+1, I learned something new two weeks ago about the ATC reason - don't know if it's 100% true but I'll believe it.

What happens is if for some reason a plane goes MX or crew, etc., the delay is initially registered as MX, crew, etc, but then they try to schedule a new time for departure, and ATC may inform that the new time will not work and delays perhaps 5 minutes after the suggested time, so the new delay reason gets updated to ATC, even though it was MX that caused it to become ATC.

+1 x100

That's my guess. If the Board won't do anything, even small groups of employees can take the matter into their own hands. It's going to get uglier.

\

SFH, the sequel? I am sorry, but I do not know what this means. Will someone kindly enlighten me? Thanks.
.

SFH = Summer From Hell

SFH II would likely be a lot more horrific with load factors much higher than they were SFH I.

One reason my wife and I are driving to our vacation spot this summer.

I really feel badly for the employees who have to deal with this kind of stuff day in day out and are expected to put on a smiling face throughout.

I've never seen that on CO or sCO since the merger. I've seen airlines with more FAs, but compared to UA (and US and AC), I haven't seen any difference in staffing numbers on TATL flights

This post really sums up the current situation. I'm sure we've all had these issues with flights and it just goes to show what a sorry state UA is in. (My last flight, a TALT, had the delay, AC, flight map and tray table issues. Thank goodness I didn't try for a veggie meal.)

United Airlines, dysfunction, is our function.

I've said to more than one FA, if everything was working correctly it wouldn't be United.

My parents are flying SFO-CDG on the 26th to catch a cruise. Sure hope everything goes smoothly.

And yes, I told them they should've flown AF.

This was one of those old 767's that has a beautifully updated Global First and Business and an economy section straight out of the mid 90's. I'm not sure if that's CO or UA, but the plane looked and felt OLD.

On the flight I'm referring to, a supervisor came on the aircraft, pulled an FA off, and the flight service director made a point of telling us to expect less service because of the departure of the FA.

sUA. sCO don't have Global First. Also, while all sUA 767s have updated premium cabins I believe and sCO haven't, sCO updated Y with C while sUA kept Y old-school

That really does suck, but I doubt that's a "sCO thing." Sounds like just a cr*ppy situation

Is it my understanding that UA just wants to cater to pax who can afford to fly up front and not in the back?

Does this explain why the FA seem so indifferent; basically unhappy when they are working in the back? This doesn't happen all the time, but it did on my last flight.