WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
Disappointed with DL 176 ATL DUB Jan 22, 2103
- Thread starter gizmo_sc
- Start date
Kev3188
Veteran
Kev3188
Veteran
True, though non-revving is rarely completely free these days, and if he was an OAL traveler, it almost certainly cost him/her something.
Lol.
If only people (non rev and paying alike) actually did that on a large scale... While we're at it, getting 'em to read the contract of carriage would be nice too.
Gate agents the world over should be so lucky!
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
[background=transparent]K and Q,[/background]
let me speak very directly.
as much as you would like to attempt to reduce the conversation to an opportunity to personally attack me, it is quite obvious that the discussion is about the protocol of using non-revenue travel benefits.
There is no desire or attempt to out anyone.... I am simply noting publicly what everyone else who critically reviewed the situation could have noted - posting personal information online is never a good idea but esp. so when you are complaining about a benefit that has been received in a system where protocol at every airline dictates a quiet, behind the scenes approach to resolving non-rev dissatisfacmments ontion.
The issue no longer became an issue of the quality of DL's product the instant the OP said that he was a non-rev. Sorry, but non-revs lose the opportunity to complain about the quality of the travel experience in a public forum.
No one here can miss that the two people on this forum who want to question the OP's right to comment online about DL's service are the same two people who have argued with me for months and years about the fact that DL has a culture that has overcome the power of labor to unionize its workforce. I spent almost a quarter of a century at DL and know full well what makes its culture work and where it doesn't work. To your consternation, I was dead right about where the representation issues would end up.
Doesn't really matter whether the OP paid a service fee of any amount or not.... if the source of the ticket was a travel-related benefit, he forfeits his right to public complain about his experience unless he wants to lose that benefit. There is an "agree" or "consent" box next to just about any contract in the world today... if you don't check the box or accept agreement, you don't get the service. The contract applies whether you have read it or not.
It is a question and discussion about non-rev protocol that is essentially identical at all US airlines. There is no attempt to shield "Ma Delta" from a harmful word.
There is a desire for readers of this forum to recognize that disparaging your travel experience on any airline is tantamount to an invitation to lose them.
Disconnect your emotion about DL's labor issues from the issue which is perfectly obvious for everyone else to see. And then directly address the issues that are really driving your responses and direct your responses to the people with whom you disagree instead of the oblique discussions which are intended to avoid discussing the real issue w/ the real people involved.
We can see through it.
In the meantime, protocol is unchanged that non-revs are not free to discuss their experiences publicly... which is the real issue which is being discussed here.
If you would like to discuss other issues, then feel free to do so... just don't try to cloak a half dozen other issues behind one that the rest of us can clearly see through.
Your turns.
let me speak very directly.
as much as you would like to attempt to reduce the conversation to an opportunity to personally attack me, it is quite obvious that the discussion is about the protocol of using non-revenue travel benefits.
There is no desire or attempt to out anyone.... I am simply noting publicly what everyone else who critically reviewed the situation could have noted - posting personal information online is never a good idea but esp. so when you are complaining about a benefit that has been received in a system where protocol at every airline dictates a quiet, behind the scenes approach to resolving non-rev dissatisfacmments ontion.
The issue no longer became an issue of the quality of DL's product the instant the OP said that he was a non-rev. Sorry, but non-revs lose the opportunity to complain about the quality of the travel experience in a public forum.
No one here can miss that the two people on this forum who want to question the OP's right to comment online about DL's service are the same two people who have argued with me for months and years about the fact that DL has a culture that has overcome the power of labor to unionize its workforce. I spent almost a quarter of a century at DL and know full well what makes its culture work and where it doesn't work. To your consternation, I was dead right about where the representation issues would end up.
Doesn't really matter whether the OP paid a service fee of any amount or not.... if the source of the ticket was a travel-related benefit, he forfeits his right to public complain about his experience unless he wants to lose that benefit. There is an "agree" or "consent" box next to just about any contract in the world today... if you don't check the box or accept agreement, you don't get the service. The contract applies whether you have read it or not.
It is a question and discussion about non-rev protocol that is essentially identical at all US airlines. There is no attempt to shield "Ma Delta" from a harmful word.
There is a desire for readers of this forum to recognize that disparaging your travel experience on any airline is tantamount to an invitation to lose them.
Disconnect your emotion about DL's labor issues from the issue which is perfectly obvious for everyone else to see. And then directly address the issues that are really driving your responses and direct your responses to the people with whom you disagree instead of the oblique discussions which are intended to avoid discussing the real issue w/ the real people involved.
We can see through it.
In the meantime, protocol is unchanged that non-revs are not free to discuss their experiences publicly... which is the real issue which is being discussed here.
If you would like to discuss other issues, then feel free to do so... just don't try to cloak a half dozen other issues behind one that the rest of us can clearly see through.
Your turns.
Kev3188
Veteran
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
labor relations were brought into the discussion because it is the clear dividing line between the posters on this topic.
Childishness is trying to use backhanded efforts to discredit someone regardless of the topic at hand.
