UA-NYC

If this merger was anywhere close to 50/50 in spirit, or even 60/40, you wouldn't have thread after thread that devolves so quickly into a pissing match. But to date it's about 85/15 or so, and getting more one-sided every day. So it's tough to blame "us" (in the 15%).

sbm12

I find this part hard to believe. I cannot figure out why it matters what they call themselves so long as the service is still provided. I'd be happy to hear announcements from the Grand Poohbah so long as it also meant that the actual service remains.


Is it that hard to understand what Flight Service Coordinator or International Service Manager mean? Given that the words used in the title actually describe the position that makes no sense to me at all.

How is either title more or less professional than the other?

Pingtung

Either title is fine IMO, one has tradition, the other appropriately labels the role.

The question asked requires a simple answer: If true, then yes, the merger has changed the name and you can chalk it up to another decision in which the CO way won out.

Of course this is just another issue for the UA folks to argue that this is truly a CO takeover while it was labeled as a merger of equals and I agree that is exactly how it looks.

SQPPS

Well there are no Pursers on SQ...They have another title...its Inflight Service Manager. They certainly are not mumbo-jumbo and neither is there long-established title.

flg8rmatt

I agree. In fact, when I flew on UA a few years ago, my first flight on UA in about 10 years, I sort of laughed to myseld when I heard the term "purser." I don't think many people under the age of 40 care, and those under 25 that don't fly UA or international routes with any regularity might not even know what that term means, to be honest. Hearing "purser" sort of reminded me how my grandmother used to address letters to me as "Master Matthew" back in the 80's. It just felt like something from a time gone by.

agarc

I have doubts that most passengers care what the lead FA's title is. But I can totally understand why someone might be upset about a title change simply due to a merger or acquisition. A job title is personal to many...why is that hard to contemplate?

Regarding the comments made by notabob, I'm so sick and tired of reading childish comments between legacy CO and UA elites. People don't like it when policies change for seemingly no good reason, especially if they feel like the changes devalue their FF benefits. I see no need to egg people on who are frustrated.

As a GS/1K, this title change obviously has no impact on my experience with the airline. But I do feel for the FAs who dislike the change. I honestly hope things get better for them in the new merged airline... I've met some awesome FAs and I wish them the very best going forward.

UALpremier

Just another example of the attitude that it's how CO does it, so therefore it has to be better, nevermind UA's (or the industry's) traditions. At least AA still has pursers.

dreamliner787

I agree with some posters above in that it's all the same as long as they do a decent job...

UALpremier

Well at least it keeps with CO's tradition of catering to the lowest common denominator.

JOSECONLSCREW28

Seriously people unless you are a f/a with either CO or UA wht the lead f/a is called on a flight shouldn't bother you. I honestly dnt get why half of you are gettin so worked about something tht really doesn't affect you. I'm an International Service Manager and it's jus a title. It's the same thing if your called purser, lead, flight manager, cabin director etc. It's the same leadership role for f/a onboard the aircraft no matter wht u call it. Is it really gonna affect your travel with an airline bcuz of wht the lead f/a is called ?

UA-NYC

It's the equivalent of changing from a red to blue carpet. Is it literally any different on our feet as we walk across it? No. It is however symbolic of a pattern of changes that moves away from anything UA-related, when it has come down to a 50/50 decision.

E+ was kept either for financial reasons (I'm guessing CO saw it was wildly profitable), and/or consumer loyalty factors (guessing not as important to them). So that was easy. But on the "softer" elements that may not directly affect profitability, it seems to be slanted 100% towards CO style/methods/attitudes.

cubfan99

+1. If it really "doesn't matter," as so many claim, then why change it?

CO DCA

Because it has to be changed to something, either purser or ISM.

I agree with the prior posters that the CO terms make more sense since they're descriptive. Purser is one of those nautical terms that don't make sense any more. It's kind of like when the pilot gives the speed of the wind at your destination in knots, or uses the term "starboard" to give direction. A year ago, on a CO flight, we flew over the Deepwater Horizon. The pilot said "on the port side....." after he finished, a f/a had to get on and say "that means on the left side of the plane."

All said, I prefer purser, since it's kind of romantic. But honestly, I don't care. Blue carpet /Red carpet? Doesn't affect me. 1K / Platinum? Doesn't affect me. RCC / P-club / United Club? Who cares. They're just names. I can't wait for this merger to get done so FT starts being about something other than an excuse for adult children to throw temper tantrums.

UA-NYC

Would you feel the same way if the plane said "Continental", but there was a tulip on the tail and anything style or process that made CO, CO was quickly being relegated to the dustbin, making the airline you've long known nothing like it?

DeaconFlyer

Yes. Who cares. It's an airline, not your childhood best friend. It exists to get you from point A to point B.

Complain about reduced upgrade rates, complain about the boarding processes, complain about the lack of hot nuts- but don't complain about silly cosmetic things that won't have an effect on your flight experience.

Having a globe on the tail won't make your flight any faster, slower, or more comfortable.