Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
What Do You Think Of The New "Pax Bill Of Rights"?  
User currently offlineLAX From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 2290 posts, RR: 3
Posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4092 times:

I've been hearing a lot lately about a new policy being implemented by most of the major U.S. airlines....the "Passengers Bill of Rights" (or something close to that title).

It's a series of changes that the airlines are supposed to start implementing to reduce delays and, in general, make all passengers happier with the airline. This is supposed to include a passenger being informed (by telephone or e-mail) of any cancellations or delays.

My question to all you frequent flyers would be ...... Have you noticed any positive changes in the airline industry as a result of this new "bill of rights" policy initiated by US airlines?

Have things indeed gotten better? Or are they even worse now?

Thanks.

40 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineCo/ba From United States of America, joined May 2001, 399 posts, RR: 3
Reply 1, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 11 hours ago) and read 4031 times:

It gives passengers(a minority) the right to abuse ground staff and then threaten lawsuites at the airlines in order to recieve upgrades which they are either not entitled to, or it is just not available. I do feel ticket agents, gate agents, and flight attendants will have to cope with an increase in hostility from those few people out there who only want to make trouble because they want something for free.

User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 2, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4023 times:

The good ol' days of commercial airlines are gone (Read: username).

Now a days people feel because they paid a lot of money for a plane ticket, they are entitled to everything. These are the same people who buy tickets to sports games and say that they have a right to interfere with the game (run on the field, etc.) because they bought the ticket.

Have you ever noticed the differences of public transportation (cabs, subways, busses, etc.) and airlines? How many people have ever complained about the public transportation as opposed to airlines?

I think the airlines should severely lower everyone's expectations (I.E. Southwest), that way people will have nothing to complain about.



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 3, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 9 hours ago) and read 4016 times:

Well PanAm747 - When I buy a ticket on Southwest, I expect safe passage from point A to point B. I expect an ontime departure and arrival. I expect to be treated as if they appreciate me spending my money with them. I expect a reasonably comfortable seat for my 6'4" frame, and I expect a beverage and perhaps a bag of peanuts.

When I buy a ticket on any other airline, I expect safe passage from point A to point B. I expect an ontime departure and arrival. I expect to be treated as if they appreciate me spending my money with them. I expect a reasonably comfortable seat for my 6'4" frame, and I expect a beverage and perhaps a bag of peanuts.

So, I pretty much expect the same thing from everybody, and for the most part, everybody delivers. If there is a level 5 thunderstorm parked off the end of the runway, I don't want the airline to launch any plane that I'm on into the jaws of the storm. Or, if the #2 engine has a problem, I'd rather not have them dispatch the plane with me on it. Most airlines currently don't want to do that either, and they will delay the flight. Here's where the passenger bill of "rights" comes into play. The PBOR would make it where airlines would have to pay people on that plane and others down the line who are impacted by the delay.

Of course, if those complainers who want compensation are killed because a plane flew into a thunderstorm, or had an unrepaired mechanical problem and crashed, they will be the first to sue the airline for not running a "safe" operation.



User currently offlineHa2vegas From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 148 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4008 times:

Ever notice how no one ever mentions exactly how bad customer service in the airlines really is...specifically? Well, I'll tell you. In the last reporting period, the worst of the majors (HP) complaint ratio was 6 complaints for every 100,000 passengers. That's 0.00006% Average was slightly under 4 per 100,000. I wonder how many other industries would fare as well?

User currently offlineSJC>SFO From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 8 hours ago) and read 4007 times:

I think people simply want a little respect. Why do many people speak cruely to ground agents or flight attendants who have little or no control over most of the problems? Because they don't feel like they are being treated right. They are the customer, and the airline is the corporation. As GoingBoeing stated, passengers just want to feel as if the airline cares that they are spending their money with that airline. In most of my experiences it really isn't like that at all. It's like you are trying to deal with a company that just sees you as another measley piece of cargo taking up a seat on one of its planes. I'm sorry but its time all parties learned some respect.

