ual763 wrote:

Art at ISP wrote:

That said, with all due respect to the O/P, I do think you’re making too much out of it...but just a little.

I’m not as livid as I was last night. But, I’m still quite mad. The reason being, she paints every single employee at United in a bad light whether that was her intention or not. Zach is THE Star Alliance/United guy at TPG blogsite. He has always been more than fair to United when unfortunate events happen. His blog posts have the following to really help, or hurt United. Yet, she feels the need to call him a drunk? For ordering a drink? This isn’t the first time she’s posted this sort of thing either. If you look back through her Twitter, she has a history of belittling customers who order a single drink.

Fuming/Livid???. Still quite mad??. LMAO...wow I think YOU'RE mad!!! Reading your post made me feel bad for the passenger, heavy frequent flyer or not, everyone deserves to be treated with respect etc. The stupid FA chiming in surprises none of us, since she is a direct reflection of the WORST type of FA's we speak of on here. She also sounds like a nasty person in general....this will hit mainstream media. BUT for you to be fuming, you need to have a little chat with yourself and life priorities mate! For real reals!

Be fuming/livid over kids being held in empty Walmart prisons ....not this!! Upset, sure.

I was in J on a US carrier NRT to the US. The FA (similar attitude to the FA in the tweet) told me he was out of beef. I must look like a beef eater. Told the Asian passenger behind me he was out of Shrimp. 2 hours later, I saw him set up a massive meal in the jumpseat. Beef and shrimp. Hmmm. So I stood there and I just glared at him and then continued on to the bathroom. The reason why I didn't say anything to him was because again this type of FA would probably shout passenger interference with crew upon arrival in the US, and I have zero time for that!

As long as there are unions this BS will continue. It's sad. I feel for ALL of the many good - great FA's at UA that now get tarnished by this.

Send her ass flying! Every time I hear the safety excuse used I call BS.... I was an FA so I can tell you yes indeed it is a part of the job. But why is service training, wine training, etc etc etc... why are there more FA's than needed for emergency evacuation etc? It's an old fashioned bad attitude to the job. I know the last decade has been challenging.... but you do get a lot of benefits. How many jobs have you one day in Buenos Aires and the next day in HNL? 9-11... as tragic as it was has been abused by a group of staff that really need to move on. This is, unfortunately a western world wide problem. Complying with safety does not excuse being rude and delivering bad service. End of story.

Very unfortuante. But how is the Old Fashioned? With or without the candied thingy...

of course it is not just a UA problem or limited to the airline industry alone. This problem is rampant throughout the service industry. You can have all the training and the supervision in place but you'll never stop this. People simply do not value their job anymore and they could not care less if they get fired. i don't know how you can have enough management presence when you're handling over 5000 flights a day.

Anybody else getting a good chuckle out this? It doesn't get much better than a points blogger and an FA in a Twitter war! Childish from both sides.

As for the FA, hope she gets canned. And sadly pathetic service like that is not uncommon on US legacy carriers.

flyguy84 wrote:

There’s always bad apples. She may need to start looking for a new job.

She’s one of the good apples. All she does is berate customers on Twitter. That’s better than beating passengers or killing their dogs.

ADrum23 wrote:

aemoreira1981 wrote:

Apparently, this woman either changed her Twitter handle or deleted her account. However, the OP's post lives on forever and United can always come here to view the evidence.

I’m sure he saved the tweets.

I highly doubt (most) airline management reads this forum, they could care less.

Absolutely incorrect. Naive to think they don’t read these things, if not indirectly. Can say from experience...

wjcandee wrote:

That's an issue of inadequate management. Try this crap at a Cracker Barrell or a Disney restaurant or a Red Lobster and you would find yourself on the street. Because they all have lots of management around making sure this stuff doesn't happen. At United, apparently-not. Fire 5 FAs from one base for this and the next week everyone will be on their toes. That they not only brazenly do it but that other UA FA's defend it speaks to a broken management culture.

Bingo.

dz09 wrote:

of course it is not just a UA problem or limited to the airline industry alone. This problem is rampant throughout the service industry. You can have all the training and the supervision in place but you'll never stop this. People simply do not value their job anymore and they could not care less if they get fired. i don't know how you can have enough management presence when you're handling over 5000 flights a day.

