They should go after some of the ex management of the old USAirways who still have SP lifetime travel!!!! Put them behind an active employee and see how they enjoy it!!! Explain why Wolf or Siegel with less than 5 years of company time should go ahead of a 40 yr retiree... :down:
Message to Retirees RE: Pass Policy
- Thread starter PQAKnow-It-All
- Start date
ChrisUS
Senior
- Aug 20, 2005
- 449
- 72
Thanks for this post.
I would say MOST had to go back to work for healthcare and a decent income. I dont think ANY of us expected to be supported by the company in our retirement, especially when it was frozen back in '91. We DID expect our seniority to mean something though.
Dog Wonder
Veteran
I could not agree with you more. Of all the things I've seen and read on this subject, nothing has angered me more than the notion that retirees have a lot more free time than active employees. After 24 years of service, my pension from US Airways is $182 a month before taxes. I am a former PSA employee whose pension was frozen in 1992; yes, I could have left the company then and moved elsewhere, but I had just bought a new house. So now, after multiple reservations offices closures, I am retired from US Airways because I more or less got tired of moving and even question the longevity of the Winston office. So I am working again, 35 hours a week, little to no vacation time, so don't tell me I have more free time than an active employee. I don't, and probably have less than the new hire. You will never be rich and able to retire completely if you continue to work for an airline. Please give me back my boarding priority. Thank you very much.
Bambi
Member
- Sep 17, 2005
- 88
- 0
My whole point on allowing active employees to get on first is this: They would like to retire from the company also. If they can't get to/from work, they will get written up, then fired if it were to continue. Is this fair to the active ones that are commuting? As I have stated prior, the airlines should provide a boarding status for commuters only. Then retirees, then other active employees on pleasure trips. To me, this would be the MOST FAIR of all.
I have seen a lot of commuters not get on flights and I see them call crew scheduling and if the company needs them they make them positive space seen it happen to many times on a full flight and crew scheduling confirms them
If the commuters are doing a favor by coming to work when they were scheduled off and agreed to work, then I say give them the PS ticket. Otherwise, I've seen many commuters wait until the last flight of the day that would get them to checkin on time and then have a fit when something happens, meanwhile, 2 or 3 flights went out earlier in the day with seats open on them. They have the ability to check loads and (excluding irregular ops) should be able to know if they need to make alternate arrangements to get to work on time (ID90s, leave the night before, etc).
Well if you are a Mesa crew member all you have to do is call crew scheduling and tell them your stuck and they book you positive space. Ive seen this happen countless times. Mesa S@#$s!!!!!
I must be drinking the Koolaid ...I agree with DP..someone truely retired has more options/flex time than those of us still employed.
2BorNot2B
Senior
- Jul 6, 2005
- 258
- 7
Excellent Bambi!! Indeed valid Commuters going to/from home to job should have priority! Now how do you get that message across to the "Powers That Be" ????? :unsure:
2B
Barbell
Senior
- Nov 16, 2005
- 335
- 0
Who asked you to commute? I think that is YOUR choice. You had rather commute than move to where you work.... and you want to be given special privilages so you can do what you want to do.
