maybe U and UAL after all

[UseYourHead]

----------------
On 3/31/2003 126 PM iflyjetz wrote:

And how many employees at U who used to work for another carrier still b!tch about how U sucks compared to their old company. I don''t want to spend the rest of my career listening to a bunch of people complain about how they got screwed.
That said, I think that there is no better fit between two companies than U/UAL. I''m a furloughed UAL pilot, so a merge of the two companies probably wouldn''t effect me very much. I''d still get recalled at about the same time. It''s just that I don''t want to go to work 15 years after the merge and listen to people complain about how they got screwed.

----------------​

I wonder how many pilots at UAL talk about scabs on your property? Or how about the 585 issue? Of all the majors, UAL''s employee moral problems have earned it top honors on the dysfunctional list. You would be lucky to pull gear for a US Airways pilot, they are a class act.

At this point, UAL employees are along for the ride my friend, while it lasts...if a merger does occur it will be a lifeline. You see, in bankruptcy you are a gavel swing away from the unemployment line.


Gear up please....

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/1/2003 6:32:28 PM iland wrote:

I wonder how many pilots at UAL talk about scabs on your property? Or how about the 585 issue? Of all the majors, UAL''s employee moral problems have earned it top honors on the dysfunctional list. You would be lucky to pull gear for a US Airways pilot, they are a class act.

At this point, UAL employees are along for the ride my friend, while it lasts...if a merger does occur it will be a lifeline. You see, in bankruptcy you are a gavel swing away from the unemployment line.


Gear up please....

----------------​

Thank you very much for cutting off the first THREE sentences in that paragraph so that you could take my statement entirely out of context. Are you a lawyer?
Here are the first three sentences. READ THEM! "I am vehemently opposed to airline mergers of any type, and this one in particular. It isn''t that I hate U employees, but I have yet to see a merge were there isn''t a lot of acrimony between the merged employees. Look at AMR/TWA as the most current example. "

I challenge you to name me one merge where all of the employees are happy. NWA/Republic? LOL! That took place almost 20 years ago, and there are STILL a lot of pissed off people flying red tails.

BTW, I am sure that you''re an anomoly at U; because you''re an arrogant jerk. (But thanks for the chap 11 lecture) I have quite a few friends at U who ARE class acts.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

----------------
On 4/1/2003 5:37:05 PM iflyjetz wrote:

----------------
On 4/1/2003 3:28:05 PM oldiebutgoody wrote:

United's 84,000-plus employees worldwide bring people together safely, conveniently and efficiently more than 1,800 times a day....

That's right from their website. Better check your numbers. And I wasn't referring to numbers of employees, but capacity of service.

----------------​

Hmmm. You have absolutely NO idea what you're talking about. UAL had more than 2500 daily flights pre-911. They dropped below 1800 and have added some flights to be just over 1800 daily. Call it a cutback of 700 flights/day. Now, perhaps you're not very good at math, but 700/2500 is 28%. Last time I checked, 28% is more than 20%. There was a smaller reduction in ASM due to more short haul flights being dropped from the schedule than long haul flights.
Oldybutgoodie, I could take the time to point you to links, but I get the impression that you don't want to let facts get in the way of a good argument (such as your vague reference to UAL being in default on DIP covenants, which is blatently false).

----------------​

We'll see what the airport facilities bond holders have to say about that. If UAL loses that one (and my guess is that it will), UAL could cease to exist that afternoon unless the bondholders "graceously" allow an extension or arrange a new repayment plan. The ONLY way UAL made their DIP convenants last quarter was by NOT paying for some aircraft leases and bond debt. I also could provide the links, but EVERYONE that reads the news knows these issues. By the way, those numbers came right from UAL's website, nowhere else.

 

[Fly]

Written by Oldiebutgoodie Posted: 12/19/2002 2:00:41 PM

oldiebutgoody
Member

Total Posts: 322
Last Post: 4/1/2003
Member Since: 8/23/2002
Member #522




blockquote] ---------------- On 12/19/2002 1:56:04 PM N513AU wrote: If I still had a job, I might be more optimistic. However, I do not and my chances of getting recalled are quite dim with them wanting to farm out all of this work. Please tell me, why should I care? ----------------

Then go learn a new trade rather than just hanging around here trying to ruin ours.

