Here is another letter from Brother Santos exposing the hypocrisy of AA management.
Dear Mr Arpey,
I see we're suing a man called Wilfredo Torres. Something drove this man
to call you 200 times in a single day. Even so, we have a policy of not
suing our passengers. This is what flight attendants & gate agents are
told. Yet, AA is suing Mr Torres for tying up your phone lines. What
really irks me is when passengers attack/assault/harass/threaten our
frontline employees, workers are expected to take it in the chin.
However, when it comes to the sanctity of your telephone the
testosterone is surging in the legal department. This leaves employees
believing your phone is higher up on the evolutionary scale than workers.
An incident occurred where a flight attendant had her shoulder separated
by an irate passenger. The airplane diverted & the passenger removed.
Certainly this unwarranted attack would nudge AA legal to spring into
action . . . not exactly. After the passenger's employer picked up the
tab for the diversion, our lawyers returned to the golf course. So what
if a flight attendant was injured in an unprovoked attack. This may
violate the Geneva Convention but SmackDown at 30,000 feet is good for
business. Ultimately, the flight attendant had to seek justice in civil
court on her paltry salary.
Several years ago, a gate agent was verbally accosted by a platinum
passenger. As luck would have it (most of it bad luck), the incident was
witnessed by an exec, who viewed the world through spread sheets, &
brought charges against the agent. This poor girl was given the option
of a career day discipline or termination. There was no evidence. This
was about an exec exerting his influence to calm a ranting passenger.
She wouldn't submit to corporate intimidation & was fired. She
eventually got her job back when NYS interceded on her behalf & AA
couldn't prove its case for termination.
As gate agents unanimously tell me, in conflicts with passengers they
seek resolution with the captains rather than management. Management
would cheerfully let the characters from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre
board an airplane as long as they purchased tickets. Regrettably,
management is immersed in profits & numbers crunching to the extent that
they don't understand the human equation. I knew a mechanic who was spat
in the face by a passenger during a lengthy maintenance delay. This
wasn't worth a moment of our lawyers' time, but alarms rang in the legal
department when Mr Torres tied up your phone lines.
Mr Arpey, you won't find many employees sympathetic to the lawsuit
against Mr Torres, because AA isn't sympathetic when passengers
attack/assault/harass/threaten employees.
Sincerely,
G Santos
mechanic & burdening the sacrifice @ JFK
AMR shareholder
As Gary brought out it seems that passengers can physically assualt front line employess and AA will do nothing to protect them or seek justice for them but ring Arpey one too many times and the full financial power of a $20 billion/year airlines legal department will be brought down upon you.
Dear Mr Arpey,
I see we're suing a man called Wilfredo Torres. Something drove this man
to call you 200 times in a single day. Even so, we have a policy of not
suing our passengers. This is what flight attendants & gate agents are
told. Yet, AA is suing Mr Torres for tying up your phone lines. What
really irks me is when passengers attack/assault/harass/threaten our
frontline employees, workers are expected to take it in the chin.
However, when it comes to the sanctity of your telephone the
testosterone is surging in the legal department. This leaves employees
believing your phone is higher up on the evolutionary scale than workers.
An incident occurred where a flight attendant had her shoulder separated
by an irate passenger. The airplane diverted & the passenger removed.
Certainly this unwarranted attack would nudge AA legal to spring into
action . . . not exactly. After the passenger's employer picked up the
tab for the diversion, our lawyers returned to the golf course. So what
if a flight attendant was injured in an unprovoked attack. This may
violate the Geneva Convention but SmackDown at 30,000 feet is good for
business. Ultimately, the flight attendant had to seek justice in civil
court on her paltry salary.
Several years ago, a gate agent was verbally accosted by a platinum
passenger. As luck would have it (most of it bad luck), the incident was
witnessed by an exec, who viewed the world through spread sheets, &
brought charges against the agent. This poor girl was given the option
of a career day discipline or termination. There was no evidence. This
was about an exec exerting his influence to calm a ranting passenger.
She wouldn't submit to corporate intimidation & was fired. She
eventually got her job back when NYS interceded on her behalf & AA
couldn't prove its case for termination.
As gate agents unanimously tell me, in conflicts with passengers they
seek resolution with the captains rather than management. Management
would cheerfully let the characters from the Texas Chainsaw Massacre
board an airplane as long as they purchased tickets. Regrettably,
management is immersed in profits & numbers crunching to the extent that
they don't understand the human equation. I knew a mechanic who was spat
in the face by a passenger during a lengthy maintenance delay. This
wasn't worth a moment of our lawyers' time, but alarms rang in the legal
department when Mr Torres tied up your phone lines.
Mr Arpey, you won't find many employees sympathetic to the lawsuit
against Mr Torres, because AA isn't sympathetic when passengers
attack/assault/harass/threaten employees.
Sincerely,
G Santos
mechanic & burdening the sacrifice @ JFK
AMR shareholder
As Gary brought out it seems that passengers can physically assualt front line employess and AA will do nothing to protect them or seek justice for them but ring Arpey one too many times and the full financial power of a $20 billion/year airlines legal department will be brought down upon you.