It is you two who tried to foolishly argue that I am outing the OP - and you even had the nerve to suggest a cry for pitchforks.
Childishness is failing to admit that the issue is really non-rev protocol - because if you agreed, you would have to admit someone else is right.... the same someone who told you 4 years ago that DL would remain non-union at the choice of its employees.
Maturity is calling it the way it actually is instead of hiding behind and attempting to discredit other people.
The topic is about non-rev protocol. Nothing more. Feel free to contribute on that basis.
Childishness is trying to use backhanded efforts to discredit someone regardless of the topic at hand.
It is you two who tried to foolishly argue that I am outing the OP - and you even had the nerve to suggest a cry for pitchforks.
Childishness is failing to admit that the issue is really non-rev protocol - because if you agreed, you would have to admit someone else is right.... the same someone who told you 4 years ago that DL would remain non-union at the choice of its employees.
Maturity is calling it the way it actually is instead of hiding behind and attempting to discredit other people.
The topic is about non-rev protocol. Nothing more. Feel free to contribute on that basis.
Kev3188
Veteran
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,825
- 4,428
Did you miss your morning dose?
What the hell are you rambling about?
You obviously have more than a dozen issues in your head that you want to discuss.
Maybe you should turn it back to the one issue germane to the thread topic; your glee of someone losing the ability to travel on Delta after posting a less than stellar experience.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
The issue of the protocol of non-revs was established long before I joined the thread... no one else except you two have had any problem comprehending that non-rev travel benefits - even if they involve a fee - have requirements that bad experiences are supposed to be handled thru appropriate channels.
But you two wouldn't want to waste an opportunity to trash Delta even though the issue of non-rev travel protocol is far from exclusive to Delta.
You have wasted no expense trying to frame me as out to have someone's butt - in a conspiracy that you have dreamed up only in your own distorted minds.
The simple fact is that you two have railed against DL for thousands of combined posts - solely rooted in the fact that DL handed labor a resounding defeat - highlighting the fact that you two can't enact real change in real life so you try to pretend that you make a difference on the internet.....
Every post you two write is tarnished by the scratched lens with which you see life.
And as long as you two continue doing what you do, you can be absolutely assured there will be people like me who will demonstrate (with glee) the abject failure of your positions and actions.
This post quit being a post about DL's service the minute the OP said it was non-rev travel. It is about non-rev protocol.
Your responses are nothing more than another failing attempt to try to discredit the company that handed defeat to the movement which you chose to embrace as well as an attempt to discredit anyone who stops you from trashing DL, let alone supporting her.
Nothing more, nothing less.
BTW. did you two happen to notice the date in the header of the message?
But you two wouldn't want to waste an opportunity to trash Delta even though the issue of non-rev travel protocol is far from exclusive to Delta.
You have wasted no expense trying to frame me as out to have someone's butt - in a conspiracy that you have dreamed up only in your own distorted minds.
The simple fact is that you two have railed against DL for thousands of combined posts - solely rooted in the fact that DL handed labor a resounding defeat - highlighting the fact that you two can't enact real change in real life so you try to pretend that you make a difference on the internet.....
Every post you two write is tarnished by the scratched lens with which you see life.
And as long as you two continue doing what you do, you can be absolutely assured there will be people like me who will demonstrate (with glee) the abject failure of your positions and actions.
This post quit being a post about DL's service the minute the OP said it was non-rev travel. It is about non-rev protocol.
Your responses are nothing more than another failing attempt to try to discredit the company that handed defeat to the movement which you chose to embrace as well as an attempt to discredit anyone who stops you from trashing DL, let alone supporting her.
Nothing more, nothing less.
BTW. did you two happen to notice the date in the header of the message?
Kev3188
Veteran
Another fine example of an overwrought posting. Feel better now?
Tying any of the responses in this thread with labor relations is a lovely display of binary (and flawed) logic.
It's almost as if you're looking to gin up traffic on this forum, and finally found an opening to do so.
Once again, I've given you far more oxygen than was warranted.
Have fun.
Tying any of the responses in this thread with labor relations is a lovely display of binary (and flawed) logic.
It's almost as if you're looking to gin up traffic on this forum, and finally found an opening to do so.
Once again, I've given you far more oxygen than was warranted.
Have fun.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
have fun? really? you were given the option to enjoy your job years ago but you decided to spend the last four years of your life as the now longest lasting DL employee railing against DL's handling of the representation components of the merger. Q at least has the business sense to acknowledge that DL is running a good business even if he doesn't agree w/ their labor policies but others...
Find this word in the NYT crossword puzzle: LOST.
As in, you have engaged in an anti-company, pro-labor online campaign for years and you have LOST at every turn.
Every post you have put online is colored by the personal defeat you have suffered.
You marketed a product which no one wants.... and yet you for some reason have continued to believe there is virtue in the labor movement - as you continue to flash your disdain for the company that you have taken tens of thousands of dollars in pay and benefits.
You don't have the guts to walk away and stand by your convictions while Q hypocritically uses the pass benefits of a company that he never worked for but which is honoring an agreement to resolve a disaster that his (and your) previous employer started and couldn't resolve.