 

[smfav8r]

A merger between U/UAL would be a night-mare!!!! The last thing any of the US Carriers need right now is the added expense of a merger...I''m furlughed U flying freight around the world with other furloughed U, AMR, UAL, NWA and DAL pilots....Most of us furloughed folks are just hoping there will be an airline to go back too!!!! (And that goes for all of the airlines) A merger between any of the carriers is going to hinder our chance for employment again with our respective carriers. As for cutbacks and everything else Y''all are bickering about.....look at the big picture....the industry is a mess and it doesn''t look like it''s getting much better....2500 AMR pilots will hit the street soon...and the available jobs are few and far between!!!! Just remember Pan Am, Eastern and Braniff where all very strong carriers at one time!!!!

 

[UseYourHead]

On 3/31/2003 126 PM iflyjetz wrote:

----------------
On 4/1/2003 8:07:03 PM iflyjetz wrote:
It isn't that I hate U employees, but I have yet to see a merge were there isn't a lot of acrimony between the merged employees...

And how many employees at U who used to work for another carrier still b!tch about how U sucks compared to their old company. I don't want to spend the rest of my career listening to a bunch of people complain about how they got screwed...

BTW, I am sure that you're an anomoly at U; because you're an arrogant jerk. (But thanks for the chap 11 lecture) I have quite a few friends at U who ARE class acts.

----------------​

With all due respect (and the highest level of humility), I simply responded to:

"And how many employees at U who used to work for another carrier still b!tch about how U sucks compared to their old company. I don't want to spend the rest of my career listening to a bunch of people complain about how they got screwed..."

FYI - I am not a lawyer and not taking your words out of context. When you state the above, you deserve a response.

If any merger/transaction does occur, all involved will be graced to be included. Any mergers at this time will be a strategic move to increase the odds of survival. The days of UAL management caring what the employee owners think are history.

Have there been mergers in the past where employees were happy?

In the airline industry, it seems that we have a silent majority who understand the big picture, appreciate what cards they are dealt in their life and their career, you do not hear the constant negativity from them.

Then you have a small vocal percentage of folks who will complain about what could of, should of, what they deserved, etc. It does not matter if it is a merger, management decisions, union decisions; the fact is they are never happy (and in fact never vote yes for a contract or a restructuring agreement). They rise to the event of a merger for it gives them an excuse for the rest of their career to complain and fan the fires of discontent.

So do I know any airline employees who are happy about mergers that have affected their career?

Yes, I know plenty of NWA pilots who realize that although there is give and take in merger, Republic added strategic route system advantages and is in part responsible for NWA's position today, they accept that and do not complain. Delta/Western same thing. North Central, Southern, Hughes Airwest, PanAm/National, Flying Tigers/Seaboard World, American/Aircal, USAir/PSA/Piedmont...same, shall I go on?

We have been through Date-of-hire mergers here, and also relative position/percentage integrations and the fact of the matter is, it is not the end of the world, life goes on. And airline seniority is not something that is stamped on your birth certificate. For the silent majority of pilots at US Airways it was just a speed bump in the road.

I have a question for you.

1) 2 years ago, did your career expectations include your current position of unemployment?
2) Was the possibility of bankruptcy even considered when you envisioned your career progression at UAL?

My point here is that going forward ANYTHING could happen. Could more consolidation happen in this industry through mergers or asset sales? The price, business environment (read: companies in trouble/bankruptcy) and regulatory climate are ripe.


Good luck to us all

 

[oldiebutgoody]

----------------
On 4/1/2003 8:30:43 PM Fly wrote:

Written by Oldiebutgoodie Posted: 12/19/2002 2:00:41 PM

oldiebutgoody
Member

Total Posts: 322
Last Post: 4/1/2003
Member Since: 8/23/2002
Member #522




blockquote] ---------------- On 12/19/2002 1:56:04 PM N513AU wrote: If I still had a job, I might be more optimistic. However, I do not and my chances of getting recalled are quite dim with them wanting to farm out all of this work. Please tell me, why should I care? ----------------​

Then go learn a new trade rather than just hanging around here trying to ruin ours.







Do everyone a favor....follow your own advise.