Same way thousands of restaurants and businesses operate daily without issue. Or how I can count on one hand the number of staff incidents I have had at a hotel (across hundreds and hundreds of nights and the answer is 1 incident) vs FAs or GAs (cases where procedure wasnt followed due to the employee not wanting to or making an excuse)

The problem is UA likely wont be able to fire this FA. And that emboldens the rotten apples to spread their rot. If UA could can this FA and the worst repeat offenders of dress code, things would tighten up instantly. The here-for-safety mantra is carte blanche for some FAs to do whatever the hell they feel like. Try that anywhere else and you'll be kicked out pretty quick

It comes from accountability and management engagement. Theres a marked difference between a Chick Fil a employee and a BK one for example (on average). Its not due to luck.

sofianec wrote:

I believe she spoke on her own behalf and since Mr Honeypot is a media public personality due to his numerous contributions She was exercising her First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution is the one that goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

XAM2175 wrote:

sofianec wrote:

I believe she spoke on her own behalf and since Mr Honeypot is a media public personality due to his numerous contributions She was exercising her First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution is the one that goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

Amen to that!

This is where the unions could actually show some backbone and NOT defend a union member. But of course they wont because the member pays dues and so is effectively a customer, and you cannot publicly shame a customer.... unless you are a union member.

XAM2175 wrote:

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

Right, and it always confuses me how people cannot separate the difference between freedom from criminal prosecution and freedom from consequences at your job.

Yes, she definitely was exercising her First Amendment rights. She is free to do that and she will not be arrested, nor should she be. That's *all* the constitution guarantees. There is no rule or law whatsoever about what her employer can or can't do to her.

This should be a teachable moment for everyone who previously thought that what they say off the clock is protected. It's protected from the government; that's it. It's not protected from your employer. And unless you have a contract specifically stating that you can't be fired for something like this, then yes, you can be fired for something like this. You can be fired for *any* reason that isn't specifically outlawed in equal rights laws (and those have nothing to do with saying stuff on twitter).

I think some people are missing the point. Nobody is saying they are not entitled to eat. But the issue here is, eating while on the ground during boarding?? Never seen that. Ever. Well except now.

Etheereal wrote:

SierraPacific wrote:

It seems like United is the only airline these days that the regional carriers provide a better in-flight experience than mainline

I'm one hundred percent sure even NK provides a better service than them.

I'm one hundred percent sure you've never been on Spirit.

I'm a 5 year GS, 1MM on UA. I am loyal to United mainly because they fly where I need to go and Mileage Plus is the absolute best program out there (I use my miles to fly F on Star Alliance carriers). I fly 100% biz international and 90% F domestic.

I can be totally honest and say my "BAD" experiences far out weigh the "GOOD" - I won't bother counting the "GREAT" experiences.

Usually, on Intl, it's serve the meal, lights out -- good bye -- and all the FA's disappear until the arrival meal is served. I'll admit, I like to enjoy some cocktails and wine on the long flights. 99% of flights, I have to get up and go to the galley and ask for anything after the initial meal service. The last flight the FA was so rude when I asked, I told her she was just that, rude -- and went back to my seat. The pursor actually come to apologize and offered free points - which I declined.

As well, 95% of the time if you go and ask for a glass of wine in one galley, they will check and say they are out (chardonnay is notoriously under stocked). All you have to do is go to the other galley and "MAGIC" they have some.

I know their number one priority is safety but they still have to provide good service when I am paying $6000 for a r/t ticket.

sofianec wrote:

XAM2175 wrote:

sofianec wrote:

I believe she spoke on her own behalf and since Mr Honeypot is a media public personality due to his numerous contributions She was exercising her First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution is the one that goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

Amen to that!

Glad you agree that United has the right to fire the FA without having violated her constitutional rights.

WTXJET wrote:

Reading the responses indicating the poor customer service of UA, especially Inflight Services. Keep in mind, from my perspective, AA is not any better. I could go on and on about the state of airline customer service in the USA. Other words, it's not just a UA problem.

This is very true. It's a miracle AA's able to control the social media postings by their employees as much as they have. There are many AA FA's that would make Gianna look like a saint if they had uncensored access to post on social media.

