Originally Posted by
flyinbob
I understand how customer service works, unlike UA, which I have observed over nearly 2 million miles of flying. The plane was in SFO, their primary maintenance facility, the problem was a
seat, not exactly brain surgery, and not fixing it would lose a potential revenue seat. So why wasn't it repaired upon landing? And ill-prepared gate personnel is not an excuse for not handling seat switching in a tight situation. Besides the OP, I'm sure there were probably a few people on board a 2+ hour flight in that sardine can who were not pleased to see employees in F seats. But this continues to be SOP for United, with no effort to change it.
Most likely posted by one who believes flight attendants are primarily there for your comfort, not safety. It's amazing that a person who bought a Y seat and sat in a Y seat not getting an anticipated upgrade is more important thant the other people on their plane getting to their detination in a timely manner.
SFO is UA's biggest maint base. Since when does UA fly the CRJ/CR7? If that flying was insourced to UA, I bet many UA pilots would be very happy.
Things don't always break down far in advance and give people the time to have them fixed. Often on short notice, good customer service isn't always about making 1 Y passenger who wants to sit in F happy, but about making the entire plane happy by getting them to their detination, and then getting the plane flying again back to a hub, so that more people don't misconnect at the next hub it flies to.
But hey, I only see things as reality, not as "UA always tries to shaft an individual." Perhaps I should realllign my outlook on life and see the world as you see it. I am sure it would make me a much happier person to believe the world (and especially airlines) are out to "get me." Nah, I think I'll continue to live in reality.
edit: assuming an upgrade, not revenue F, as we all know that no flyer would ever pay for F on UA, correct?