I doubt they will do anything about it. The 09 contracts were recently announced (and UA is a BIG player in that market from IAD), so the airline is safe for a year. Maybe it will come up in negotiations for 2010.

For 09, I'm sure GSA will just say 'it's covered in per diem', which is not untrue.

The loss of real business class does hurt gov travelers. My travel regs state that upgrades to business class (payed for by the traveler, using upgrade materials or cash) are allowable, but upgrades to first are not allowable under any circumstances. In other words, technically I cannot upgrade on a 2-class domestic flight, but can on a 3-class.

Switching to another airline is not an option for some of us (particularly so for the IAD crowd).

I have been trying to explain this to SK for years...but they don't want to listen... (let's serve coffee/rolls/juice on domestic routes to all pax (where they practically have a monopoly), and *not* to Y pax on European (competitive) routes! :confused:)

Oh yes, let's hassle a SEN flying on LH metal for more than 40 mins at check-in with family as well...

Fully agreed - how can one get him removed, and would anyone want to replace him? :eek:

I think Glen Tilton should be selling meals on these first flights, so he can experience first hand how "enhanced" the passengers feel. But he doesn't have the guts to do this, does he? Easier to put employees at the front of this, while he is taking his millions to the bank.

I can't and won't support that behavior. I think this is it for me and UA. Sad...after a million miles - but I'll use JetBlue, LH, AF, Openskies and ANA for my trips now.

...?!?
 

I've got only one more flight booked already on UA this year (late Oct) and that's it at this point. And, I'm already wondering if I should be calling demanding vouchers or something for free BOB if I don't get upgraded to C on my FRA-return.

After that point, B6 and VX is looking better and better for domestic and whoever I can find intl.

This seems like a nose-dive into bankruptcy, so here's a question what can I do to protect my 500K remaining miles in MP? Book a ticket on another carrier I'm guessing...

Well, first of all the fare is for the ride. You likely paid that fare because you wanted a refundable ticket, or you bought last minute on a high traffic route.

I'm just trying a bit of perspective. If you paid $1500, or $2500 when another airline had a seat for $1000 then that's your problem. But if you say you aren't going to fly because of a $10 food fee, I don't get it. Yes, UA's product is pretty second rate, and that is the reason I've bought international tickets on other airlines. But in this age of charging for things like baggage, which I think is worse, all the griping about a $10 food fee seems a bit overboard. Some of the BOB selections are better than the former hot food, so it appears the complaint is about being charged $10. I agree it stinks, but not enough for all the hyperventilating going on.

Not if they outlast UA...

You know, I used to think that it was the least important part of the experience as well. Then I started flying CO in F. I'm now choosing CO F to EWR over UA PS C to JFK. The seat is important, but it's not everything.

The anger level in this thread seems almost off the scale. Whether meals are or are not important to a travel experience is immaterial. Free meals vs. BOB seems almost irrelevant. What seems more relevant is that so many frequent travelers posting here, ostensibly among UA's sought after customer base, are so angry. This announcement seems to be the last straw for many. Clearly a lot of resentment and anger remain from the recent implementation of baggage fees, which was in turn preceded by years of declining service levels and policy and procedure changes that left the travel feeling duped.

The question for UA management, and indeed for most US majors, is how can a service business like theirs survive when their customers dislike them so much?

If true, I will be moving all my transatlantic travel to LH. :td:

Excellent post. I agree totally. Sure, running an airline is very tough these days, but if in the process of cutting costs you alienate your most valued customers, you'll end up losing the battle in the end. Not to side with the pilots here because I think they are part of the problem not part of the solution, but UA's got the wrong management team (i.e. Tegue and Tilton) in place right now. Not only do they have labor fights on every front, they've got bean counters who are doing their best to eliminate any last vestiges of an enjoyable flying experience.

To be honest, at this point I hope UA doesn't survive. It would make life much easier if SFO had a strong hub carrier that didn't suck to the degree that UA does. I'd love to see UA turn its customer service and management problems around but I just don't see it happening within a reasonable period of time. UA is so broken now that Ch. 7 with another carrier coming in to dominate SFO seems like the best option at this point.

what else is off the scale and funny really is all the keyboard CEOs we have that probably know about as much about running a large company as I do fixing a car engine.

355 posts (several have more than 1), there's something like 115 people on this board right now. While you may be correct that many customers dislike them but I'd contend we aren't really the definitive word on UA customers. It will take probably 2 to 3 quarters to find out the real effects, which my money would be are negligible. If people really really cared about service and high quality food they haven't been flying UA internationally for awhile most likely, the rest will probably stay as M+ and E+ has them by the short hairs.

Well, I am certainly not in a position to comment on your mechanical skills, however, I would think that most of the so-called keyboard CEOs on this board would agree that angering your customers and having them dislike you over the long haul is bad for business.

Again, it's not about this one service cut, it's about the adversarial relationships that airlines have created with their customers, specifically engendered by their business models with elements such as the fare structure, the frequent flyer programs, the fees and services charges and on and on. This is but the latest chapter.

Well I'll help you out: I can barely put gas in the thing

Yes this is one more service cut, and it very well may end up being an unmitigated disaster, all I'm saying is I won't conclude definitively it is based on FT comments. If one remembers its pretty much sang the same song begin sung here in this thread as when p.s. lost meals in Y, and when Hawaii flights went BoB and transcons (other than Hawaii and ps) before that and you know what:

ps makes a ton of cash according to UA
Hawaii flights also seem really full
Most transcons seem full too

All I'm saying is the decision may very well piss off people here but that doesn't make it a horrible decision, it may be but I'll wait and see how it plays out.

The frequent flyer program?!? The US carriers have the most generous FFPs in the world and UA is among the most generous in terms of redemptions and upgrades. All those who profess their desire to switch to VX and LH should switch to their programs and see what their coach fares get them. Very little.

Unfortunately, the nature of modern airlines tends to lead to customer dissatisfaction. People want the cheap fares of today, but the service quality of yesteryear. They are incompatible desires. So airlines are much like cable or phone companies. Everybody hates them, but keeps buying the product.