User currently offlineB757300 From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 4114 posts, RR: 22
Reply 6, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 2 days 7 hours ago) and read 3995 times:

How about an Airline Employee's "Bill of Rights"?


"There is no victory at bargain basement prices."
User currently offlinePanAm747 From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 4242 posts, RR: 8
Reply 7, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3979 times:

Goingboeing-All of those expectations are fine. However, some people take those too far. Some people want a 5-star meal in coach, and can not understand that air travel is sometimes uncertain with delays and cancellations. When they don't get the meals, or encounter delays then they whine and moan.

Air travel is different today. When people want/need to travel by air, they buy the cheapest ticket they can afford. This sets up the attitude that all airlines are cattle hearders



Pan Am:The World's Most Experienced Airline - P(oor) S(ailor's) A(irline): San Diego's Hometown Airline-Catch Our Smile!
User currently offlineLAXflyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2000, 158 posts, RR: 0
Reply 8, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3978 times:

I'm still waiting for an "Employee bill of rights." Well said COba

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3977 times:

Ok, SJC-SFO, let's talk about respect on this issue, shall we? One of the provisions states that airlines need to be more forthcoming with info on delays. Well, I've never seen that as a problem where I work. We get the information, we let the people know what's going on. Sometimes we may wait 10 minutes or so to get all the information we need, but we don't just not tell people what's going on. Now, the respect part. It NEVER fails that there will be someone in the boarding area that will say "you're lying", or "just tell us what's REALLY going on", or something like that. In other words, they automatically don't believe ANYTHING they're told. Those are the ones who end up sending in the compalint letters to the DOT; they are the ones that are eating up this constant media hype (which is what a lot of this is), about how airline employees "lie" all the time. And they are part of the reason why the Congress is thinking about implimenting some regulations that would be disasterous for the industry and consumers.

Are there some employees who just don't get it and lie about a situation? Of course there are, but they are not as pervasive as the media or Congress would lead the public to believe. Such employees should be disciplined when they do such things. But I suspect that, if the truth be told, such employees are a rare minority in the business. Most of us want to just deal with the situation at hand, see it to it's resolution, then move on. Most of us don't enjoy the delays anymore than any flyer.

Until the public gets over this "Watergate syndrome", the belief that we're just a pack of cheerful liars, which is very far from the truth, then there will continue to be problems.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3978 times:

The bill is simply another effort by the Trail Lawyers' Association of America to find a new source of revenue for them, now that they have gotten used to multi-billion dollar awards. Pretty soon you will have ambulance-chaser-style ads, saying things like "Have you ever been delayed on your flight? You may be entitled to compensation! Give us a call!"

Instead of a huge complicated bill which leaves plenty of things vague and will tie up the already overstretched U.S. court system, there is a very simple remedy. Require each commercial airport to be rated by the FAA as to how many aircraft movements the airport can manage per hour, taking into account proper spacing, etc. Reduce that number by 10%, to account for weather, cock-ups and the odd charter, and that number will be the allowable slots. Then make the airlines bid for these slots with the airports, and make it a felony for the airport administration to grant more than that number of slots.

Simple, with clear responsibility, and no need for the courts. Right now, I think the airlines schedule their planes without any regard to how many the airport can actually handle.

Charles


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 11, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 22 hours ago) and read 3969 times:

<< Right now, I think the airlines schedule their planes without any regard to how many the airport can actually handle. >>

And they do this in response to customer DEMAND. If people didn't want to fly out of LGA at 5:00 p.m., airlines wouldn't schedule so many flights out of LGA at 5. Judging from the loads, however, the public might demand even more. The problem is, unless the public DEMANDS a reduction in the number of flights at any given airport at any given time, then they should sit quietly while they are number 35 for takeoff because a thunderstorm passed overhead at 5:01.

