flag stop - san-iad red eye makes "flag stop" in CLE
Oct 6, 2015, 3:33 pm
#31
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,322
What *is* the right thing?
Not disturbing the planned schedule and expected arrival time of a planeload of passengers? Or is it about getting 65 passengers to Cleveland with less disruption to them? Or are you suggesting there was a better way that would satisfy these both ideals with some cost that UA was unwilling to incur?
"The right thing" is not always clear cut?
Not disturbing the planned schedule and expected arrival time of a planeload of passengers? Or is it about getting 65 passengers to Cleveland with less disruption to them? Or are you suggesting there was a better way that would satisfy these both ideals with some cost that UA was unwilling to incur?
"The right thing" is not always clear cut?
The right thing to do is to put them on another airline - but lol UA would rather do what they did to save the revenue....
Oct 6, 2015, 3:42 pm
#32
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,044
Lol none of this matters if UA operates their schedule as promised when people buy a ticket - my thought is that all these issues wouldn't exist if UA operated properly - and to suggest that screwing over all those passengers who paid for a direct flight to accommodate UA's screw up is somehow "fair" is beyond me....
The right thing to do is to put them on another airline - but lol UA would rather do what they did to save the revenue....
The right thing to do is to put them on another airline - but lol UA would rather do what they did to save the revenue....
and without knowing the real reason for the original delay, hard to blame UA on this. pretty certain the 65 people to CLE would prefer this option than overnighting in SAN.
Oct 6, 2015, 4:07 pm
#33
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: ORD/MDW
Programs: BA/AA/AS/B6/WN/ UA/HH/MR and more like 'em but most felicitously & importantly MUCCI
Posts: 19,719
Oct 6, 2015, 4:50 pm
#34
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,322
put them on another airline where they may or may not get out...or get them out and inconvenience a few people to IAD. unless you were connecting in IAD and missed your connection, an hour isn't that big of a deal.
and without knowing the real reason for the original delay, hard to blame UA on this. pretty certain the 65 people to CLE would prefer this option than overnighting in SAN.
and without knowing the real reason for the original delay, hard to blame UA on this. pretty certain the 65 people to CLE would prefer this option than overnighting in SAN.
Oct 6, 2015, 5:19 pm
#35
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: DEN
Programs: UA1K
Posts: 4,044
i understand they are dead last operationally...but your comments just sound like someone who has a grudge against UA and will say anything negative.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
Oct 6, 2015, 5:40 pm
#36
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 812
I'd say that as long as the IAD passengers didn't have to get off the plane and get back on, 1 hour isn't that big of a deal, and I don't think arriving at 6:30 am instead of 5:30 am would have significantly affected connections or appointments/meetings.
That being said, UA should still have given $25-$50 vouchers to the IAD pax proactively.
That being said, UA should still have given $25-$50 vouchers to the IAD pax proactively.
Oct 6, 2015, 5:45 pm
#37
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
i understand they are dead last operationally...but your comments just sound like someone who has a grudge against UA and will say anything negative.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
United at the same time sold a non-stop RED-eye to IAD. That is a flight that people (1) pay extra for, as its NS, and (2) because it is a relatively long flight, actually allows folks to get some sleep.
Faced with the fact that it had hosed 65 people when their plane went MX, United could have off loaded them to OALs, or it could have tried to move them around, instead it took something of value from those who bought SAN-IAD. Not only did it take an hour of their time, but it took if from sleep.
Were on on this flight I would be HOP'N mad.
The current management team has the attitude that once they have your money they can do what they like to you. Trust me, the people who paid to fly SAN-IAD N/S are likely not pleased.
A quality/honest/decent (pick your work) airline would have either not done this, or they would offer a proactive apology and major compensation (as in
"we are sorry for this, here is 10,000 miles or a $300 voucher") yet united here just engaged in its usual quasi-criminal approach to CS...
Oct 6, 2015, 6:07 pm
#38
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: if it's Thursday, this must be Belgium
Programs: UA 1K MM
Posts: 6,484
The mechanical is what it is, and sure, UA is at fault for that. But it could happen to any airline.
After 8pm, there are 3 realistic options to get to Cleveland:
-- 10:35pm UA through ORD
-- 10:35pm US through CLT
-- 10:30pm DL through ATL
From IAD in the morning, CLE is served by only an RJ.
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
After 8pm, there are 3 realistic options to get to Cleveland:
-- 10:35pm UA through ORD
-- 10:35pm US through CLT
-- 10:30pm DL through ATL
From IAD in the morning, CLE is served by only an RJ.
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
Oct 6, 2015, 6:20 pm
#39
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,322
i understand they are dead last operationally...but your comments just sound like someone who has a grudge against UA and will say anything negative.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
given the circumstances...and we don't know all of the variables, it sounds like the best option possible. they could have said screw it, let them fly to DEN and have them on their own once there. we all know there have been countless times where people miss their connection and are on their own at their own expense. if you were one of the 65 trying to get to CLE, pretty certain you'd be appreciative and happy to get home.
While I am impressed they turned the flight quickly - the impact to landing that much earlier in CLE and then taking off again and landing again can't have been good for the folks who thought they were purchasing a direct red-eye flight...
Last edited by bmwe92fan; Oct 6, 2015 at 6:25 pm
Oct 6, 2015, 6:32 pm
#40
Join Date: Feb 2008
Programs: 6 year GS, now 2MM Jeff-ugee, *wood LTPlt, SkyPeso PLT
Posts: 6,526
The mechanical is what it is, and sure, UA is at fault for that. But it could happen to any airline.
After 8pm, there are 3 realistic options to get to Cleveland:
-- 10:35pm UA through ORD
-- 10:35pm US through CLT
-- 10:30pm DL through ATL
From IAD in the morning, CLE is served by only an RJ.
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
After 8pm, there are 3 realistic options to get to Cleveland:
-- 10:35pm UA through ORD
-- 10:35pm US through CLT
-- 10:30pm DL through ATL
From IAD in the morning, CLE is served by only an RJ.
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
But seriously, do you think its more likely that (a) United could not fit any of these folks impacted by its own MX onto OALs, and this was the ONLY option, or (b) that UA did not want to pay OALs to take them, or pay to upgage, and it was cheaper to just badly inconvenience the SAN-IAD folks?
Oct 6, 2015, 7:36 pm
#41
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,146
From IAD in the morning, CLE is served by only an RJ.
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
The question for the critical posters above is, what concretely would you suggest UA should've done? Put maybe a few passengers on those flights (if they even had capacity), and rebooked the rest all for the next morning or later?
Oct 6, 2015, 8:16 pm
#42
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA EXP+LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, Marriott PLT, Hilton DIA, Hyatt Glob, Avis CHM
Posts: 4,671
All things considered, UA was going to have some angry pax. This let them have the least amount of service disruption overall...
Oct 6, 2015, 8:20 pm
#43
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: NYC / TYO / Up in the Air
Programs: UA GS 1.7MM, AA 2.1MM, EK, BA, SQ, CX, Marriot LT, Accor P
Posts: 6,322
No - this let them have the least amount of REVENUE disruption - there are 130 people that wouldn't agree with you...
Oct 6, 2015, 8:31 pm
#44
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: SYD
Programs: UA 1K, SPG LT Gold
Posts: 36
Oct 6, 2015, 8:32 pm
#45
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CLE
Programs: UA GS+LT UC, AA EXP+LT PLT, Fairmont LT PLT, Marriott PLT, Hilton DIA, Hyatt Glob, Avis CHM
Posts: 4,671
Ignoring the finances, would you rather force 65 customers into an overnight delay situation than delay 100 customers by 1 hour?