A&e's New Series Airline
- Thread starter mrman
- Start date
Since I see a lot of this on a daily basis (luckily not all in one day, that would be hell), the things that I see glaring in the stories were
1) Why should WN have to give people free tickets because some idiot made an a&& out of himself and couldnt control their kids? It sounded like the crew did everything they could to try to get things under control and the group wouldnt listen. I know it sucks to be on a flight like that, but it wasnt WN doing it and they shouldnt have to "give" another trip to the people onboard just to get them to fly again. A $50 voucher AND that wasnt good enough. The lady wanted a free ticket. I'd say, No. Sorry the flight was unenjoyable due to ANOTHER PASSENGER, we did all we could (turning on the seatbelt sign and telling them to sit is going about as far as they could do without forcibly strapping the kids in and taping the guys mouth shut) and WN wont pay for it. If you want to sue the guy yourself for making the flight bad, have your lawyer contact our legal department and we'll see what we can do about getting the guys info to you.
2) Why should WN have to pay for hotels during the blackout. I know it appears that the DTW people were told otherwise, but I've personally told people and documented their record no hotel only to have the other city call back asking if we said to do hotels. Maybe the customers should sue the power company in Ohio (Maybe WN should for reimbursement.?)
It amazes me what people want to be compensated for when things are beyond the airlines control. A mechanical, crew problem I can see where they would have a reason to be upset, but weather, power blackout and udderly classless or idiot fellow passengers, sorry dont see it.
PS-Saw the show for the first time tonight and thought it was pretty good. The agents for the most part did a good job dealing with the problems they had and all the fellow agents who have had to deal with the exact same problems feel for you. The job doesnt involve just pulling tickets or typing on the computer some days.
1) Why should WN have to give people free tickets because some idiot made an a&& out of himself and couldnt control their kids? It sounded like the crew did everything they could to try to get things under control and the group wouldnt listen. I know it sucks to be on a flight like that, but it wasnt WN doing it and they shouldnt have to "give" another trip to the people onboard just to get them to fly again. A $50 voucher AND that wasnt good enough. The lady wanted a free ticket. I'd say, No. Sorry the flight was unenjoyable due to ANOTHER PASSENGER, we did all we could (turning on the seatbelt sign and telling them to sit is going about as far as they could do without forcibly strapping the kids in and taping the guys mouth shut) and WN wont pay for it. If you want to sue the guy yourself for making the flight bad, have your lawyer contact our legal department and we'll see what we can do about getting the guys info to you.
2) Why should WN have to pay for hotels during the blackout. I know it appears that the DTW people were told otherwise, but I've personally told people and documented their record no hotel only to have the other city call back asking if we said to do hotels. Maybe the customers should sue the power company in Ohio (Maybe WN should for reimbursement.?)
It amazes me what people want to be compensated for when things are beyond the airlines control. A mechanical, crew problem I can see where they would have a reason to be upset, but weather, power blackout and udderly classless or idiot fellow passengers, sorry dont see it.
PS-Saw the show for the first time tonight and thought it was pretty good. The agents for the most part did a good job dealing with the problems they had and all the fellow agents who have had to deal with the exact same problems feel for you. The job doesnt involve just pulling tickets or typing on the computer some days.
Since when is it "captivating" TV when some fat A$$ gets bumped from a flight. Not that watching somebody be told they need a seatbelt extender isn't fascinating.
This show is stupid. period. Why do I care to watch SWA agents chase an asian couple from terminal one to terminal four just to see if they make their flight? This is reality TV hitting the wall. SWA should be embarassed that they fell for the concept. There is a reason every other airline turned them down. No harm will come to SWA, people want cheap fares. nothing else matters. However, one has to wonder what self respecting professional organizaton would care to show their dirty laundry on TV. What the hell is the point?
This show is stupid. period. Why do I care to watch SWA agents chase an asian couple from terminal one to terminal four just to see if they make their flight? This is reality TV hitting the wall. SWA should be embarassed that they fell for the concept. There is a reason every other airline turned them down. No harm will come to SWA, people want cheap fares. nothing else matters. However, one has to wonder what self respecting professional organizaton would care to show their dirty laundry on TV. What the hell is the point?
I did not catch last night's episode, but will catch it on a re-run (hopefully). I enjoy what I have seen so far.
I do not see what has happened so far in the difficult customer situations as a black eye for WN and its customer service staff. I do think these episodes do show "opportunities for improvement". We all have "opportunities for improvement" wherever we work.
I do not see what has happened so far in the difficult customer situations as a black eye for WN and its customer service staff. I do think these episodes do show "opportunities for improvement". We all have "opportunities for improvement" wherever we work.
What exactly did Colleen Barrett, who made the final call on "Airline"..fall for?Ferlod U said:
She understood that the point of the show was to showcase Southwest Airlines, warts and all. The show has generated quite a bit of buzz about Southwest Airlines in the press and the aviation community in general. That is never a bad thing. The show has focused and engaged the employees of Southwest and given them the unique opportunity to see themselves through the customer's eyes. Frontline employees/leaders are using the show as an opportunity to open dialogues about better ways to take care of Southwest's customers. This is also, a good thing.
Southwest has always been about thinking outside the box. How about we wait until all 18 episodes have aired before deciding how "embarassed" Southwest should be. I guess Colleen doesn't think letting people know that her frontline has bad days just like anyone else is "dirty laundry" So far the worst the show has done is demonstrate that the people of SWA are human. Nothing embarassing about that.