As far as expectations, customers can do a lot. How hard is it to get to the gate an hour early and ask the gate agent if this is a meal flight in coach? If it isn't, head on down to Mickey D's and grab a burger. Most flights 2 hours or less are not meal flights.

If the flight is late, they should ask themselves how much quicker the plane will get there if they pitch a fit to the gate agent.

If they are flying in to Philly to meet someone for dinner at 6:00 they should think twice before booking the 5:00 flight out of Cleveland - it might be delayed.

If they are upset because the plane was supposed to leave the gate at 5:00 and didn't push back until 5:15, they should remember the two "wheelie bags", laptop PC and briefcase they drug on board and spend 5 minutes themselves finding a place to stow them. Multiply that by a couple of hundred other passengers and see how much time could be saved.


User currently offlineKUGN From United States of America, joined Jul 2000, 615 posts, RR: 6
Reply 12, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3964 times:

I am somehow uncomfortable with the idea of goverment jumping into my rescue as a consumer. I remeber they tried to help consumers with deregulation of local telephone/DSL service and all we got was more regulation and lower quality, slower paste of DSL introduction, depleated telecoms, and new middle-tier companies with lots of money.

Why should I expect that goverment would help me any better with this "pax bill" of "rights" ? It is good for politicians to talk about it (McCain?), but all they can get is more beurocracy, and more cost which will be past down to consumers.

Last weekend I had my best ever transatlantic flight ever. I flew British Airways, connecting at LHR. The previous flight arrived at the gate at Terminal 1 35mins prior to my connecting departure Terminal 5. I got on time, my luggage got on time.

The flight attendants during flight, check in agents about everyone was as helpful as they could.

I tend to believe that neither UK nor US goverment made those proffesionals act in such manner. But still they offered wonderfull consistent product. It was their company that worked on that, not some politician.

So, regarding "pax bill" of "rights" -- thanks, but no thanks.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 21 hours ago) and read 3961 times:

Goingboeing,

I agree with you - Passengers are mostly pretty ignorant of what needs to happen for a plane to leave on time. So much the more reason NOT to give them more "rights" that they can abuse. The only result will be a bunch of lawsuits, the cost of which will find its way into the price of a ticket, making travel more expensive for all of us, in order to benefit some lawyers and a few people who will win the lottery in court.

Mandating a fixed, maximum number of flights that can pass through an airport during a given time frame will force airlines to spread their flights out, or use bigger planes.

Another thing. One of the reasons that some airports like ORD, ATL, and JFK are saturated is because of their use as hubs. Many of the people going through these airports have absolutely no business in that city whatsoever. If airlines insist on having hubs for transit passengers, why not have them in depopulated areas? Put a massive hub right in the middle of the Kansas plains - enough room for 20 runways and no noise problems with neighbors. Forcing airlines to adhere to strict enforcement of slot rules would make them consider this option.

Charles


User currently offlineWannabe From United States of America, joined Jun 1999, 677 posts, RR: 3
Reply 14, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 20 hours ago) and read 3953 times:

Here is a personnal example of why we shouldn't need the "bill of rights".
Last Thursday I was scheduled on a AA flight from DFW to LGA. The flight evidently originated in Lima, Peru and was about 1 hour late in arriving, which was posted on the board almost 2 hours prior to the originally scheduled departure time. When the aircraft arrived, he ground people at DFW announced that the aircraft would need to be inspected by US customs and then cleaned, and it would be 1 more hour till boarding. They kept us informed throughout. Once our flight crew got on and passenger boarding started, it turned out that there was a mechanical problem with the plane, giving false landing gear indications in the cockpit. The pilot kept us informed throughout the fix process as to what was going on and what the next steps could be. Although the flight was a breakfast flight, he had lunches brought on board as we waited. He came back through the cabin several times to talk to passengers, and once the broken part was found (a micro switch), he passed it back through the cabin for all to see. We wound up leaving 3 hours behind schedule, but I did not hear anyone complain. As long as people are kept in the loop and are treated well, we should not need another lawyered up document to define what we are entitled to. Most times, such a document does more to cause problems than it does to fix them.


