Management Out To Get Senior Agts

[phlagent]

For the past two days corp security and management have suspened 2 agents in phl.....for alledgedly honoring fares...for customers.....either I am missing something...but if we have space...and we can sell the seat...
instead of the cust
going over to our competitors...why not keep them with us and give them the discount fare....revenue right....

well I don't believe management see's it that way
so they have a new software that will print the record to corporate security if
a fare is waved in the record...don't know how its done but this is what we were told today.....

so in order to fix the company and the problems it has...lets buy software and get rid of the high end agents.... what is thier priority....

:down:

 

[Schatzee]

They should have done this a long time ago...... It gets old seeing records where passengers have a "friend" at a station and this "friend" is costing the company revenue by doing favors.

It took a lot more that just one waiver for a fare to suspend an agent. If you dig a little deeper, the agents have probably been waiving the fares for quite a while and digging their own grave.

If you are following the fare rules, a waiver is not needed.

 

[ELP_WN_Psgr]

If U follows its fare rules for too much longer, they won't need any agents at all, since they won;t have any customers with the likely exception of Bob & Art.

 

[Art at ISP]

This is an unfortunate development. There SHOULD be reasonable discretion on the part of senior agents or managers in extrenuating circumstances, but abuse is another story-it's kind of a fine line. The experienced senior agents and supervisors are the main reason we stay loyal--they should be recognized for keeping loyal customers coming back.

That said, this is skirting the major issue--THE ENTIRE FARE STRUCTURE AND IT'S ASSOCIATED RULES NEED A MAJOR OVERHAUL. If we had realistic rules and fares, this whole point would be moot, revenues would be up and both employees and customers would be happier.

It's time to change folks---DL did it, and I do believe it is revenue positive.

What's it gonna take to show some guts and get competitive?????

 

[UseYourHead]

Were there any warnings given that the actions the agents took would result in suspension?

Has this issue been discussed, or is it a current hot item?

What can be done to work within the system, giving our customers the treatment they deserve, while allowing the agent latitude to act in the airlines best interest?

For the past two days corp security and management have suspened 2 agents in phl.....for alledgedly honoring fares...for customers.....either I am missing something...but if we have space...and we can sell the seat...
instead of the cust
going over to our competitors...why not keep them with us and give them the discount fare....revenue right....

:down:

[post="252586"][/post]​

 

[nycbusdriver]

One thing these agents can do which will not show up on computer "snitch" reports:

Tell the customer that management has tied their hands, and that ___________ (fill in the blank with Southwest, JetBlue, AirTran, ATA, Song, Ted, etc.) down the hall can give them the price they want.




Since management's actions broadcast their intentions to push the customer to another carrier, then the agents should help in that effort and literally sell the other carriers' products.

 

[diogenes]

Whether this is a new initiative (U has those every time a veep goes to the john), I have no idea.

There are two sides to this equation. Company enforcement of fare rules has run hot and cold forever, with concurrent vagaries in agent 'flexibility.'

Back in the day, I've seen agents paying their rent by waiving fares and granting free upgrades to their landlords. Or doing this stunt for discounts on auto purchases. No kidding.

The company response to this arabian bazaar approach to business was uneven, at best. Some got their hands slapped, and others sailed right thru. Thru that time period, no one was terminated. Unbelievable. I would have fired everybody involved, and everybody who SHOULD have known about it that did nothing.

OTOH, I know of a very fine agent, who during a spell of flexibility, waived a fare. Just as her co-workers were doing, just as she had been doing, and just as the manager had authorized in previous cases. So she took the initiative (it's amazing how unavailable management can be when these issues come up) and granted the waiver.

Next thing you know, corporate issues her a termination. And the chickenneck (hey MODS, you like that, don't you ) manager doesn't stand up for her. She had a heck of a time getting her job back. Meanwhile, waivers went on, in the station and on the system, unabated (a big reason she got her job back, eventually).

Art has had the solution to this from the get-go. Simple fares. Relatively few fares. Enforce them.

You need to trust your agents to do the right thing. And effectively monitor for those few who don't.

U is congenitally incapable of either.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

[post="252586"][/post]​

What did you mean senior agents? If they are only targeting senior agents and not whole workgroup then have the union use a discrimination defense

 

[whlinder]

That said, this is skirting the major issue--THE ENTIRE FARE STRUCTURE AND IT'S ASSOCIATED RULES NEED A MAJOR OVERHAUL.

This is definitely true. However, does US have the employees to do this? Something tells me they don't.

If we had realistic rules and fares, this whole point would be moot, revenues would be up and both employees and customers would be happier.

[post="252650"][/post]​

Revenues wouldn't necessarily be up, hopefully they'd be neutral, but I doubt they would be up. However, simplifying everything should reduce costs through increased efficiency, and in the end it works out in favor of US.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

Art has had the solution to this from the get-go. Simple fares. Relatively few fares. Enforce them.

You need to trust your agents to do the right thing. And effectively monitor for those few who don't.

U is congenitally incapable of either.

[post="252689"][/post]​

This is why I always think that they should put customer service at the top of the wage scale. Fewer but better paid: say flight attendents and fleet service folks get promoted into customer service jobs. More trust and shared culture. Of course, you have to have a functional culture to begin with. I could even say pilots 'retiring' into costumer service at age 60.

 

[whlinder]

But if you simplify the fares and rules, the CSR job gets easier and you need fewer of them.

 

[RowUnderDCA]

exactly, you'd never have to hire any off the street.

 

[diogenes]

RUD,

Back when I worked for a real airline, fleet and customer service were the same department. In small stations, you worked both functions, always in the same week, frequently in the same day. All station tasks were completed by the agents on duty - no fleet/customer service dichotomy.

In the larger stations, fleet and customer service were bid independently, but agents transferred between the two at will.

As a result, fleet was versed in customer service, and c/s knew operations.

The power of that cannot be understated.

 

[Art at ISP]

As some of you say, fare rationalization and simplification may only be revenue neutral, with the benefit realized by reducing costs. I still maintain, however, that the POTENTIAL is there for it to be revenue positive, IF done right.

I firmly believe that if such a rationalization took place, AVERAGE fares would rise, as more people might pay a bit more for flexibility. I know I would pay $50 more to be able to change, rather than $100 plus fare difference--that's a no brainer.

Now I am no genious, but I do believe that if AVERAGE fares increase, revenue will eventually follow upward. Combine that with the fact that some people who would not have flown a particular route with a ridiculous fare might actually do so now, and you get more people flying.

I drove to the IAD area on Wednesday because the lowest airfare I could get on either UA or US was about $500 for a round trip--I could not justify this expense to see one customer (although multiple locations). At $250-$300 it was a done deal. And these prices were from LGA--ISP was over $900!!

On the bright side I had a very pleasant drive, and got to break the wife's new car in nicely....but then I digress...

My best to you all.......

 

[REACC1]

RUD,

Back when I worked for a real airline, fleet and customer service were the same department. In small stations, you worked both functions, always in the same week, frequently in the same day. All station tasks were completed by the agents on duty - no fleet/customer service dichotomy.

In the larger stations, fleet and customer service were bid independently, but agents transferred between the two at will.

As a result, fleet was versed in customer service, and c/s knew operations.

The power of that cannot be understated.

[post="252882"][/post]​

I concur with everything stated above. It was a real airline back then. Dio, you da man.