----------------
I don't even have a clue what that is supposed to mean. Employees at U put up with all sorts of nasty speculation throughout this entire year. I suggest that if YOU can't stand the heat, then YOU should stay out of the kitchen. By the way, I work TWO full time careers, and closely follow the airlines (not just U). If you don't like what you see on U's board, then YOU go back to UAL's board. It's really sad to see the large number of UAL folks that are STILL in deep denial over their situation.

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/2/2003 652 AM oldiebutgoody wrote:


I don''t even have a clue what that is supposed to mean. Employees at U put up with all sorts of nasty speculation throughout this entire year. I suggest that if YOU can''t stand the heat, then YOU should stay out of the kitchen. By the way, I work TWO full time careers, and closely follow the airlines (not just U). If you don''t like what you see on U''s board, then YOU go back to UAL''s board. It''s really sad to see the large number of UAL folks that are STILL in deep denial over their situation.

----------------​

Much of that speculation was fueled by U''s Chip Munn.

Is he a UAL pilot? He didn''t say so. I am; I freely admit it.

In denial? Not bloody likely. UAL''s pilots will pass the TA proposed to them by a wide margin. UAL''s workforce is well aware of how close the edge of the cliff we stand.

You seem to have a huge hardon for UAL. What happened? Did we lose your luggage on a flight? Crossed paths with a CSR who was having a bad day?

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/2/2003 6:52:17 AM iland wrote:

I have a question for you.

1) 2 years ago, did your career expectations include your current position of unemployment?
2) Was the possibility of bankruptcy even considered when you envisioned your career progression at UAL?

My point here is that going forward ANYTHING could happen. Could more consolidation happen in this industry through mergers or asset sales? The price, business environment (read: companies in trouble/bankruptcy) and regulatory climate are ripe.

Good luck to us all
----------------​

Iland, how about a truce? We both interpreted each others'' words differently than intended. I realize that there has been a lot acrimony between U and UAL employees over the last three years. I did not mean to ''dis U employees; I am friends with every U employee that I have met (being in the AF reserve, I meet a lot of U employees). I used U''s mergers as an example that many at U can relate to. In fact, U was my number one airline choice to be hired by (NWAC was #2); unfortunately, U only cashed my check without calling me for an interview; NWAC called me while I was in training at UAL.

Before I answer your questions, I should point out that I''m in my 40s and grew up in the airline industry. I flew on Pan Am helicopters watching the skyline of New York City; I flew on Piedmont and Republic; I flew into DCA at night staring at the White House, Washington monument, reflecting pool, and Lincoln Memorial; I remember watching the Branniff ''Peter Max'' jets. I remember being denied boarding in Munich due to a full jet (nonreving) and later flying in empty aircraft during the rash of skyjackings (DB Cooper''s on a beach in Cabo soaking up the sun).

To answer your questions:
1. Having seen the ups and downs of the industry for 30+ years, I had the hair on my neck stand up when I read Don Carty''s comment in the USA Today about the precipitous drop in business travel in the spring of 2001. It sounded like the all-too-familiar end of the business cycle. I made sure that I remained debt free and banked as much of my income as I could; since I worked part time in the reserve, I was able to save a lot of money. Within a month after 911, I moved out of my apartment and put all of my stuff in storage. I wasn''t furloughed until the spring of 2002, but I was able to get the reserve or United pay for my hotel rooms most of the time. Other times, I would crash with friends and family or pay for the occasional hotel room.
So while my expectations in the spring of 2001 did not include being furloughed, I still made appropriate plans for the ''worst case scenario.''

2. I was well educated as a child as to the degree that airlines are leveraged. I saw the mighty Continental (their pilots were at one time the highest paid in the industry), Eastern, Pan Am, and TWA fall into bankruptcy. No airline is bulletproof, not even Southwest.
I knew UAL had a lot of debt; they also had a lot of equity in aircraft. (911 vaporized aircraft equity for all airlines).
I saw UAL go from hiring 100+/month to a trickle. That was a bad sign.
UAL going chap 11 was well within my ''worst case scenario.''