User currently offlineLON-CHI From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 15, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 3944 times:

First, let me just say that I can't imagine how hard it must be for ticket, gate and customer service agents to deal with so many idiotic, selfish and rude customers on a daily basis. Every time I fly, I go out of my way to be nice to these people (even though it does irk me sometimes how often the courtesy is rarely retuned).

That being said, as a frequent flyer, I am all for a Passengers Bill of Rights. I've been fairly lucky over the years flying, in terms of delays, cancellations and other hassels. But, on the occasions that something has gone wrong, I have been completely amazed at the airlines response (or lack of). I've experienced delays or cancellations that the airlines claim is weather related that, with a little investigating, reveals it is really due to a mechanical, low passenger load or some other reason that is the airlines responsibility. Or, when airlines knowing far ahead of time that a flight is going to be cancelled or delayed but not revealing it to the passengers or the employees on the front line until you're waiting to board at the gate or actually on board. If the airlines would just be truthful and manage information better, it would go a long way in improving customer attitudes.

Basically, the airlines need to be held accountable when they fail to deliver what they promise. They have a captive market and no one to answer to. For the person who mentioned the low complaint ratio, I strongly believe that most passengers feel "what's the point?" When you do complain, you'll be lucky to get any response and if you do, it most likely will be a form letter that does not even address the problem.


User currently offlineLowfareair From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 16, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3940 times:

>>Ever notice how no one ever mentions exactly how bad customer service in the airlines really is...specifically? Well, I'll tell you. In the last reporting period, the worst of the majors (HP) complaint ratio was 6 complaints for every 100,000 passengers. That's 0.00006% Average was slightly under 4 per 100,000. I wonder how many other industries would fare as well?<<

That is people complaining to the government, not to the airlines. Let me put it in perspective: You bought a $500 Weber Grill at the Home Depot. When you get home, you find out that it has a dent in it, chipped enamel and that some parts are missing. Do you:

a) go back to the Home Depot to return it and try to exchange for a new one?
or
b) not bring the grill back, but go back and scream at the guy who sold it to you?
or
c) complain to your local congressman that the grill stinks?

Where I work, the answer is generally choice a, and occasionally b. That is the same in the airline industry.


User currently offlineMikeybien From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3937 times:

I think the problem lies with people who want to pay less than $200 to fly coast-to-coast and then expect to get treated like royalty. The American public's desire for cheap travel is what has caused the massive hub and spoke system and cattle-car seating. Like in most other things in life, you pay for what you get. And now, 20 something years after deregulation, the media is fanning the fire by sensationalizing every last incident and convincing the American public that it's the airlines fault for providing the service people were asking for. Without a doubt, this falls under the saying: "You've made your bed, and now you have to sleep in it."

User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 18, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3934 times:

LON-CHI I've got to take some exception to some of your statements:

<< But, on the occasions that something has gone wrong, I have been completely amazed at the airlines response (or lack of). I've experienced delays or cancellations that the airlines claim is weather related that, with a little investigating, reveals it is really due to a mechanical, low passenger load or some other reason that is the airlines responsibility.>>

First off, machines can break. But what's the cause of the following delay - Aircraft is scheduled to depart MCI at 6:45 a.m., but because of fog in STL, it has to hold in KC for an hour. Already the flight is one hour behind for the day, and it really is a weather delay. Let's say the plane gets to STL and then goes to CLE and back to STL. It's still running late, but the pilot notes a problem with a warning light. So, maintenence checks it out and the flight is delayed another half hour. So, it's an hour and a half delayed - what's the cause of the delay - weather or maintenance? And in the end, what difference does it make? If it's late, it's late, and I do not consider a maintenance delay to be the airlines "fault". I want a machine to be completely airworthy if it's going to take me 5 or 6 miles up in the air. Also, airlines don't cancel for low loads. If the DFW-MCI leg of a flight is light, what does the airline tell the MCI passengers who were planning on getting on board that plane (and would have filled 98% of the seats) for it's return to DFW? Now, sometimes an airline will "steal" a plane from one route to cover for one that has a mechanical to accomodate more passengers on another route, but they pretty much look at which option will impact the fewest passengers. It's pretty intricate, but I'll bet they are cutting down on complaints by doing what they do.

<< Or, when airlines knowing far ahead of time that a flight is going to be cancelled or delayed but not revealing it to the passengers or the employees on the front line until you're waiting to board at the gate or actually on board. If the airlines would just be truthful and manage information better, it would go a long way in improving customer attitudes. >>

Watching the AA flight displays at DFW the other day, I couldn't help but notice how often the status changed on many different flights. It LOOKED like they were trying to be proactive. But...so many people don't get to the airport until 1 hour (or less) before departure, how in the world is the airline supposed to notify them that the plane is running late until they finally get to the gate? Should the airline call you at your home, office, hotel, or car phone to tell you that your flight is running late? How do they do that?

You can hold the airlines accountable without having them pay some monetary "reward" and raising my airfares...you can forego the "elite" status on the offending airline and fly the competition. If the original airline doesn't improve it's service, they'll be punished far worse, and far more justly, than any government mandated "bill of rights" can do.


User currently offlineRookie From Croatia, joined Apr 2009, 0 posts, RR: 0
Reply 19, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3929 times:

No one has mentioned anything about the people in Detroit a few years back and what rights they had. The courts seemed to agree with a lot of those people. It seems that because of this site most are pro airlines. There seems to be alot of pilots,ground crews and gate agents. Some have said that people want everything for a $200 ticket, are the passengers the one who says thats all they will pay or is it the price the airline said to pay. No one is wrong for expecting exactly what the airlines say they will do, get you from point a to point be at this time,on this day and in this amount of time. Peoples time is worth as much as an airlines time.If all this attention that is being paid by congress wouldn't of happened the airlines would still treat people as cattle and say we will gladly take your money but don't say a word about how you are treated. I live in MSP and really have one player in town and the last time I flew was to MKE. We pushed back from the gate no effort was made to start the engines, after sitting for 15 mins. the pilot said there was a brake problem and maintenence would have to look at it. We sat there for another 15mins. with nothing from the cockpit and then were told another 15 mins. We finally left 1hr. and 20 mins late. Not much honesty there. People were really mad because if they would of pushed back to the gate we could of got on the only competitors flight, Sun Country to MKE and made it there on time ,but they waited until the other flight left so we had no choice but to wait. Not very fair for a paying customer. Try and remember there are always two sides to the story and if enough people complained more than complimented which way will congress go?

User currently offlineMatt D From United States of America, joined Nov 1999, 9502 posts, RR: 46
Reply 20, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3925 times:

A lot of interesting points have been raised here, most of which I agree with. However, as in most disputes like this, there's "his" side, "her" side, and then "the truth".

The fact of the matter is that the airlines are, to a certain degree, just as guilty as the Public for creating this mess. And just as it's up to the public to make some concessions, the airlines must do likewise. Otherwise, we'll get nowhere, and the cycle of frustration will escalate indefinitely.

As an example, when I took United a couple of years ago from ONT-SFO, the flight was delayed by nearly 3 hours. The usual excuse of "weather" (as an airline enthusiast, I am aware of the SFO fog, so I gave them the benefit of the doubt) was given. They said that SFO is not allowing any takeoffs or landings. I was upset, but I also know that sometimes, especially in dealing with SFO, "shit happens".

I had no real reason to doubt the sincerity of their claim-that is-until a nice shining 737-500 showed up as an arrival at the gate. When I asked where it came from (even though I checked on the monitor to confirm), she told me that it came from SFO.

If SFO was closed for the last three hours, and nothing was taking off or landing, and it's only an hour flight between SFO and ONT, and a plane inbound from SFO had just landed, it didn't take Columbo to figure out that something fishy was going on. When I inquired to the GA about my suspicions of them being less han honest with us-pointing to the just arrived plane at the gate, she said she was 'not of liberty to discuss it, and that when it's time to board, she will call us'.

Then how many times has a "few minute" minor delay mushroomed into several hours or more? Although I can't really prove it, it seems to me that a favorite tactic of the airlines is to be fully aware that a flight is going to eventually be cancelled, or has no chance of taking off within the next 7 hours, will only choose to inform the pax in 15 minute increments that it should "only be a few more minutes", in essence holding passengers hostage from the truth, their destinations, and making alternate bookings. Then, when the last other flight to wherever they were going has left for the day, they will finally inform you that your flight, which should have left 6 hours ago, has been cancelled.

What about Northwest and DTW and the 8 hour parking lot? Need I say more?

How about paying $2700 for that LAX-EWR ticket when the guy sitting next to you paid $149? Now don't get me wrong, I think that for the most part, the airlines should be free to set their own fare levels, but when you have fare disparities of that magnitude, that is simply unethical.

It's incidents like I just described that the airlines have done to themselves to get the abominable reputation they enjoy today.

Now let's look at it from an airline employees point of view?

You have a flight, booked with 197 pax, and 195 of them how up on time, get boarded with no incident. then after you have broken a sweat, and gestated an ulcer in your paunch, are ready to pull the jetway for an on time departure when the other 4 pax show up, not only asking to be checked in, but DEMANDING to ve checked in. And when the GA (rightfully) spells out that your ticket clearly states that you need to be at the gate at least 10 minutes before departure (not to mention her 15 PA announcements), and you are late, this person has the nerve to get belligerent. So what usually happens? The plane gets held, pissing off the 195 pax just so 4 others who couldn't (or wouldn't show up on time could board. I truly feel sorry for the GA's whenever I see that.

Flying airplanes is an expensive business. It seems like no matter what the airlines do, the pax are never happy. They want to fly in brand new state of the art 737-700's, A320's, and 777's. They want a nice leather recliner seat, similar to what they have in their living room. They want to be served a 9 course filet mignon meal, and pay $99 round trip.

Again, it doesn't take a CPA to see that that is clearly an unachieveable goal. What's more important? A roomy chair, or a low fare? Do you want a nice new plane, or an ancient clunker of questionable ancestry? Do you want peanuts or Beef Wellington?

Well, unfortunately, the public can't have it that way. Not if they want the airlines to stay in business. The airlines have to pay for salaries for everyone involved to get the plane from point A to B. They have to make their monthly payments on some very expensive jets. They have to pay for fuel and maintennance. They have to pay airport rent and landing fees. And, being in a business to make money, should be entitled to make a little profit after all expenses are deducted.

I'm not sure that a passengers Bill Of Rights is the long term answer. It sounds like a knee-jerk response to the problem more than anything else. But that doesn't mean that the airlines SHOULDN'T share some of the blame, and be part of the solution. It's all a two way street.

Wanna know what I think the best way to solve this is?

Good old fashioned honesty, good manners, and a practical sense of reality, on the part of the airlines and the public alike.



User currently offlineFly_emirates From United Arab Emirates, joined Oct 2000, 1046 posts, RR: 9
Reply 21, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3920 times:

As a flight attendant, i agree with the bill of rights.. because some of the attendants really act rudely.. and i have seen some situations where the attendants lose patience with some passengers specially if they have children or infants.. but when you applly for this wonderful job, you have to expect many things and try to display the best behaviour you could.. but in some cases, you should be serious with some passengers who causes trouble.. like people who dont obey safety regulations or who try to flurt with female flight attendants..


User currently offlineLON-CHI From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 219 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 15 hours ago) and read 3912 times:

Goingboeing,

You might not consider a maintenance delay the airlines "fault", but they (airlines) do. That's why they'll put you up in a hotel if that can't get you on a flight until the following day. And that's the big difference between a weather delay and a delay that is the airlines responsibility.

