FlyingNut724

What ethical failing is that? We want to go back to pre 9/11 and not have the government share relevant information? we saw where that got us.

nerdbirdsjc

With all due respect, anyone who considers the situation you mentioned as "widespread disorganization" hasn't seen just how badly IRROPS situations like these are typically handled by airlines here and elsewhere. United did a better than average job in handling the situation. Why?

1. United offered customers a choice on whether to continue on to SFO or overnight in IAH. Even and perhaps especially when faced with a major flight irregularity, customers appreciate the ability to make a choice between possible options. Some customers preferred to continue on to SFO regardless of potential difficulties on arrival, others got off in IAH and were in a hotel room under 90 minutes -- either way, they were empowered to select the option that best suited them under trying circumstances instead of having something imposed by the carrier.

2. United actually continued the flight to SFO. This too is a positive for United. With the diverted aircraft and crew now at its largest operating base, many airline Ops control centers would have summarily cancelled the flight and just sought to re-accommodate from that hub even if continuation was feasible.

3. United proactively issued reasonable compensation for the disruption. If United doled out $250 certs for a 2-3 hour delay, that is quite fair for the vast majority of affected pax. And many airlines would have done nothing in that regard and just tell pax to write in to Customer Care.

I'm fine with bashing UA when it's at all justified, but here the airline handled the situation rather well.

Steve M

Why is that clear? You seem to be ignoring the plight of all of the passengers on board whose final destination was SFO. It seems that what those passengers ended up with (i.e. arriving at their ticketed destination the same day albeit a few hours late) is far superior than having to be overnighted somewhere.

bocastephen

I was basing my assertion on the comments I heard (I'd rather not identify who to avoid repercussions) that indicated both a widespread problem and chaos resulting from these fuel stops enroute.

The source lamented how badly these situations had been handled previously and thought it was best to start with a clean slate given the risk of chaos ensuing at the fuel stop - which turned out to be an accurate forecast.


It didn't really happen like this. Ops' intention was for a 30 min fuel stop - in to the gate, door open per FAA regs, fuel on, and out we go. They did not anticipate the desire of many passengers to find alternatives to their destination, and this is the root of the problem - not proactively rebooking passengers from IAH onwards and not proactively finding hotel space at SFO before we even left the ground at FLL. The only reason UA gave passengers a 'choice' at IAH was due to demands from customers to get off at IAH, and this clearly overwhelmed the crew and lone gate agent. My point is, rebookings should have occurred upon our departure from FLL and been ready to hand out upon our arrival at IAH....and that did not happen as it was apparent to everyone that UA expected us to take on fuel, leave and sort the mess out in SFO.

How is this a positive? There is no question absent a crew time out or other maintenance issue that the flight should have continued from IAH to SFO - anything else would be madness.

I have no idea what compensation they offered. As a 1K, I was offered 10k miles, $250 off domestic of 10% off systemwide - the GS sitting beside me could have been offered 50k miles, $500 off domestic and 20% off systemwide, while Kathy and Bill Kettle sitting in 24 D and E were offered 500 miles or $25 off domestic.

Again, the situation was not handled well. The following should have occurred:

1. seek enough volunteers to void the fuel stop - I know I would have gladly volunteered for a $500 cert and gone the next day. Out of 160 people could they have attained 30 volunteers? Maybe, maybe not - they didn't even try

2. many of the connecting customers were going to destinations served from IAH. While en route from FLL to IAH, every passenger with a missed SFO-XXX connection should have been rebooked where space allowed and the GA meeting the flight at IAH should have been calling names or destinations and handing out new boarding passes immediately upon our arrival

3. as our wheels left FLL, Ops should have been coordinating with SFO to secure a block of rooms at appropriate hotels as a contingency, then release rooms as passengers were rebooked at IAH, and confirm rooms for passengers with a guaranteed overnight at SFO, rebook them proactively from SFO (yes, this part happened eventually, but without communication) and had a service recovery agent meet the flight at SFO, announce the plan and hand out room vouchers, meal vouchers, new boarding passes, overnight kits and compensation packs right in the jetway.

4. communication, communication, communication

Keep in mind nobody was freaking out at FLL - it wasn't until we arrived at IAH and people became aware of their misconnects at SFO and the lack of communication did the aisles get stormed by angry passengers. It happened pretty quickly because word spread among the passengers faster than it came from UA. I was out of my seat for a few moments to ask the poor GA about going from IAH to SEA, she agreed to check, I turned around and my path was blocked - I spent 20 mins standing in the jetway while angry customers berated the crew, pushed their way off, etc.

flybit

the problem is CO, they have no idea how to handle anything abnormal. 1K used to get rooms paid for even if the delay was weather. CO put an end to this and every other useful 1K perk.

channa

Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; U; Android 4.1.2; en-us; LG-P659 Build/JZO54K) AppleWebKit/534.30 (KHTML, like Gecko) Version/4.0 Mobile Safari/534.30)

This perk still exists, it's just enforced inconsistently.