Smfav8r did a very good job of explaining why mergers are a VERY bad thing right now. Two words. Integration costs.
IF UAL were to merge with another airline, there would be no better fit than U. There is little route overlap But step back for a moment and think about what the integration costs would be. Our fleets don''t mesh very well; U has A330s; UAL has 777s (I see the -400 going the way of the flight engineer at UAL). U''s 75/767s have different engines than UAL. Our 737 fleets are incompatible. U''s fifi fleet has CFMs; UAL''s have V2500s. Seating configurations are different on ''same'' aircraft.
Then there are uniform costs, computer integration costs, procedures standardization costs, manual standardization costs, etc. It''s a huge expense at a time when airlines can''t afford to spend extra money. When two airlines merge, the integration costs outweigh any synergies for several years.
I don''t know how long you''ve been exposed to the airline industry or studied the economics of merges and asset sales, but they rarely live up to the initial promise.

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/1/2003 8:16:10 PM oldiebutgoody wrote:
We''ll see what the airport facilities bond holders have to say about that. If UAL loses that one (and my guess is that it will), UAL could cease to exist that afternoon unless the bondholders "graceously" allow an extension or arrange a new repayment plan. The ONLY way UAL made their DIP convenants last quarter was by NOT paying for some aircraft leases and bond debt. I also could provide the links, but EVERYONE that reads the news knows these issues. By the way, those numbers came right from UAL''s website, nowhere else.

----------------​

You don''t know much about how chap 11 works, do you? A quick course: the judge (Wedoff) is God almighty. No one can do anything against the judge''s wishes.
I suspect that you also don''t understand the priority of who gets paid or the lack of leverage by debtholders while a company is in chap 11.
I''d try to educate you, but you''ve got such a hardon against UAL that it''d be a waste of my time and this board''s bandwidth.

To all those at U, congratulations on your emergence from chap 11. Tailwinds.

 

[UseYourHead]

Iflyjets,

A "truce" is a fine idea. You sound well grounded with your background and views of the industry. After a few posts I believe we understand each other and respect one anothers opinions, FWTW.

As I said before, good luck to us all (Mergers or not)

----------------
On 4/2/2003 9:58:31 AM iflyjetz wrote:

Iland, how about a truce? We both interpreted each others'' words differently than intended. I realize that there has been a lot acrimony between U and UAL employees over the last three years. I did not mean to ''dis U employees; I am friends with every U employee that I have met (being in the AF reserve, I meet a lot of U employees). I used U''s mergers as an example that many at U can relate to. In fact, U was my number one airline choice to be hired by (NWAC was #2); unfortunately, U only cashed my check without calling me for an interview; NWAC called me while I was in training at UAL.

Before I answer your questions, I should point out that I''m in my 40s and grew up in the airline industry. I flew on Pan Am helicopters watching the skyline of New York City; I flew on Piedmont and Republic; I flew into DCA at night staring at the White House, Washington monument, reflecting pool, and Lincoln Memorial; I remember watching the Branniff ''Peter Max'' jets. I remember being denied boarding in Munich due to a full jet (nonreving) and later flying in empty aircraft during the rash of skyjackings (DB Cooper''s on a beach in Cabo soaking up the sun).

To answer your questions:
1. Having seen the ups and downs of the industry for 30+ years, I had the hair on my neck stand up when I read Don Carty''s comment in the USA Today about the precipitous drop in business travel in the spring of 2001. It sounded like the all-too-familiar end of the business cycle. I made sure that I remained debt free and banked as much of my income as I could; since I worked part time in the reserve, I was able to save a lot of money. Within a month after 911, I moved out of my apartment and put all of my stuff in storage. I wasn''t furloughed until the spring of 2002, but I was able to get the reserve or United pay for my hotel rooms most of the time. Other times, I would crash with friends and family or pay for the occasional hotel room.
So while my expectations in the spring of 2001 did not include being furloughed, I still made appropriate plans for the ''worst case scenario.''

2. I was well educated as a child as to the degree that airlines are leveraged. I saw the mighty Continental (their pilots were at one time the highest paid in the industry), Eastern, Pan Am, and TWA fall into bankruptcy. No airline is bulletproof, not even Southwest.
I knew UAL had a lot of debt; they also had a lot of equity in aircraft. (911 vaporized aircraft equity for all airlines).
I saw UAL go from hiring 100+/month to a trickle. That was a bad sign.
UAL going chap 11 was well within my ''worst case scenario.''

