps reduce bags that sit around or get rerouted inefficently.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:38 pm
#70
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Ewa Beach, Hawaii
Posts: 10,907
It's a little hard to tell because the regionals are broken out from mainline, but http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...cemberATCR.PDF has October 2011 data:
PMUA is #9 with a 2.76 reports per thousand passengers mishandled baggage rate.
PMCO is #10 with a 3.17.
Skywest is #11 with 3.25.
ExpressJet is #13 with 3.85.
Mesa #14 with 3.95.
ASA #15 with 3.99.
For all of 2010, PMCO was #6 with 2.65 reports per thousand passengers.
PMUA was #8 with 3.4.
Regionals down the list.
(data from http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...bruaryATCR.PDF)
Probably won't see full-year 2011 data until February of 2012.
PMUA is #9 with a 2.76 reports per thousand passengers mishandled baggage rate.
PMCO is #10 with a 3.17.
Skywest is #11 with 3.25.
ExpressJet is #13 with 3.85.
Mesa #14 with 3.95.
ASA #15 with 3.99.
For all of 2010, PMCO was #6 with 2.65 reports per thousand passengers.
PMUA was #8 with 3.4.
Regionals down the list.
(data from http://airconsumer.dot.gov/reports/2...bruaryATCR.PDF)
Probably won't see full-year 2011 data until February of 2012.
Jan 2, 2012, 2:42 pm
#71
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: ORD / DUB / LHR
Programs: UA 1K MM; BA Silver; Marriott Plat
Posts: 8,243
Spoke with a very friendly Service Director at DEN late last week about the transition to SHARES in early March. While much of the information she shared about her on-going training has already been discussed here a new bit came out that I hadn't heard yet and was hoping a resident UA staffer could comment.
She said that SHARES (or whatever the baggage subsystem is called) does not include any real-time bag tracking component and that they will stop scanning bags durring aircraft loading, unloading, and a bag-belt delivery when UA transitions to SHARES. As many of you know, UA is somewhat unique in that they scan a bag several times throughout the journey and maintain that scan history (similar to FedEx). This history and help resolve lost bag issues much more quickly and I imagine saves both UA and customers with displaced bags a lot of time and money. I think Delta has implemented the process (and even allows customers to follow along with their iPhones) but CO has not and the new UA will not.
My hope is that legacy UA agents and management will be able to attest to the significant inefficiencies once SHARES rolls out and over the years they'll get patched back to PMUA standards.
She said that SHARES (or whatever the baggage subsystem is called) does not include any real-time bag tracking component and that they will stop scanning bags durring aircraft loading, unloading, and a bag-belt delivery when UA transitions to SHARES. As many of you know, UA is somewhat unique in that they scan a bag several times throughout the journey and maintain that scan history (similar to FedEx). This history and help resolve lost bag issues much more quickly and I imagine saves both UA and customers with displaced bags a lot of time and money. I think Delta has implemented the process (and even allows customers to follow along with their iPhones) but CO has not and the new UA will not.
My hope is that legacy UA agents and management will be able to attest to the significant inefficiencies once SHARES rolls out and over the years they'll get patched back to PMUA standards.
Last edited by iluv2fly; Jan 2, 2012 at 3:24 pm Reason: unnecessary
Jan 2, 2012, 2:53 pm
#72
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,449
Thanks!
Please correct me if I am wrong, I am sure many of you know more about this than I do. I got this info from a job I interviewed for with UA about year back, which involved merging the CO and US systems. I withdrew my application as they had no time line as to when the job would start, or how long the job would last, and I had another client with a fixed start date.
Basically SHARES is a fight management system running on a mainframe using IBM DBMS software developed in 1983. The system has been modified to the point it is no longer supported, so all development and testing must be done in house. SHARES has a user interface, which they have enhanced far beyond what the delivered Green Screen can do, however it does not operate off of any real time database triggers, requires a lot of manual work, and any process/jobs must be scheduled and run on the mainframe during certain maintenance windows.
Most carriers are now using ERP systems, which are running on modern servers, not mainframes, and do not require the system to be borough down for processing windows, and do not require everything to be done by jobs submitted on the ever. Modern ERP systems can manage costumer information and update accounts in real time based on triggers. Several ERPs still use jobs and job sets to schedule certain batches as too many real time processes can effect system performance.
I am under the impression that PMUA uses a modern ERP system, however significant licensing fees are paid to be abel to use this system, while SHARES is no longer supported, and thus has no licensing fees.
Again, this is what I gathered from interviewing with them, they could have been feeding me BS, they may not have been. They never told me any of this information is confidential, so there ya go.
Basically SHARES is a fight management system running on a mainframe using IBM DBMS software developed in 1983. The system has been modified to the point it is no longer supported, so all development and testing must be done in house. SHARES has a user interface, which they have enhanced far beyond what the delivered Green Screen can do, however it does not operate off of any real time database triggers, requires a lot of manual work, and any process/jobs must be scheduled and run on the mainframe during certain maintenance windows.
Most carriers are now using ERP systems, which are running on modern servers, not mainframes, and do not require the system to be borough down for processing windows, and do not require everything to be done by jobs submitted on the ever. Modern ERP systems can manage costumer information and update accounts in real time based on triggers. Several ERPs still use jobs and job sets to schedule certain batches as too many real time processes can effect system performance.
I am under the impression that PMUA uses a modern ERP system, however significant licensing fees are paid to be abel to use this system, while SHARES is no longer supported, and thus has no licensing fees.
Again, this is what I gathered from interviewing with them, they could have been feeding me BS, they may not have been. They never told me any of this information is confidential, so there ya go.
Jan 2, 2012, 3:10 pm
#73
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 681
Channa, thanks for compiling this list.
I don't get why people are all hot and bothered claiming this is irrelevant and baseless, even while admitting it's all accurate.
Sure, things could completely change in a few months. But given the glitches I've seen arise in the short time I've "returned" to Continental, I'm not hopeful. Especially since posters seem to acknowledge longstanding "issues" that don't get resolved.
I'm not a PMCO basher--I think they do some things just fine. I'm just hopeful UACO Eventually ends up with the best of both systems/policies from the passenger perspective.
I don't get why people are all hot and bothered claiming this is irrelevant and baseless, even while admitting it's all accurate.
Sure, things could completely change in a few months. But given the glitches I've seen arise in the short time I've "returned" to Continental, I'm not hopeful. Especially since posters seem to acknowledge longstanding "issues" that don't get resolved.
I'm not a PMCO basher--I think they do some things just fine. I'm just hopeful UACO Eventually ends up with the best of both systems/policies from the passenger perspective.
Jan 2, 2012, 3:29 pm
#74
Moderator: Midwest, Las Vegas & Dining Buzz
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Chicago, Illinois
Posts: 17,970
There have been posts which have been deleted which are merely back-and-forth snide remarks to other posters. Those will now stop. If you continue to do this, you will face disciplinary action. You know who you are.
We asume you are all adults. We are not babysitters.
iluv2fly
Moderator, UA
We asume you are all adults. We are not babysitters.
iluv2fly
Moderator, UA
Jan 2, 2012, 4:00 pm
#75
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Near SEA
Programs: UA MM, AS MVPG75K, Marriott Lifetime Gold
Posts: 7,969
I'd like to suggest adding a bit more accuracy to the OP to be clear about the difference between a policy and a system.