Originally Posted by
CollegeFlyer
First of all, some UA employees already behave in this manner all the time. Not all, or even or most employees, but an influential enough minority to be a PITA for pax. As in the many threads I cited, in the post that you replied to. And remember the Wildcat strikes,
CHAOS, the
Summer of Hell, and the
2008 sickouts? All self-help, much of it illegal, and the epitome of "it's all about ME, it's all about ME" behavior at the customer's expense. Using customer suffering as a bargaining chip to get leverage against the employer. If you wonder why some customers are not enthused about going out of their way to help employees get higher pay, more job security, and better benefits...that bridge was burned a long time ago. Not by the customers, but by some employees and certain Union decisonmakers, who burned bridges with the customers just to show Management the strength of their resolve.
Second, don't you think that a customer, who is paying to receive a service, is in a different position than an employee, who is being paid to do a job? It is perfectly reasonable for the customer's concern to focus on the service she is receiving (and whether she is getting what she paid for); she is paying for something to be done for her ("me me me"). Whereas the employee must consider the requirements of the job he is being paid to perform, and think about the expectations of the people paying him to do it. If he was doing the job solely for his own personal benefit ("me me me"), why would anyone pay him to do it?
Third, I actually don't see what you point was (other than to attack me personally), since this is a thread about the WAS-MAD codeshare route. And I was replying to posts which said that it's awful that this route is "outsourced" and not flown with United "metal," and I was making the point that the metal really does not affect the product delivered, as long as this flight is still treated in other ways like a United-operated flight.
Just so you know, it is NOT my intent to personally attack you - I love attorneys
. As a matter of fact, I was in my first year of law school when I got hired by UA (UofMD @ Baltimore). It's tempting to second guess my decision to leave for UA and not finish, but my #1 career choice was flying
.
I understand the points you are making because I can step out of my 'role' as a pilot employee and objectively look at the big picture. I get the distinct feeling that if you imagined yourself in the postition of a f/a or pilot (or any employee of UAL) you would understand some of my posts a little better. You will probably still not agree, but at least you won't think I'm a crazed thug
.
I'm sure we both agree that outstanding customer service is an imperative! I understand why UA customers, especially FFs, are concerned with their benefits and perks and whether or not they will be impacted by UAs decisions. It's perfectly natural for a customer to see the IAD-MAD flight in light of how it impacts THEM. It's also perfectly normal for an employee to see the same thing for how it impacts THEM. It's simply wrong to expect an employee to completely ignore company actions that negatively impact their jobs/careers! Notice that NOWHERE do I excuse poor customer service!!!! I am what you would consider a 'hardliner' when it comes to my contract and dealings with UAL. OTOH, I am very customer focused....moreso than most. I'm very pragmatic about our relationship though
. There's no doubt that some passengers are inconvenienced by my enforcement of my contract -- although it certainly is NOT my intent. IMO the interests of employees and passengers (especially FFs) are closely aligned!