Now is the best time to narrate an incident that happened many years ago,in 1970. My uncle and a friend of his decided to go to Madagascar on business and when he returned to Greece after two years he had many stories to relate. They flew on Air France and returned on Alitalia or the other way around. Anyway,they were seated in row one in economy and during mealtime the curtain was open and they witnessed a scene in first class: a passenger raged and fumed because the crew supposedly had no champagne to serve him with his meal. And the scene went on,the passenger accepted no excuses. And they both had a good time laughing at the man "in the front seat" who insisted and complained. Finally the crew gave in and as my uncle said in awe "they opened champagne for him!" He did not understand that the passenger knew his rights and that the crew was lying to him. At last they landed, and the passenger said: "I have come to meet the representatives of that company". "That's us!" Said my uncle. "And we were laughing at him the whole time!" That goes to say that it has always happened even in the best homes!

KLASM83 wrote:

Man, UA really hasn't recovered from the Glenn and Jeff days.

I will hope that Oscar can turn it around, but when morale is in the dumps and it causes the cranky employees, it's a mark that unfortunately lasts for a while.

UA still has a culture problem but is working on it. Slowly. I have met some new employees that have high morale and are fresh new faces, and most of the Jeff and Glenn individuals higher up are now looking for new jobs.

One of which I met indirectly as he interviewed at my former employer. Very interesting interview...

ltbewr wrote:

UA executive management needs to be firm with employees and their employee unions as to such bad service, bad behaviors and talking about the job in their real identity and connection to UA in personal social media. These posts on social media are likely against their work rules, may violate confidentiality agreements, disclose even to the point of violations of Federal laws as to security weaknesses and personal info as to their own, other crew members and passengers. There needs to be improvements in continuing training as to service and behavior of cabin crews.

This not only goes for the airlines but anyone in the industry. Even though I left my position as a network planning consultant in August of last year. , I am still bound by the NDA's I signed. This is because many routes and other projects I worked on are still in progress and are extremely sensitive subjects. I also have to tread lightly when talking about projects that I worked on, I can only do vague references to data and say "hey I worked on that, cool it came to life", even though I may have some knowledge that a route is going to be announced weeks or months beforehand still.

It really irks me when we have people like GlobalCabatoge (or however his name is spelled) or some other individuals that claim they have "internal sources" and are citing things that I know only a handful of individuals know about (including myself). Its also shocking how a public representative of the company such as this one on Twitter is allowed to go full ham for a while.

In a recent UA flight I took (HNL-ORD), the welcome announcement ended with, "If you require any assistance, please feel free to approach our crew of dedicated safety professionals." Just sounded so odd.

This thread is what makes me laugh about A-net. 170 plus posts about a flight attendant who goes on a completely inappropriate twitter rant....which is why I absolutely abhore social media and the self absorbed people who post on it. In contrast, PSA is in the middle of what’s going to be a WEEK plus long meltdown causing a scheduling disaster for tens of thousands of people and that thread is.... 45 posts long. Seriously people. I can sum up the issue like this: some UAL flight attendants are surly. I’ve experienced great and horrible flight attendants at every US Airline. Some people shouldn’t tweet. Not sure why that takes 175 posts. I log into A net to see interesting things about the industry. After 3 days of this being on the front page I can’t BELIEVE you people aren’t bored...

Claiming that FA's are primarily there for your safety is like saying teachers are primarily there for children's safety during fire drills. It's absolute BS. For that matter, aren't we ALL here for others' safety?? I'm a "fire drill floor leader" at my office in case of fire. Does that mean my company pays me to be here primarily for everyone's safety?

If a stranger tripped in the street I would help him/her up and out of the street. So I guess I'm here for his/her safety as well!

Being here "for everyone's safety" is aka being a decent human being! The pretension of some people today is truly mind boggling.

FAs are there primarily for the safety of the passengers, that’s undispatable! If that weren’t the case, than Airlines wouldn’t have them at all. Now that being said, there’s a differ between primarily and only, and FAs are there for passenger comfort as well. However, there is absolutely nothing wrong with stating, primarily for your safety when it’s the truth!