Airlines will never admit canceling for light loads, but it happens. Case in point, I was scheduled on a domestic U.S. flight a while ago. It was on a Friday and for the hell of it, I kept track of that flight the week leading up to my trip. That flight was cancelled four days in a row. Sure enough, on the day of my flight, we were told at boarding time that our flight was cancelled (no reason given) and we had been put on another flight an hour later. We were able to keep our tickets and seat assignments and no one, to my knowledge, was bumped. Was it just luck that everyone made it on the flight? Maybe, but it sounded very suspicious. So, I asked a friend who works for the airline in question about it. She is a high level manager in operations. In the strictest confidence, she said "yes", they will sometimes cancel a flight for a light load if they can do it smoothly and get away with it. In my case, it was not a big inconvenience, but I was pretty shocked that it happened.

Here's another example. Two months ago, I was flying LHR-ORD on UAL. I found out the plane I was to fly on was coming in from Chicago earlier that morning, so I kept track of it, since if it was late, I knew my flight would also stand a good chance of being late. Well, that plane actually got in early. So, several hours later, when I was sitting at the gate before boarding, I knew something was wrong since all the flight attendants were sitting with me an not on the plane. Sure enough, an announcement was made that the flight was delayed two hours. The reason that was given to us? Late arrival of the plane due to weathe!. When we finally boarded, I noticed some mechanics hard at work on one of the engines (it looked like they had been there awhile). When we were all the seated, the pilot came on and announced that we would be delayed another hour due to some "routine maintenance." So now we were delayed three hours, most likely due to mechanical problems. If that was the reason, I and the other passengers could have demanded that we be put on other flights. But since the first delay was due to "weather", we didn't have that option. Why did UAL say the plane was initially delayed by weather? Only they know for sure, but I knew it wasn't true.

Finally, Goboeing, to respond to your last point about how airlines are supposed to notify passengers about delays when they're not in the airport, passengers can call and check on the status of their flight, which I, and many others, do before leaving for the airport. Some airlines will now even page or call you with status updates.

Sorry for the long post, but I thought I would share some specific details about a couple of my recent experiences to clarify my previous post.


User currently offlineGoingboeing From United States of America, joined Dec 1999, 4875 posts, RR: 16
Reply 23, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 13 hours ago) and read 3897 times:

Not trying to be argumentative LON-CHI, but concerning a PBOR - please name one US Government program that has resulted in improvements without a corresponding increase in costs. Then ask if a "bill of rights" is worth it.

User currently offlineMace_2 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (13 years 3 months 1 week 1 day 12 hours ago) and read 3893 times:

I dont like the bill, but I wasnt treated the best on my NWA trip on spring break. I was flying with my sister, so I borded with her, she was on somekind of program because she was underaged. well, the gate agent didnt feel like taking us back the the plane, so all of the satnd bys went on before us, we had the tickets in advace.so, she was sopseto have a window seat, she did not. I didnt even get to sit by her. They put me next to an emengency exit. A woman started to complain that she wanted a window seat, so I was kicked out. The flight got worse but not as a result from the airline. But still, We had our tickets 6 months in advance, and we didnt even get our seats, the stand by's got them. The airlines should have more respect than. " well...I dont feel like going back there right now". But I will agree with co/ba on his first post though, it will be abused. Reguards

Mace_2


25 SJC>SFO : I think some of you are missing (my) point. Airlines are increasingly dishonest with the customer. Say it says on my ticket that my flight leaves at 8
26 Goingboeing : My recent flights on AA was scheduled for 10:57 and pushed back at 10:57. It was a light load, but if they REALLY meant that the 10:57 time was when t
27 Ha2vegas : Ok lets assume the consumer model is correct, and that for every complaint officially registered, 3 more are not. (This is a standard satisfaction mod
28 DCA-ROCguy : I haven't had time to read all the comments, so just a few observations about the PBOR in general. This is another case of something the industry shou
29 SJC>SFO : GoingBoeing- I am very kind and courteous to all airline staff. The response I often get is often condescending and makes me feel as if "the airline d
30 Lowfareair : >>Also, I submit the gov't numbers are a fair guage. If the department store makes good my grill, I don't complain to the manufacturer. (Likewise, if
31 Goingboeing : Lowerairfare - you point out something that the "bill of rights" will never address. That is - the people, who will scream at the gate agent for delay
32 Cfalk : Like I said before, this bill is nothing but a trial lawyer's wet dream, will not do anything concrete to alleviate congestion and delays, and will ca
33 LON-CHI : Below is a summary of the PBOR that Rep. Bud Shuster introduced in Feb 1999. Summary of the Shuster Passenger Bill of Rights Requires airlines to pay
34 Post contains images Cfalk : "Requires airlines to pay compensation to passengers if they are kept waiting on the runway for more than 2 hours either prior to takeoff or after lan
35 Post contains links LON-CHI : Cflak, The definition of a “departure delay” in the actual PBOR is defined as the time after door of the plane is closed and when it actua
36 Alpha 1 : SJC-SFO said: "I think some of you are missing (my) point. Airlines are increasingly dishonest with the customer. Say it says on my ticket that my fli
37 Goingboeing : I can't help myself: Summary of the Shuster Passenger Bill of Rights Requires airlines to pay compensation to passengers if they are kept waiting on t
38 Post contains images Alpha 1 : Ok, let's take these parts of this 'BOR one at a time: "Requires airlines to pay compensation to passengers if they are kept waiting on the runway for
39 Cfalk : Goingboeing, Good job. And just to beat the dead horse some more, the key elements of the bill (compensation for delay, "misleading" explainations, wh
40 LON-CHI : Here is another bill, also introduced in Feb 1999. WASHINGTON, D.C. -- U.S. Senators Ron Wyden (D-OR) and John McCain (R-AZ) announced the bipartisan
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
What Do You Think Of The New Jat Colours? posted Tue Jan 13 2004 23:19:29 by Adriaticflight
What Do You Think Of The New First Choice Liverly? posted Wed Nov 19 2003 19:29:36 by Aircraft88
What Do You Think Of The New Piarco posted Tue Aug 19 2003 04:36:51 by Vkstealth
What Do You Think Of The New Tame Livery? posted Tue Jul 22 2003 08:14:53 by Kjet12
WHat Do You Think Of The New AA 717 posted Sat Oct 20 2001 20:28:16 by Delta2006
What Do You Think About The New A330 Of Edw? posted Wed Dec 6 2000 15:54:08 by EDR 374
Fly Baboo, What Do You Think Of The Name? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 00:50:21 by Dambuster
What Do You Think Of The A350 Ads? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 02:56:39 by MarshalN
What Do We Think Of The New T1 In YYZ? posted Sun Aug 8 2004 06:40:04 by YYZACGUY
What Do You Think Of Qantas' New Image? posted Wed Mar 3 2004 14:36:03 by Qantasflyer
What Do You Think Of The New Piarco posted Tue Aug 19 2003 04:36:51 by Vkstealth
What Do You Think Of The New Tame Livery? posted Tue Jul 22 2003 08:14:53 by Kjet12
WHat Do You Think Of The New AA 717 posted Sat Oct 20 2001 20:28:16 by Delta2006
What Do You Think About The New A330 Of Edw? posted Wed Dec 6 2000 15:54:08 by EDR 374
Fly Baboo, What Do You Think Of The Name? posted Sat Nov 11 2006 00:50:21 by Dambuster
What Do You Think Of The A350 Ads? posted Thu Oct 13 2005 02:56:39 by MarshalN
What Do We Think Of The New T1 In YYZ? posted Sun Aug 8 2004 06:40:04 by YYZACGUY
What Do You Think Of Qantas' New Image? posted Wed Mar 3 2004 14:36:03 by Qantasflyer