DeaconFlyer

Well standing with the masses seemed to make you so upset (oh the horror that your special status wasn't immediately recognized!) I hope that your $7x (where x is the number of passengers in your group*) was worth the debasing experience you had to go through

*I believe variables are covered in 4th grade

Zone1

The first SEA flight out of SFO gets to SEA earlier than the first IAH flight. The OP made the right move traveling on to SFO if he wanted to get to SEA before noon.

transportprof

I get the sense that most of the regular posters in this forum are pretty good at what we do. That's why we have so much spare time to post on FT.

It's especially frustrating to see things bungled when you have high performance standards and hold yourself to them.

But you're asking for a heart attack by expecting UA to meet such standards these days. Except for those top bananas in the UC (see the slightly humorous thread I started yesterday on this) there isn't anything that couldn't stand improvement in today's 'Motel 6 of the skies'.

I'd recommend downloading the Jacques Tati movie "Mr. Hulot's Holiday" on your smartphone/tablet/laptop and keep it handy for comic relief during such episodes as OP experienced. And we're all going to experience these if we fly frequently on United.

luckypierre

This is the nub of the whole issue facing United. I dont know how many gate/counter agents staff Fort Lauderdale, but let's say 25 and United cuts a third from the payroll. The system works passably well under normal circumstances, but when confronted with a significant IRROP, falls apart. Perhaps the 25 could have processed the 40 VDBs, but the new lower headcount staff realizes it is an impossible task and doesn't even consider it. You combine this fundamental work problem with a poor information technology choice, a demoralized workforce and edicts from headquarters restricting their freedom to find IRROP solutions.
With these initiatives of the highest importance to corporate management, I dont see how the responses will improve, barring a remarkable advance in rebooking efficiency (which presumably would run up against the restrictions on solutions).

cv11nyc

As one who flies the 737NG for UAL, myself and my colleagues in the cockpit are not aware of any new 'speedbrake' issue. This is interesting given the many official operational/safety publications published by both the FAA and UAL. Also don't forget the unofficial rumor mill which often covers many things true and false.

In 8 years on the plane, I can recall two delays caused by a speedbrake malfunction. At no point in time was safety EVER compromised. Good to know that certain government officials and NGO's feel they are more informed then the pilots who fly the airplane. My manual lists two limitations with the 737 NG speedbrakes of which one is due to an FAA airworthiness directive that has been out for over 10 years and has caused little trouble since it was published.

channa

This has nothing to do with Project Quality. CO has been falling apart in IRROPS for several years.

Only thing that's worse now is that CO is much bigger, and rebooks/IRROPS/etc. are more common, and rebookings and such can be more complicated -- both with a larger network and Star Alliance rebooking requirements that require them to use other carriers.

The last time I can recall CO handling IRROPS well was in the paper ticket days, when they had a system that could process rebooks/reissues quickly -- a green Sharpie pen and a stapler. A couple of scribbles and a couple of clicks with the stapler, and you were on your way in seconds -- much easier than the cryptic SHARES reissues we have these days.

As for FLL, when I was there last year, trying to standby onto FLL-SFO (I was on FLL-IAD-SFO that was delayed and a likely misconnect), I was actually told I couldn't because it would be a change of route. I pushed back and said so what, you put it as standby, and if I clear, you sync up the ticket. The guy actually admitted that they were short staffed and didn't want to put the work of syncing up the ticket on the gate agent, so that's why it wouldn't be allowed. I had to push back harder and tell him that the old United system would have done this no problem, and it's not my problem that they chose the inferior system, put the standby request in there, if it clears, it clears, and if it delays the flight, that's a cost of doing business with lousy computer systems.

He eventually caved, but I didn't get the sense from this interaction that this station was really with it if they would rather overnight misconnect a 1K rather than let them standby.

craz

Would you have taken $150 or $200 where things usually start and sometimes end at?

I wouldnt be a bit surprised if someone ran the #s and found out that # of folks that would misconnect and have to be Comped something would cost them less then getting the 40 VDBs.

Sort of like the car companys, sure they know they have a faulty part that results in accidents and even that there will be deaths, but the #s show it will cost them less $$$ to pay out those claims then to do a complete recall, so they chose "Well punk do you feel its your lucky day when you start up and drive this car'.

Soccerdad1995

Are you seriously suggesting that the OP may have had 28 (or more) people traveling with him on this flight? I think that would have been relevant to mention if it was in fact true.

The point being that short of having ALOT of vouchers to pick up, standing in line for $7 vouchers is not worth the time and effort of a significant percentage of the people in this country.

Luvs2snowbordbut1kSEA

A perfect representation of my post merger experiences with Jeff's airline. Happy 2 years in relative peace away from Jeff's UA. Still 0 segments and couldn't be more pleased.

People who can should leave- many of us already have. I feel sorry for those who can't.