Smfav8r did a very good job of explaining why mergers are a VERY bad thing right now. Two words. Integration costs.
IF UAL were to merge with another airline, there would be no better fit than U. There is little route overlap But step back for a moment and think about what the integration costs would be. Our fleets don''t mesh very well; U has A330s; UAL has 777s (I see the -400 going the way of the flight engineer at UAL). U''s 75/767s have different engines than UAL. Our 737 fleets are incompatible. U''s fifi fleet has CFMs; UAL''s have V2500s. Seating configurations are different on ''same'' aircraft.
Then there are uniform costs, computer integration costs, procedures standardization costs, manual standardization costs, etc. It''s a huge expense at a time when airlines can''t afford to spend extra money. When two airlines merge, the integration costs outweigh any synergies for several years.
I don''t know how long you''ve been exposed to the airline industry or studied the economics of merges and asset sales, but they rarely live up to the initial promise.

----------------​

 

[oldiebutgoody]

----------------
On 4/2/2003 10:13:59 AM iflyjetz wrote:

----------------
On 4/1/2003 8:16:10 PM oldiebutgoody wrote:
We''ll see what the airport facilities bond holders have to say about that. If UAL loses that one (and my guess is that it will), UAL could cease to exist that afternoon unless the bondholders "graceously" allow an extension or arrange a new repayment plan. The ONLY way UAL made their DIP convenants last quarter was by NOT paying for some aircraft leases and bond debt. I also could provide the links, but EVERYONE that reads the news knows these issues. By the way, those numbers came right from UAL''s website, nowhere else.

----------------​

You don''t know much about how chap 11 works, do you? A quick course: the judge (Wedoff) is God almighty. No one can do anything against the judge''s wishes.
I suspect that you also don''t understand the priority of who gets paid or the lack of leverage by debtholders while a company is in chap 11.
I''d try to educate you, but you''ve got such a hardon against UAL that it''d be a waste of my time and this board''s bandwidth.

To all those at U, congratulations on your emergence from chap 11. Tailwinds.

----------------​

I''ll bet I''ve forgotten more about chapter 11 than you''ll EVER know, and I just went through one. I don''t have any emotion at all about UAL. In fact, many of my best friends work there. The fact that you and "fly" elect to display your level of ignorance and denial by arguing about mergers with other carriers is your prerogative. Personally, I hope no more jobs are lost, as I''ve said before. You can elect to ignore the truths of UAL''s precarious situation, but they are obvious to all who care to look. The judge is not "god almighty", as you suggest; the law is. Judges ONLY rule on matters which are brought before them. The matter of the airport trust certificates that UAL elected not to pay HAS NOT YET GONE BEFORE THE JUDGE. Many analysts predict that UAL will be denied their request to make these bond holders "unsecured creditors", as UAL is attempting to do. Should they fail, as many think will happen, then they would have to renegotiate these payments or liquidate. Also, you think U had a problem with pensions, UAL has 2.5 times the number of employees that U has. I wouldn''t take for granted that management won''t be after that real soon, especially now that U has set the precedent. Now, if you can''t stand the speculation, I suggest you leave this board immediately and go back to the much rosier UAL board, where most posters still have their heads buried in the sand (or possibly elsewhere), and bow 3 times each day toward WHQ while chanting Tilton''s name.

 

[AtlanticBeach]

Bob''s experiences are not isolated. UX on the east coast has delays that often stretch into hours, resulting in misconnects on a regular basis. I''ve come to view their schedule as "suggested times only".

Midfield CSRs at IAD are quite indifferent, possibly because they often get overwhelmed by the sheer volume of people who are stranded. For international rescheduling, it is often faster and we have better success by going to the main terminal outside of security (forget the hold times on the phone if you are not elite). The folks at O''Hare are much better to deal with.

FA response in international Business Class is fair, at best. They must be there solely for my safety, because frequently they are not there to serve me or other passengers. Very territorial and not very helpful. Domestic FAs usually provide much better service.

There are many nice folks working for United. Unfortunately, there are a significant number of employees who don''t seem to care. Certainly, a sad condition for people who owned the company at the time.

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/2/2003 11:48:29 AM oldiebutgoody wrote:

I''ll bet I''ve forgotten more about chapter 11 than you''ll EVER know, and I
just went through one.

The judge is not "god almighty", as you suggest; the law is. Judges ONLY rule on matters which are brought before them.

The matter of the airport trust certificates that UAL elected not to pay HAS NOT YET GONE BEFORE THE JUDGE.