XAM2175 wrote:

sofianec wrote:

I believe she spoke on her own behalf and since Mr Honeypot is a media public personality due to his numerous contributions She was exercising her First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution is the one that goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

I was waiting for someone to say that. It amazes me the number of people that think the first amendment means anything goes. No, it doesn't. It only pertains to how the *government* controls the speech of its citizens.

avi8tir wrote:

I'm a 5 year GS, 1MM on UA. I am loyal to United mainly because they fly where I need to go and Mileage Plus is the absolute best program out there (I use my miles to fly F on Star Alliance carriers). I fly 100% biz international and 90% F domestic.

I can be totally honest and say my "BAD" experiences far out weigh the "GOOD" - I won't bother counting the "GREAT" experiences.

Usually, on Intl, it's serve the meal, lights out -- good bye -- and all the FA's disappear until the arrival meal is served. I'll admit, I like to enjoy some cocktails and wine on the long flights. 99% of flights, I have to get up and go to the galley and ask for anything after the initial meal service. The last flight the FA was so rude when I asked, I told her she was just that, rude -- and went back to my seat. The pursor actually come to apologize and offered free points - which I declined.

As well, 95% of the time if you go and ask for a glass of wine in one galley, they will check and say they are out (chardonnay is notoriously under stocked). All you have to do is go to the other galley and "MAGIC" they have some.

I know their number one priority is safety but they still have to provide good service when I am paying $6000 for a r/t ticket.

I am only 1k and fly 90% paid F domestically in the US and upgraded to J internationally a couple of times annually....and I concur. While I have the occasional fantastic crew, most of the US crews I experience are mailing it in. There ARE some though that are absolutely delightful though. I won't name names, but if you fly certain routes as much as I do, some of the FAs eventually start to think of some of us fliers as "family".

Not sure what’s worse, the FA or those who defend her actions. Sad thing is - no one really surprised.

Terminate her and send a message to the FAs - Customers, particularly premium, pay for not only safety but the service level that’s ADVERTISED on the menu and in the marketing.

Provide it - or move on Gianna.

luvfa wrote:

FAs are there primarily for the safety of the passengers, that’s undispatable! If that weren’t the case, than Airlines wouldn’t have them at all.

This is true; if not for federal law requiring X number of flight attendants, you'd see exactly one or two aboard, in F class only. And there'd be vending machines where the rear galley currently is.

EA CO AS wrote:

And there'd be vending machines where the rear galley currently is.

...and the vending machines would be scruffy and not working half the time. You might occasionally get a complimentary peanut though.

mm320cap wrote:

This thread is what makes me laugh about A-net. 170 plus posts about a flight attendant who goes on a completely inappropriate twitter rant....which is why I absolutely abhore social media and the self absorbed people who post on it. In contrast, PSA is in the middle of what’s going to be a WEEK plus long meltdown causing a scheduling disaster for tens of thousands of people and that thread is.... 45 posts long. Seriously people. I can sum up the issue like this: some UAL flight attendants are surly. I’ve experienced great and horrible flight attendants at every US Airline. Some people shouldn’t tweet. Not sure why that takes 175 posts. I log into A net to see interesting things about the industry. After 3 days of this being on the front page I can’t BELIEVE you people aren’t bored...

Thank you! I keep checking to see if United has been shut down over all the outrage.

XAM2175 wrote:

sofianec wrote:

I believe she spoke on her own behalf and since Mr Honeypot is a media public personality due to his numerous contributions She was exercising her First Amendment rights.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution is the one that goes:

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

UA, or any other employer, making it a condition of employment that employees don't misrepresent the company is not "Congress... abridging the freedom of speech".

I take issues with companies sacking people over their personal lives. However, when someone misrepresents your company, you have all the privileges to drag her out of their

"Anybody else getting a good chuckle out this? It doesn't get much better than a points blogger and an FA in a Twitter war! Childish from both sides."

Yep.

I'm also a million-miler (all domestic flying and AC codeshares - no overseas flying). I just want to make my connecting flights without running. Drinks, snacks, and witty banter with the FAs are a plus - but are not required. But when I do order a drink, I add to the request, "Mix it any way you like."


But . . . if everyone leaves me alone with a hot, gooey Uno pizza slice and a *large* bottle of blended red wine, I'm a happy camper.