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 1,453
No, reality TV hitting the wall would be a group of passengers plotting ways to bed down their seatmate while voting another "contestant" off the plane. Or a ramper posing as a millionaire to capture the heart of a group of lovely golddiggers. Or a gate agent calling out over the PA "Passenger Jones...will you accept this rose". "Reality TV" had hit the wall long before this.Ferlod U said:
While you and I might find this interesting, the general public really doesn't want to see the detail behind the scenes. There are infrequent specials on the behind the scenes of an airport/airline (similar to the british series) but they don't muster enough of an audience here to warrant an actual show.funguy2 said:
The truth behind delays is similar to the truth behind the North Pole. Kids don't really want to know the truth behind how their packages are made, purchased, and wrapped. It's far more exciting to envision elves doing all of the work and Santa delivering than it is to picture mommy and daddy going to Target to buy a present. Just as in delays...most passengers have a far more vivid impression of the "evil airline deeds" behind delays and they really don't have an interest in de-bunking the myths.
But hey...for those of us that do care...I would like to see it.
marco90821
Advanced
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2002
- Messages
- 223
- Reaction score
- 0
Wow, after watching three episodes I am convinced I would never fly SWA. The passengers you attract appear to be from some back woods area of WV...and this isn't just a few, it seems to be the majority. Then the employees do not even present themselves in a professional manner. The uniforms are awful, not to mention the number of obese employees. They need to offer "makeover for the SWA Folk."
KCFlyer
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2002
- Messages
- 11,538
- Reaction score
- 1,453
In 3 episodes, you saw maybe 15 of the more than 72 Million passengers they flew last year. I'm not an expert in statistics, but I believe that 15 (or hell 45 if you want to count the BMX team) is not enough to provide a representative sample of the "majority" of their passengers.marco90821 said:
Wow, after watching three episodes I am convinced I would never fly SWA.
The beauty of America is that everyone has that choice. Never is kinda like forever which is a very long time.
The passengers you attract appear to be from some back woods area of WV...and this isn't just a few, it seems to be the majority.
Ignoring the fact that this is a sweeping generalization what would you have SWA do? Interview passengers before accepting reservations to weed out the "undesirables"? Ban passengers from " back woods" parts of the country or lower socio-economic groups because some people would feel uncomfortable? Are "Back Woods West Virgnina" Dollars worth less than those from a part of the country that is percieved to be more "upscale"?
Then the employees do not even present themselves in a professional manner.
You mean like when they provided a homeless person with toiletries and clothing so he could travel. We have watched people who are likely having the worst work days of their lives with screaming irrational passengers AND television cameras in their faces. So far, no one has taken a swing at anyone yet. Professional is in the eye of the beholder.
The uniforms are awful,
I wonder where "Uniform Fashion Sense" ranks on the average passenger's list of important factors when choosing a carrier.
not to mention the number of obese employees.
That is one of the most offensive things I have read all I day...and I got up pretty early. As long as employees can do their jobs effectively, their size or lack thereof is irrelevant. Treating them in any other manner is unconscienable and illegal.
The beauty of America is that everyone has that choice. Never is kinda like forever which is a very long time.
The passengers you attract appear to be from some back woods area of WV...and this isn't just a few, it seems to be the majority.
Ignoring the fact that this is a sweeping generalization what would you have SWA do? Interview passengers before accepting reservations to weed out the "undesirables"? Ban passengers from " back woods" parts of the country or lower socio-economic groups because some people would feel uncomfortable? Are "Back Woods West Virgnina" Dollars worth less than those from a part of the country that is percieved to be more "upscale"?
Then the employees do not even present themselves in a professional manner.
You mean like when they provided a homeless person with toiletries and clothing so he could travel. We have watched people who are likely having the worst work days of their lives with screaming irrational passengers AND television cameras in their faces. So far, no one has taken a swing at anyone yet. Professional is in the eye of the beholder.
The uniforms are awful,
I wonder where "Uniform Fashion Sense" ranks on the average passenger's list of important factors when choosing a carrier.
not to mention the number of obese employees.
That is one of the most offensive things I have read all I day...and I got up pretty early. As long as employees can do their jobs effectively, their size or lack thereof is irrelevant. Treating them in any other manner is unconscienable and illegal.
diverboy
Member
And all of the old bitties that work the counter at all the "legacy" airlines are any better.. not too many young people there because they've all been furloughed.marco90821 said:
Agree with both of your points, tad.tadjr said:
What REALLY killed me in episode 3 was the whiny c*** from San Diego who got to MDW with her kids and was then totally p***** off that she missed her flight and expected WN to provide her with seats RIGHT NOW.
My god, was she a totally annoying person!
I'd have given her cab fare to ORD and told her that there were a lot more flights to SAN over there just to get rid of her! Especially since she kept going on about America West, who don't even fly out of MDW!
The MDW CSS handled her a lot more politely than I would've been able to...
I think Colleen made a mistake doing this show. WN doesn't need buzz. WN has an Aura about it! WN is perceived as the happy airline where everthing goes as planned. While I like this show and agree the WN employees do a really good job We see too many perceived warts and it makes WN look too much like the "legacy" airlines. I think a smaller less well known airline like Airtran or Frontier who are expanding and need the buzz would have been a better fit. WN has too much to lose and little to gain from this show.SWAFA30 said:
PS I REALLY love this show!!
skycruiser
Member
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2003
- Messages
- 70
- Reaction score
- 0
Hmmmm, your statement "Treating them in any other manner is unconscionable and illegal" sounds vaguely familiar to the episode in were a passenger of yours was told they were to large to fly in one seat and needed to purchase two. Talk about "unconscionable". LUV should just start charging folks by their weight and treat them as cargo. While, in theory that policy makes little sense, seeing it actually done, well that was "unconscionable"! The ironic thing about the fellow that was told he had to buy another seat was that the agent that told him this wasn't to much smaller herself. So how does that work out for LUV employees anyway? Is the same person that humiliates a paying passenger and forces them to buy another seat themselves obligated to the same policy when non-reving?SWAFA30 said:
