Pilot walks off plane for wrong meal
Jul 27, 2011, 11:29 pm
#46
Join Date: Mar 2007
Programs: QFF Gold, Flying Blue, Enrich
Posts: 5,366
+1 The OP "must not have really gotten the full story and wasn't actually in the cockpit and didn't actually see what was written on the checklist and is exaggerating and couldn't possibly have been just as the OP stated because, after all, the OP is only a passenger and doesn't really understand the code language the pilots were using with the groundcrew. 
Yadda yadda yadda And the other pilot offering to buy the complaining pilot lunch - couldn't possibly have happened.
Yadda yadda yadda And the other pilot offering to buy the complaining pilot lunch - couldn't possibly have happened. 
Jul 27, 2011, 11:30 pm
#47
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Central California
Programs: Former UA Premex, now dirt
Posts: 6,531
... One can try to say you pay my salary, but that is just a nice catch phrase, even if you don't like the "laundering" concept, in reality, it is much closer to the truth that to say that a customer pays it. I think I might try to tell the next police officer that I pay his salary when I get pulled over and see how far it goes. ...
Last edited by iluv2fly; Jul 28, 2011 at 9:18 am Reason: language
Jul 27, 2011, 11:30 pm
#48
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: SFO
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 4,449
One pissed off pilot.
Clearly, this was not the first time this happend. Really a proverbial straw that broke the camel's back. He was pissed. He had enough, and he just wasn't going to take it anymore. Good for him for standing up for what he believes in.
Jul 28, 2011, 12:10 am
#49
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: LHR (sometimes CLE, SFO, BOS, LAX, SEA)
Programs: UA 1K
Posts: 5,893
My first guess was that this is an example of "working to contract" as a way to express disapproval with the state of negotiations between pilots and the corporation. (It seems awfully coincidental with http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/conti...cheduling.html .)
On second guess, I'm not so sure -- if your goal is to delay flights and cause measurable financial impact to the corporation, wouldn't you pick something a little more predictable than a mis-catered crew meal?
On second guess, I'm not so sure -- if your goal is to delay flights and cause measurable financial impact to the corporation, wouldn't you pick something a little more predictable than a mis-catered crew meal?
Jul 28, 2011, 12:18 am
#50
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Always on the move
Programs: Something lifetime here and there
Posts: 1,867
My first guess was that this is an example of "working to contract" as a way to express disapproval with the state of negotiations between pilots and the corporation. (It seems awfully coincidental with http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/conti...cheduling.html .)
On second guess, I'm not so sure -- if your goal is to delay flights and cause measurable financial impact to the corporation, wouldn't you pick something a little more predictable than a mis-catered crew meal?
On second guess, I'm not so sure -- if your goal is to delay flights and cause measurable financial impact to the corporation, wouldn't you pick something a little more predictable than a mis-catered crew meal?
Jul 28, 2011, 12:39 am
#51
Moderator: Hyatt Gold Passport & Star Alliance
Join Date: May 1998
Location: London, UK
Programs: UA-1K 3MM/HY- LT Globalist/BA-GGL/GfL
Posts: 12,087
Yes I remember that nightmare too - changed my view of pilots pretty much totally I am afraid. Still to this day I have little or no respect for those involved in that dispute. If that's coming again then it's off to AA I go, and this time there won't be any second chances.
Jul 28, 2011, 1:01 am
#52
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: ORD & MKE
Programs: Airlines: UA-CO, NH, AA, and DL Hotels: SPG, Accor, PC, and Marriott
Posts: 1,827
Ahh, another FT thread with partial information. Gotta love it.
The OP may not know all the issues involved here unless he can say he talked to the captain or FO directly. Talking to a FA doesn't suffice.
Secondly, crew meals are part of our contract, we pay for them, so we want them onboard, just as you do when you have a FC seat with a meal. They are also a safety aspect, since low blood sugar and flying are not a good thing, that's why we have them in our contract. I always check before we leave for my meal to make sure it's there, and that it's what I can eat. We can't depend on uneaten FC meals, most of the time we don't get leftover FC meals.
This captain might have ordered a special meal (we have everything from salad meals to kosher to low sodium) and needed that meal. If I have a full crew meal, and I get a salad instead, that's not a meal so I wouldn't take it either.
Third, going into the terminal to buy food is an option, and one I usually choose since the food is better. The problem with that is you're loaning the company your money, since it can take months to get reimbursed, there may not be a restaurant close by or open, and sometimes you run into a flight manager who wants to argue that you spent too much for lunch and hassle you.
We delay trips for catering for passengers. I see no problem with the delay for crew catering either. However, delaying this long for just a side item for a meal I would not agree with. I'd just run inside and buy some items and expense it.
AD
The OP may not know all the issues involved here unless he can say he talked to the captain or FO directly. Talking to a FA doesn't suffice.
Secondly, crew meals are part of our contract, we pay for them, so we want them onboard, just as you do when you have a FC seat with a meal. They are also a safety aspect, since low blood sugar and flying are not a good thing, that's why we have them in our contract. I always check before we leave for my meal to make sure it's there, and that it's what I can eat. We can't depend on uneaten FC meals, most of the time we don't get leftover FC meals.
This captain might have ordered a special meal (we have everything from salad meals to kosher to low sodium) and needed that meal. If I have a full crew meal, and I get a salad instead, that's not a meal so I wouldn't take it either.
Third, going into the terminal to buy food is an option, and one I usually choose since the food is better. The problem with that is you're loaning the company your money, since it can take months to get reimbursed, there may not be a restaurant close by or open, and sometimes you run into a flight manager who wants to argue that you spent too much for lunch and hassle you.
We delay trips for catering for passengers. I see no problem with the delay for crew catering either. However, delaying this long for just a side item for a meal I would not agree with. I'd just run inside and buy some items and expense it.
AD
+1
Jul 28, 2011, 1:08 am
#53
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Portland
Posts: 11,571
I enjoy helping the customers to the best of my ability within the guidelines set forth my my employeer, United Airlines, but make no mistake, it is the company that I work for, the company's rules I follow (and intern they must as well follow the rules,) and the company that pays my checks.
Jul 28, 2011, 1:17 am
#54
Used to be PWMRamper
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: ATL
Programs: Marriott Platinum
Posts: 999
It was a pilot we regularly see and are good friends with, so of course we obliged.
And once in a great while we get an in range call asking for lobsters. That one doesn't work out, no lobster vendors at PWM (shocking! They could make good money!)
Jul 28, 2011, 1:17 am
#55
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,686
This arguement is futile, think about it...when I work for you directly, then you both employ and pay me. If you are not my direct emploeer, and your payment is not processed by me as an individual, you neither pay me, nor employ me. It's really a very simple concept, how can it be difficult to understand who an employer is and who funds the payroll account that pays me? Your credit card charge does not go to my account, nor does it go directly into UA's payroll account. Accounts receivable and payroll are not the same account, and even if it were, you do not disperse the payroll account, which is what pays me.
Understand?
Jul 28, 2011, 1:39 am
#56
Join Date: Nov 2006
Programs: Flying Blue, easyJet Plus (!)
Posts: 1,762
This sort of thing should really be handled better.
Neil
Jul 28, 2011, 1:42 am
#57
Suspended
Join Date: Jan 2009
Programs: UA 1k
Posts: 1,208
And unions wonder why they get blamed for the downfall of this country's economics.
Jul 28, 2011, 4:50 am
#58
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: What I write is my opinion alone..don't read into it anything not written.
Posts: 9,686
Unions didn't invent contract law. Imagine an "at will" empolyee who forgot to do his job (i.e. deliver the proper product) who could be fired instantly for that, or better yet, could be fired without any reason at all. Seems to me, a set of binding rules and reasons to be terminated are far better than no reason needed at all.
Jul 28, 2011, 6:38 am
#60
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: London & Sonoma CA
Programs: UA 1K, MM *G for life, BAEC Gold
Posts: 10,222
This particular instance looks extreme, but I do suspect that there are back stories which would explain some of the events.
However, it is symptomatic of an organization which is badly run. Labor is unhappy because it perceives itself as mistreated. Labor has no one in authority to turn to to get things sorted (where was a station manager or an ops manager to sort this out). Labor feels that they need to make a stand in the only way which will bring matters to the attention of senior management.
Now, the question then comes as to how we got into this situation in the first place. Why on earth would UA ever agree to ridiculously over-detailed contractual obligations which allow labor to hold it to ransom? Presumably because labor does not trust management to do the right thing in the first place. Years of conflict, as opposed to partnership, lead to mistrust and downright bolshiness on the part of labor - and probably also management.
The challenge for the new company will be to break this vicious cycle; to behave reasonably towards employees and to weed out the employees who will not behave reasonably in their dealings with the company or its customers.
However, it is symptomatic of an organization which is badly run. Labor is unhappy because it perceives itself as mistreated. Labor has no one in authority to turn to to get things sorted (where was a station manager or an ops manager to sort this out). Labor feels that they need to make a stand in the only way which will bring matters to the attention of senior management.
Now, the question then comes as to how we got into this situation in the first place. Why on earth would UA ever agree to ridiculously over-detailed contractual obligations which allow labor to hold it to ransom? Presumably because labor does not trust management to do the right thing in the first place. Years of conflict, as opposed to partnership, lead to mistrust and downright bolshiness on the part of labor - and probably also management.
The challenge for the new company will be to break this vicious cycle; to behave reasonably towards employees and to weed out the employees who will not behave reasonably in their dealings with the company or its customers.