The earbuds go in, and you won't hear from me again until we land.

Here I am again (perhaps I’ll be called entitled?) but this hasn’t been my experience. I just checked my lifetime miles: 2,952,492 - almost 3 million. In 30 years I had ONE bad FA who made a bigoted remark not realizing I belonged to the minority they insulted. That was 10 years ago or so. I complained and got a call with the appropriate apology words said to me.
Otherwise ALL the UA FA’s I have encountered have been neutral to really nice.
I bet United is reading this and twitter and they will take action. It’s not like they don’t know they need to fix this big perception problem they have.
BTW: they have one young FA named Joel Patterson who is spectacular, loves to make his passengers happy and greets them all with a big smile- and his uniform looks like he just walked out of a Brooks Brothers ad after a 10 hour flight. It’s great to see him on board my flights.
Yes, there are some sloppy looking ones and I have a feeling they will need to sharpen up, as more FAs like Mr Patterson come on board.

kgaiflyer wrote:

"Anybody else getting a good chuckle out this? It doesn't get much better than a points blogger and an FA in a Twitter war! Childish from both sides."

Yep.

I'm also a million-miler (all domestic flying and AC codeshares - no overseas flying). I just want to make my connecting flights without running. Drinks, snacks, and witty banter with the FAs are a plus - but are not required. But when I do order a drink, I add to the request, "Mix it any way you like."


But . . . if everyone leaves me alone with a hot, gooey Uno pizza slice and a *large* bottle of blended red wine, I'm a happy camper.

The earbuds go in, and you won't hear from me again until we land.

So you don't think paying thousands of dollars for a business class seat entitles you to the drinks and food that are advertised? They're just a plus? It's a lucky thing for airlines that many people disagree with you because, otherwise, business class wouldn't exist and overall fares would likely be higher.

Good for you with your own opinion but having a different opinion doesn't make the blogger childish.

Antarius wrote:

767333ER wrote:

ual763 wrote:

As if this isn't bad enough, she then eventually goes into the typical "my job is a safety professional, food service is just a perk", that US FAs seem to carry with them to the grave. It literally makes me sick just reading this.

It shouldn't ever be an excuse for bad service, but that line is partly true. Safety and security first, then service, unfortunately most passengers and just about anyone that doesn't work in an airline or know these things doesn't realize that even if there is not a security threat or emergency, they still are doing a lot of things to ensure safety. I was told by a pilot whom I know very well that he thinks their job is in fact harder than his after having been in their cabin trainer during his training. A FA that does the service stuff bad gets all the flack and no one likes to get bad service, but you are still safe at the end of the day. One that does the safety stuff bad may go unnoticed by the passengers, but it would be a risk to their lives, yet most don't see that because most even on this website do not understand this aspect of the job so much.

Having said that, what happened here was awful, surely any proffessionally trained cabin crew can do better than this if they give any effort at all.

Safety first means that if the pilot calls for jumpseats, that takes priority over drink service. It does not mean the FAs can skip service if they dont feel like it.

If airlines the world over can remain safe and provide service, I do not see how these are mutually exclusive.

But I didn’t say they are, I in fact explicitly said it’s not an excuse to provide bad service, but it is the key focus of the job at the end of the day and you are grossly oversimplifying that aspect of the job. The problem with this forum is that we don’t have very many participants that do this job (or any job on a plane for that matter) so no one will educate people here.

The story has been picked up by Fox News.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/06/2 ... rvice.html

And Travel Pulse:
https://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlin ... fE.twitter

767333ER wrote:

Antarius wrote:

767333ER wrote:

It shouldn't ever be an excuse for bad service, but that line is partly true. Safety and security first, then service, unfortunately most passengers and just about anyone that doesn't work in an airline or know these things doesn't realize that even if there is not a security threat or emergency, they still are doing a lot of things to ensure safety. I was told by a pilot whom I know very well that he thinks their job is in fact harder than his after having been in their cabin trainer during his training. A FA that does the service stuff bad gets all the flack and no one likes to get bad service, but you are still safe at the end of the day. One that does the safety stuff bad may go unnoticed by the passengers, but it would be a risk to their lives, yet most don't see that because most even on this website do not understand this aspect of the job so much.

