If you look at the chart you posted, there is a service charge of $65 for F/C and $25 for B/C each way on DFW-LHR in the over 25 year section. Considering that an over 25 year employee is getting only a $130 break on a DFW-LHR round-trip for riding in coach, it seems to me that the misleading statement would be to say that "International travel is free with 25 years company seniority."
Non Rev policies after merger?
- Thread starter USnonrev16
- Start date
Chill out!!!
I made a typo; I left out the word "coach."
It should have read "International coach travel is free with 25 years company seniority." Taxes and fees should be the same at all airlines. The examples cited by the US Airways posters did not appear to include taxes and fees.
I made a typo; I left out the word "coach."
It should have read "International coach travel is free with 25 years company seniority." Taxes and fees should be the same at all airlines. The examples cited by the US Airways posters did not appear to include taxes and fees.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
Thanks for taking the time to post the info. Based on what I'm seeing, it looks like the system that US has in place is less expensive for the employees. I'm sure that when and if the time comes that there will be some sort of a combination of each system.
You were the one that was so quick to call my statements misleading. And, I still say that International coach travel is free with 25 years seniority IS misleading if you fail to mention that there is still $174.00 in taxes and fees to be paid. By the way, yes those should be the same from one airline to the next. But, after 5000 years of fighting among those Semitic first cousins, there should be peace in the Middle East. I have a f/a friend who flew to Australia last year on vacation. He was on Qantas going over and Delta coming back. The taxes and fees that DL charged him for SYD-LAX were less than what AA charged him from DFW-LAX. And, as a courtesy to an OAL traveler, he was upgraded to First Class at no additional charge. Go figure.
When US and HP combined they went with DOH after the US folks fought for seniority. I would expect something similar if AA & US merge.
Black Magic
Veteran
- Jan 4, 2008
- 937
- 553
That was only because that was what the majority (which was the east) wanted..Now guess what?? The tables will be turned...The majority will be on AA's side and they will want time of check-in as they currently have. Doug has even been on record stating that if he was starting a new airline he would rather have time of check-in for boarding priority.
I have experienced FCFS and seniority boarding and hands down, I prefer seniority.
Nonrev travel is by its nature unpredictable, seniority at least gives you a hint as to your chances. Couple that with the huge commuting population at US, which, by the way, the present US management referenced when it developed the current policy at US, and it just makes sense. If you have the seniority, you can commute. If you don't, you don't.
What I don't get, is with all of the significant seniority dates at American, why they WOULDN"T want seniority boarding. They would have an AAdvantage. (Yup, pun intended)
Finally, if there's anything to angst about, it's the composition of the benefits. American's are hands down, inferior. At US, we fly for free. Period. Internationally, we pay the taxes. Thassit. If you want to upgrade, you pay for an upgrade. That is much better than paying by segment, etc. Admittedly, it would be nice to not have to pay to upgrade, but fundamentally, I would rather do that than pay every time I fly. Also, frankly if you're going to upgrade you should be prepared for it, dressed and everyone briefed to behave discreetly. If it was automatic, given the lowest common denominator, we'd probably lose it after a few months anyway.
I actually think that it benefits US for its employees to travel freely. We're the best advertisers of destinations and the benefits of travel. We're safety helpers if something goes wrong, quality control to a limited extent, admittedly not great, but stuff does filter back. . . and I flew a trip with an American non rev who hardly ever flew his own airline, it made more sense to use ZED on other carriers. What does that say about the company that you work for that you don't even use its services? It doesn't COST them anything to provide this benefit, if anything they only gain from it via ancillary revenue. Revenue that would go elsewhere if employees were just as well off using ZED as their own carrier.
I don't have a lot of hope that our policies will survive a merger, but clearly, ours is a better benefit, and given this industry, that's important.
Nonrev travel is by its nature unpredictable, seniority at least gives you a hint as to your chances. Couple that with the huge commuting population at US, which, by the way, the present US management referenced when it developed the current policy at US, and it just makes sense. If you have the seniority, you can commute. If you don't, you don't.
What I don't get, is with all of the significant seniority dates at American, why they WOULDN"T want seniority boarding. They would have an AAdvantage. (Yup, pun intended)
Finally, if there's anything to angst about, it's the composition of the benefits. American's are hands down, inferior. At US, we fly for free. Period. Internationally, we pay the taxes. Thassit. If you want to upgrade, you pay for an upgrade. That is much better than paying by segment, etc. Admittedly, it would be nice to not have to pay to upgrade, but fundamentally, I would rather do that than pay every time I fly. Also, frankly if you're going to upgrade you should be prepared for it, dressed and everyone briefed to behave discreetly. If it was automatic, given the lowest common denominator, we'd probably lose it after a few months anyway.
I actually think that it benefits US for its employees to travel freely. We're the best advertisers of destinations and the benefits of travel. We're safety helpers if something goes wrong, quality control to a limited extent, admittedly not great, but stuff does filter back. . . and I flew a trip with an American non rev who hardly ever flew his own airline, it made more sense to use ZED on other carriers. What does that say about the company that you work for that you don't even use its services? It doesn't COST them anything to provide this benefit, if anything they only gain from it via ancillary revenue. Revenue that would go elsewhere if employees were just as well off using ZED as their own carrier.
I don't have a lot of hope that our policies will survive a merger, but clearly, ours is a better benefit, and given this industry, that's important.
Good post overall, but I REALLY liked this part. It speaks quite poorly when, as an airline employee, you won't fly your own airline for just about anything, tempered with logic. I'm not talking about it being a negative that I take Qantas instead of US; it's understandable that they just don't fly there. To not fly your own airline because of service, cost, reliability, things like that, is a VERY bad thing. And nonrevs DO talk, I dont' care what the 'policy' says.
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
That's a pretty harsh comment. Not everyone is in a situation that permits them to move at the drop of a hat due to base and/or station closures. Some people have children still in school that they don't want to uproot midstream, and others may be caring for an ill family member in their home area. Some may also have spouses that have a decent job that they can't afford to leave in favor of the other persons job. I guess that it's an easy comment to make if you aren't in any of the above situations.
Yeah it is and so is telling me my vacation is less important than their commute. Look, working for the airlines is fun but it is not easy. People have to make choices on whether to keep their job and commute or quit. The purpose of pass priveleges is not just to get you to work. There are other jobs besides airline jobs.
whatkindoffreshhell
Veteran
Reminds me of that WN flight PIT-PHL that was always loaded w/ commuting senior attendants. Those threads were good!
wings396
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 3,672
- 1,122
I never said that anyones commute is more important than your vacation, nor did it state the opposite. I responded to your cold remark about the move or quit position that you took on the subject. Unless you are, or have been in that position you can't relate. In case you haven't noticed, decent jobs are hard to come by today. The fact is NOBODY wants to commute, but in some cases they must to surive and support their families. FWIW, I'm in favor of going by DOH seniority for travel, as it is a cut and dry issue with no doubts as to who MAY have checked in sooner. I for one can't see 30 people all sitting at their computer 24 hours in advance waiting to pounce on their check in spot as if they were waiting to purchase concert tickets. As I'm sure you are aware that the internet and/or computers can go down at any given time, and in that case you or I could be SOL on the list.
gabby
Senior
- Jul 24, 2006
- 306
- 48
Well at PSA we open and close bases regularly. Making commuting by airline the only choice.
OK, if you choose to stay with the airlines you are going to have to commute. Suit yourself. There is life after the airlines. I found that out myself and wonder why I didn't leave sooner. Now I don't fly non-rev because I have such a crap boarding priority and I just pay to fly. Good luck all..........
BTW, I was the original PSA.