DL employees have to be reminded of NW's poisoned labor relations even on DL's standby lists.
It's no surprise that DL employees want nothing to do the labor movement when they see people like you two.
Find this word in the NYT crossword puzzle: LOST.
As in, you have engaged in an anti-company, pro-labor online campaign for years and you have LOST at every turn.
Every post you have put online is colored by the personal defeat you have suffered.
You marketed a product which no one wants.... and yet you for some reason have continued to believe there is virtue in the labor movement - as you continue to flash your disdain for the company that you have taken tens of thousands of dollars in pay and benefits.
You don't have the guts to walk away and stand by your convictions while Q hypocritically uses the pass benefits of a company that he never worked for but which is honoring an agreement to resolve a disaster that his (and your) previous employer started and couldn't resolve.
DL employees have to be reminded of NW's poisoned labor relations even on DL's standby lists.
It's no surprise that DL employees want nothing to do the labor movement when they see people like you two.
Kev3188
Veteran
Yes, really.
If pounding out a tirade like some indolent child makes you feel better, then by all means, continue to do so.
Thanks for participating.
WorldTraveler
Corn Field
- Dec 5, 2003
- 21,709
- 10,721
yeah, we were waiting for you to throw your little red flag up... wonder what took you so long to arrive.
Of course my post was offensive and obnoxious, K, but that is how most of us feel to see EVERY topic turned into an opportunity by you and a few others into a bash fest of DL.
Not one person doubted that there were product issues, although Josh identified that delta.com doesn't list the flight as having the refurbed 767-300s. The 764, 747, and 777s are the only fleets that are 100% converted, thus any expectation of lie flat, front to back AVOD would only be accurate on those fleets or on a flight for which DL has specifically said they will use an aircraft w/ the refurbed cabin. delta.com has explicit symbols that distinguish between the two types of aircraft.
Given that you, K, and Q have DL flight benefits even though Q has never worked for DL means you should know DL's protocol for non-rev travel, even if you don't use it.
On the issue of publishing negative non-rev experiences, I don't know of a single airline, anywhere in the world, that would find that acceptable. And all have clauses that allow them to deny boarding to non-rev passengers who don't follow their protocols.
Thus, the notion that you two put forth that anyone was trying to out someone or ready to launch pitchforks is as outlandish and over the top as my post was.
Outlandish is the notion that even a relatively simple policy is denied by you two - or supplanted by an attempt to slam DL, and better yet me as one who spoke up for their policies.
The issue of labor relations was brought in because that is the clear division between the POVs of the posters in this thread - and it is a perfectly obvious division to anyone who frequents these boards.
I'd truly like to have a board where we can interact respecting our different and diverse positions... but I am not about to cave into internet slam attempts of any organization or person that have no basis in reality.
Being willing to admit obvious black and white facts and segregate personal opinion to places where it should exist - and nowhere else - will go a very long ways to providing a peaceful place where a variety of opinions can be exchanged.
Of course my post was offensive and obnoxious, K, but that is how most of us feel to see EVERY topic turned into an opportunity by you and a few others into a bash fest of DL.
Not one person doubted that there were product issues, although Josh identified that delta.com doesn't list the flight as having the refurbed 767-300s. The 764, 747, and 777s are the only fleets that are 100% converted, thus any expectation of lie flat, front to back AVOD would only be accurate on those fleets or on a flight for which DL has specifically said they will use an aircraft w/ the refurbed cabin. delta.com has explicit symbols that distinguish between the two types of aircraft.
Given that you, K, and Q have DL flight benefits even though Q has never worked for DL means you should know DL's protocol for non-rev travel, even if you don't use it.
On the issue of publishing negative non-rev experiences, I don't know of a single airline, anywhere in the world, that would find that acceptable. And all have clauses that allow them to deny boarding to non-rev passengers who don't follow their protocols.
Thus, the notion that you two put forth that anyone was trying to out someone or ready to launch pitchforks is as outlandish and over the top as my post was.
Outlandish is the notion that even a relatively simple policy is denied by you two - or supplanted by an attempt to slam DL, and better yet me as one who spoke up for their policies.
The issue of labor relations was brought in because that is the clear division between the POVs of the posters in this thread - and it is a perfectly obvious division to anyone who frequents these boards.
I'd truly like to have a board where we can interact respecting our different and diverse positions... but I am not about to cave into internet slam attempts of any organization or person that have no basis in reality.
Being willing to admit obvious black and white facts and segregate personal opinion to places where it should exist - and nowhere else - will go a very long ways to providing a peaceful place where a variety of opinions can be exchanged.
Glenn Quagmire
Veteran
- Apr 30, 2012
- 4,825
- 4,428
These frivolous nonsensical rants are precisely why there is nobody willing to engage on this Delta board. You bury a comment in one rant saying you want "a board where we can interact respecting our different and diverse positions" while writing a foaming at the mouth personal attack on the remaining few willing to tolerate your crap.
It is sad and pathetic.
Have fun. Really.
It is sad and pathetic.
Have fun. Really.