Having said that, what happened here was awful, surely any proffessionally trained cabin crew can do better than this if they give any effort at all.

Safety first means that if the pilot calls for jumpseats, that takes priority over drink service. It does not mean the FAs can skip service if they dont feel like it.

If airlines the world over can remain safe and provide service, I do not see how these are mutually exclusive.

But I didn’t say they are, I in fact explicitly said it’s not an excuse to provide bad service, but it is the key focus of the job at the end of the day and you are grossly oversimplifying that aspect of the job. The problem with this forum is that we don’t have very many participants that do this job (or any job on a plane for that matter) so no one will educate people here.

You talk about it like it's an unbelievably complex process. No one is doubting that they do a lot for safety. I'm sure it's stressful. But it's a job! Every job has behind-the-scenes stress and processes that you have to go through. What bothers me is that you and others seem to think that FA's are somehow more special than everyone else. As I said in my earlier post, a teacher could be considered there for a child's safety. But if he/she is not teaching the kids anything and just keeping them safe, no one would think that's acceptable. A flight attendant should "attend" to customers AND keep them safe.

In this case, clearly the stress of keeping customers safe wasn't that high since they were eating meals during boarding.

I concur with VC10er. I have traveled with UA since my very first airplane flight in 1964. I had trouble remembering a bad flight attendant. They are neutral to outstanding. Recently, I found one cleaning out the bathroom probably twice on a 5 hour flight on a 737. But, clearly, there are some difficult ones out there.

Travel bloggers and "million milers" don't know everything. Both the pilots and FA's meals are now cooked and served on first class dinnerware because they were previously done so on plastic...which melted into the food.

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often. Also the comments that we can skip a meal might be right, but if you work on a plane and you maybe have 3 flights behind you already, this might be very wrong. I heard of collegues on other airline breaking together because they didnt eat or drink too much (which sometimes isnt possible due to time). If I say that i want to eat something, because I couldnt on my last 3 sectors, the captain will delay the ebtire boarding process (not sure if they do it at United too). Because I want everyone to reach their destination in time, I would rather eat in the rear galley while boarding (in case I have the rear door). I can tell you one thing.. if I dont eat enough and I have some flights behind me, I cant concentrate anymore.. and thats something very important (so we can evacuate the plane for example.. the only factor then is the passengers who think they know everything better and also take their carry on outside dueing evac like we could see so many times)

happycrew wrote:

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often.

All that means, is that if you are in the middle of food/beverage service and an emergency may happen, you are to prioritize the handling of the emergency/safety precautions over the handling of the food & drink service. It doesn’t mean you can provide crappy service in a non-emergency situation which happens to be, like, thankfully, 99% of the time.

happycrew wrote:

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often. Also the comments that we can skip a meal might be right, but if you work on a plane and you maybe have 3 flights behind you already, this might be very wrong. I heard of collegues on other airline breaking together because they didnt eat or drink too much (which sometimes isnt possible due to time). If I say that i want to eat something, because I couldnt on my last 3 sectors, the captain will delay the ebtire boarding process (not sure if they do it at United too). Because I want everyone to reach their destination in time, I would rather eat in the rear galley while boarding (in case I have the rear door). I can tell you one thing.. if I dont eat enough and I have some flights behind me, I cant concentrate anymore.. and thats something very important (so we can evacuate the plane for example.. the only factor then is the passengers who think they know everything better and also take their carry on outside dueing evac like we could see so many times)

I too am a crew member for a major European carrier. I too am fully aware that safety takes priority over service. However I have service standards which I am expected (and paid) to follow. Plus I also have my own personal standards and pride in myself so I always try to reflect that in my job. I treat passengers as customers which they are, they hopefully leave the flight knowing they got what they paid for and maybe exceeded expectations.

There is absolutely no excuse for rudeness towards a customer even if the customer is proving to be a challenge. Once you start treating your customers with contempt it’s time to leave!

ual763 wrote:

happycrew wrote:

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often.

All that means, is that if you are in the middle of food/beverage service and an emergency may happen, you are to prioritize the handling of the emergency/safety precautions over the handling of the food & drink service. It doesn’t mean you can provide crappy service in a non-emergency situation which happens to be, like, thankfully, 99% of the time.

It means, we dont even have service sometimes. I guess I know much better what it means than anyone else here (except the other flight attendants). Fly with some cheap airline and you know how much service is part of our work

ual763 wrote:

The story has been picked up by Fox News.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/06/2 ... rvice.html

And Travel Pulse:
https://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlin ... fE.twitter

And A.net got referenced in the articles stating that while the FA deleted her twitter account, the screen shots are here

ER757 wrote:

ual763 wrote:

The story has been picked up by Fox News.
http://www.foxnews.com/travel/2018/06/2 ... rvice.html

And Travel Pulse:
https://www.travelpulse.com/news/airlin ... fE.twitter

And A.net got referenced in the articles stating that while the FA deleted her twitter account, the screen shots are here

That FOX story painted the travel blogger as quite a "french bath", but most here say he's a good guy so if you don't know that ahead of time, it doesn't reflect well on him I feel...

VC10er wrote:

Here I am again (perhaps I’ll be called entitled?) but this hasn’t been my experience. I just checked my lifetime miles: 2,952,492 - almost 3 million. In 30 years I had ONE bad FA who made a bigoted remark not realizing I belonged to the minority they insulted. That was 10 years ago or so. I complained and got a call with the appropriate apology words said to me.
Otherwise ALL the UA FA’s I have encountered have been neutral to really nice.
I bet United is reading this and twitter and they will take action. It’s not like they don’t know they need to fix this big perception problem they have.
BTW: they have one young FA named Joel Patterson who is spectacular, loves to make his passengers happy and greets them all with a big smile- and his uniform looks like he just walked out of a Brooks Brothers ad after a 10 hour flight. It’s great to see him on board my flights.
Yes, there are some sloppy looking ones and I have a feeling they will need to sharpen up, as more FAs like Mr Patterson come on board.

Joel is great, used to be at VX...one of the best I have come across.

happycrew wrote:

ual763 wrote:

happycrew wrote:

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often.

All that means, is that if you are in the middle of food/beverage service and an emergency may happen, you are to prioritize the handling of the emergency/safety precautions over the handling of the food & drink service. It doesn’t mean you can provide crappy service in a non-emergency situation which happens to be, like, thankfully, 99% of the time.

It means, we dont even have service sometimes. I guess I know much better what it means than anyone else here (except the other flight attendants). Fly with some cheap airline and you know how much service is part of our work

That doesnt make any sense.......at all

1- Safety is indeed your priority- as you have stated and I agree.
2- What UAL763 said also makes sense. You are to only prioritize safety in an event of an emergency. At other times, you are to serve the customers because thats part your job description.
3- You combat his statement by saying, "we dont even have service sometimes"......so you're implying, as a cabin crew, in a none-emergency situation, you are to strap yourself in the jump seat and deflect any form of service? Please help me clarify your statement.
4- OR are you implying during the boarding process, you are exempt from providing service and that its ok for you to eat infront of the passengers.

And to be frank, in a discussion about "bad flight attendants", a new user joining airliners.net with the username "happy crew" is ironic.

Perhaps airlines should publisize that the primary role of Cabin Crew is to get you out of a blazing plane.

Watch ticket sales react to that.

Duplicate post. Someone beat me to it.

happycrew wrote:

ual763 wrote:

happycrew wrote:

Hi,

i am a flight attendant working for another airline in another country. Our priority is safety and nothing else. Offering food and drinks is secondary. Trainers tell us that very often.

All that means, is that if you are in the middle of food/beverage service and an emergency may happen, you are to prioritize the handling of the emergency/safety precautions over the handling of the food & drink service. It doesn’t mean you can provide crappy service in a non-emergency situation which happens to be, like, thankfully, 99% of the time.

It means, we dont even have service sometimes. I guess I know much better what it means than anyone else here (except the other flight attendants). Fly with some cheap airline and you know how much service is part of our work

I have flown Wow Air (a ULCC) several times. I have found the attitude of the flight attendants, as well as the service, to be better than many U.S. domestic carriers in the back. I’d love to find 35 inch pitch in economy here stateside . Your statement is a generalization.