Also, you think U had a problem with pensions, UAL has 2.5 times the number of employees that U has.
----------------​

Oldybutgoody, you should go into standup comedy; you are hilarious. You first made incorrect statements about capacity reduction in this thread and now you''re going to prove yourself wrong about UAL''s chapter 11 filing? You forgot more about chap 11 than I''ll know? You have no idea what my level of knowledge is. BTW, chapter 11 is different than chapter 7 or 13 personal bankruptcy. Although it''s possible for individuals to file under chapter 11, it would be highly unusual. But you do have an advantage over me; I''ve never had to file for personal bankruptcy.
As for the ''airport trust certificates,'' there is no such animal. I had to do a search to verify this, since UAL has a large number of different debt instruments. Here''s a list for those that want to deal with the Joe Friday facts, not the Cliff Claven facts:

"United has a complex debt structure, consisting of:

$3,100,000,000 of various aircraft-backed mortgages secured
by 87 aircraft;

4,000,000,000 of various aircraft-backed enhanced equipment
trust certificate financings secured by 100
aircraft;

1,800,000,000 of various capital lease obligations with
respect to 69 aircraft;

5,500,000,000 of various operating lease obligations with
respect to 243 aircraft;

646,000,000 owed under six series of senior notes due
between 2003 and 2021 issued under a 1991
Indenture between United Air Lines, Inc., and
the Bank of New York;

1,700,000,000 owed under 18 special facility revenue bond
facilities doe between 2011 and 2035;

97,000,000 of 13.25% Trust Originated Preferred
Securities, called TOPrS; and

200,000,000 of estimated trade debt."

Here''s the link: http://www.bankrupt.com/united.txt
Approximately page 4.

UAL is in default on some of the equipment trust certificates, secured by aircraft. UAL has successfully renegotiated with some of bondholders and is in the process of negotiating with others. The equipment trust certificates are secured by aircraft. Aircraft are not exactly selling for a premium right now, so if the creditors want to repossess the aircraft, they''re more than welcome to. They can park them in the desert alongside the more than 1000 other aircraft taken out of service since 911.

As for Judge Wedoff, his rulings and statements thus far have been unquestionably clear: his primary purpose is to ensure that UAL survives as a viable corporation. He has interpreted the law in such a manner as to be most beneficial to the survival of United. I don''t expect him to rule differently with respect to any bondholders.

While UAL''s pensions are underfunded, they are less underfunded than U''s pensions were. And UAL''s pilots have negotiated a lower pension multiplier on the A fund in their TA (from 1.5% to 1.35% multiplier with a 30 year cap), so the underfunding problem has been reduced. Here''s the text:
"Utilizing the current pilot defined benefit plan: 1.35% times
final average pay (highest consecutive 36 months out of the
the120 months immediately preceding retirement), times
years of participation to a maximum of 30 years. Early
retirement reduced 3% per year from age 60."

Here''s the link: http://www.flyingcold.com/alpa/Tentative_A...ch27.pdf
See page 21.

Oldybutgoody, you have a tenuous grasp of the facts. In any further correspondance, could you please back up your ''facts'' with links? I''ve got a feeling that I''ll be seeing plenty of links from theonion.com.

 

[iflyjetz]

----------------
On 4/2/2003 1222 PM AtlanticBeach wrote:

Bob''s experiences are not isolated. UX on the east coast has delays that often stretch into hours, resulting in misconnects on a regular basis. I''ve come to view their schedule as "suggested times only".

Midfield CSRs at IAD are quite indifferent, possibly because they often get overwhelmed by the sheer volume of people who are stranded. For international rescheduling, it is often faster and we have better success by going to the main terminal outside of security (forget the hold times on the phone if you are not elite). The folks at O''Hare are much better to deal with.

FA response in international Business Class is fair, at best. They must be there solely for my safety, because frequently they are not there to serve me or other passengers. Very territorial and not very helpful. Domestic FAs usually provide much better service.

There are many nice folks working for United. Unfortunately, there are a significant number of employees who don''t seem to care. Certainly, a sad condition for people who owned the company at the time.

----------------​

AtlanticBeach, my greatest disappointment while working at UAL has been how shabbily UAL employees treat our customers. I can not and will not defend poor service from UAL.