Looking at the timeline of #958, the thing that UA should have done better was get to them sooner. The wait was way too long. However the nature of the situation would have had the passengers spend the night regardless. It sucks, but it's better than a disaster. If the mechanics are intentionally behind this, it's just deplorable and completely unprofessional.

The language is typical at every company, good or bad. How well they're run has nothing to do with it.

FWIW, I've written up a few mechanical issues (I'm an Airbus Captain) over the past two weeks and I've found the mechanics to be professional and competent in repairing the items.

In the first instance I would not accept the plane (CLE-SFO) with the two inoperative systems that were legally deferred. I told them that they had to fix at least one of the systems in order for me to accept the plane. They responded right away and the system mx controllers (Willis Tower) ordered parts to be shipped in...leaving us with at 3 hour delay. IMO, the local mechanics were very proactive and attempted to reset/fix the EGPWS and discuss the details of the system mx controller. As it turned out, they were able to fix the system and get us underway with less than a 30 minute delay.

The second was a Flt Mgmnt computer problem we discovered when we were about to take off. We worked with the system mx controllers attempting to reset several times with no success. We returned to the gate and got the process started to find a new airplane (at least 3 hour delay). Once again, several local mechanics came to the plane and were able to fix/reset the system. We arrived in Chicago less than 45 minutes late.

The third was just yesterday. Thirty minutes prior to departure I discovered the Cargo smoke detect system was inoperative. Once again, several mechanics showed up right away and fixed the system. No delay.

In all of these cases the mechanics were pleasant and professional and showed absolutely NOTHING but the desire to fix the writeup and get us out as soon as possible.

Now, I can't speak for all mechanics in the system, but I would caution against painting with a broad brush and condemning all of the mechanics (or ANY employee). Each one of the instances I mentioned above could have easily resulted in a very long delay or even cancellation if they so chose.

glad to hear the mechanics are still doing their jobs!

Still doesn't speak to the unreal numbers of maintenance delays and cancellations if compared to any other major carrier in the world.

I definitely understand! I just wanted to point out my experiences to keep things somewhat balanced.

Thank you. It was the most informative post I've read in a while.

My original comment on this situation was going to be along the lines of "Hey, you are flying across the North Atlantic in an aluminum tube. Don't expect Disneyland when things don't go as planned." but changed my mind after thinking it through.

MX people, don't like your current contract, go on strike and work it out. FAs, don't like that you might have to work on an aircraft that isn't in your contract, go on strike and work it out. Just remember why you have jobs.

I recall watching an interview with a NW mechanic during their 2005 strike who made the statement "I'd rather see the company go out of business than work under theses conditions". We know how well that worked out for them.

Good on you -- thanks for the account and the commitment to safety. I didn't mean to suggest that the whole corps of mechanics is conspiring against the company and its passengers, just wondering why the canx / trouble rate seems to be ballooning right as the summer travel season starts.

I was on a UX flight from an outstation last weekend where the equipment came in with some complaint and the new crew refused to accept it until the writeup was addressed by the (slow-moving) ground staff we had available... delay ensued... not suggesting we push back with stuff unaddressed, just saying it is suboptimal to address this stuff during a tight turn at an outstation. Sometimes unavoidable of course, but to an outside eye it looks like the fleet is being flogged to the breaking point. Same stuff happened in Eastern's last chapter.

Quite true but I wish we could stop rationalizing UA lapses, delays, egregious irrops, etc. by pointing out that they are better than a terrible accident. Better outcome would be to fly a safe airline without shredding the timetable every day.

I'd have to say the business world is divided into companies that genuinely want to get closer to customers, and those that fear them and resent having to explain themselves, and the latter is typically the poorly run kind, and I think UA certainly falls into that category.

One thing perhaps a little bit different-
You usually don't see an airline immediately offering to refund the ticket price up-front. Presumably in addition to whatever compensation might be offered.

Seems like a business moving people around should have a full-time disaster desk with a triage system already in place to deal with this sort of thing. Part of that system would include appropriate responses for situations that cannot be adequately dealt with on the ground, like this one. As soon as such a situation is recognized, Plan B springs into place and you make sure to muzzle comments from people speaking for the airline that don't have a clue. Trouble is, the 'net has served to decentralize or kinda democratize things, if you will. But in something with PR disaster potential, you just gotta take back control. Even if it's just so you can have a fall guy.

Given the number of issues we've been reading about recently, I agree that it's wrong to blame the line mechanics for what's happening. To me, this points at poor preventative maintenance, and that's a corporate decision.

They're governed by the Railway Labor Act, which makes it very hard to strike legally.

Just to all of the folks (and Daily Mail) -- I've been to Goose Bay, and there's very little there there. I'm guessing they didn't even have a way to get off the base to access the town.

Definitely scratching me head as to why they sent them back to EWR though.

axl - thanks for your post.

I would think if there was an extra plane or two used to ferry/shuttle it would have more use ending up again in EWR than in LHR...because could they even land the extra flight at LHR with the slots?

Report elsewhere is that the cxld one of the scheduled LHR flights to free a slot for the relief section.

But the same aircraft sat on the ground at EWR then went on to LHR. In cases like this LHR could handle the aircraft.

Very poorly handled by UA. Its crazy this is the same airline that did a fantastic job with the Midway Islands diversion. How

First passenger interviews I've seen since the diversion to Goose Bay. They're in front of T2 at LHR:
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/...rracks-n375131

I think this may indeed be a new low, or a new height of incompetence, apathy, and customer hatred.

I wish there was a way to know the root cause of the mx issue.

Was it due to deferred maintenance related to the $2 billion in cost cuts that are necessary to increase profitability margins to ensure that Jeff gets more than $12 million in compensation for 2015?