I tip my hat. AA should start poaching the good employees too...

What would you suggest as an FT "United" course of action? I'd love to hear the plan.

There are plenty of ways to get their attention. Look at chinatraderjmr's $132,000 thread for example. A petition by GSs would be the first step IMHO.

Instead of fixing a half broken airline they found one more way to disappoint their best customers. Amazing.

I'd rather UA keep the good employees and start poaching good management.

There are over 1000 posts in this thread and I wonder if "any one" posted positive comment about this move. I am really really mad about this (and obvious inability for not able to see how many R/RN inventory available). :mad:

And if you have read the thread you would have seen the many posts how R is still available to be seen. :rolleyes:

of the 500 separate posters to this thread, a small handful have defended or supported the change.
So basicly >99% negative.


actually strictly R can not be seen but availability of R> your desired number can be found.

This airline keeps going steadily downhill - not only the customers but even the employees are sick and tired of the new United. I have not heard a single word of praise from any employee. Everytime they are blaming the SHARES system, the management, the merger - when will Mr. Smisek finally wake up and face reality instead of bragging about his new airline on the video screen before every flight!

Entitlement?
 

Both JS and some posts here are not sympathetic to the need for transparency of R/RN spaces. I submit that upgrades using RPU and GPU (as opposed to CPU) are NOT entitlements for the elites. They are earned, just like award miles. Please do not give us RPUs (which are already fewer due to the 75K mile threshold compared to the 10K mile per quarter) and GPUs if they are useless. Imagine what would happen to any frequent-flyer program (and therefore its airline) if suddenly no award space is available! Please nickel and dime the TOD upgrades by eliminating CPU all together.

But it can still be seen, regardless, it's a change United has made and will continue into the future.

possible solution helps everyone
 

Shannon:
As you can see I have been a rather quiet follower on this board for a quite long time. Usually topics are discussed at length and with so many views that I don't think my contribution is needed. However, in this case I really don't get the point of why United isn't reversing this terrible move and changes the system to something that helps both its customers and its employees. In fact, I thought that the way the fare buckets were displayed, was a bit superior to the information that we got on the legacy United ("da bomb") website. So there was ONE change that I actually liked after learning to use the new site (don't know if CO.COM had this feature as I didn't use it much before March). I know that finding this feature (it doesn't jump into your eyes to confuse you) in my case saved United a lot of phone calls. And it would continue to do so should there be the willingness to reprogram the feature back into the web interface as it should be since the main focus appears to be associated with confusing innocent customers.

My proposed solutions:
1. To help all customers immediately (and take the extra load off of the reservations agents), I would suggest that the fare display button should be turned back on.
2. To solve the problems of confused customers that you mention as a main reason for turning the feature off (and others have mentioned this above), the site could be reprogrammed alike the old UAL.COM site where the fare buckets were only displayed if this was selected in the flyer's profile. If this is marked well, it can assure that no inexperienced flyer will be shocked and turn away from booking a United ticket.

I hope that this pledge does not go unheard.
Alohaplus

Maybe, maybe not. Time will tell, but there have been other instances when people spoke and UA (granted it was PMUA management and not the current CO stubborns) did make restore prior practices after trying out less customer friendly changes. Case in point, the SDC fee which was briefly $75 for 1Ps. After adopting the fee for about 6 months for all but 1Ks and GSs, UA quietly dropped it. There was considerable hostility expressed on FT when the fee was announced. Was the latter the reason why UA reinstated the prior practice? Who knows, but it sure didn't hurt.

In this case, if enough people learn about this and alter their travel behavior away from UA, even if it is only 1%, that will not go unnoticed. Everything is measured in marginal increments, and small percentages make all the difference between success and failure.

Is it possible that the expert more changes were a side-effect of the August 28 reservations system collapse? The IT management was told to get their act together and fix the numerous issues. Shutting down the expert mode features an easy way to make some of the issues invisible.

If the above scenario is in fact what happened, we may have a chance to undo the changes by showing that this is an unsatisfactory solution.

I can't see what they have to do with each other, unless you mean there will be less burden on the call centers of elites calling to process upgrades that aren't clearing properly when R>.

Even if you're right, the system collapse affected the masses, not a limited segment of their clientele. They won't reverse their decision because of us.