More Hard Evidence OF Doug Parker's Anto-Customer Attitude

[SparrowHawk]

“There absolutely will be cancellations that wouldn’t have been canceled otherwise,” US Airways’ chief executive, Doug Parker, said in response to my question about the potential effects of the tough new Department of Transportation rule.

Mr. Parker said his airline and others simply wouldn’t board flights if it appeared that weather or other potential disruptions might lead to takeoff delays that would result in fines.

“More likely, it’ll be pre-emptive — we’ll start canceling flights in bad-weather situations,” he said.

Balance here

Nothing to add folks, his words speak for themselves, who am I to interupt?

 

[FutureUScapt]

“There absolutely will be cancellations that wouldn’t have been canceled otherwise,” US Airways’ chief executive, Doug Parker, said in response to my question about the potential effects of the tough new Department of Transportation rule.

Mr. Parker said his airline and others simply wouldn’t board flights if it appeared that weather or other potential disruptions might lead to takeoff delays that would result in fines.

“More likely, it’ll be pre-emptive — we’ll start canceling flights in bad-weather situations,” he said.

Balance here

Nothing to add folks, his words speak for themselves, who am I to interupt?

Well I know you would just love to rip Parker for this one, but he is just echoing what every other industry executive/ATA spokesperson has been saying about this new legislation. In fact, this is the first time I've heard someone from US finally come out and say this. But feel way to flame away...

 

[ChockJockey]

On a US Airways A320, a plane that holds 150 passengers, the fine for a single infraction could be over $4 million

:blink:

Mr. Parker said his airline and others simply wouldn’t board flights if it appeared that weather or other potential disruptions might lead to takeoff delays that would result in fines.

Is every airline that cancels a flight to avoid multi-million dollar fines anti-customer?

 

[flyJOE]

You can't fault Doug on this one. Other airline exec's are saying the same thing. Frankly, you can't blame any airline for doing this, rather than risk several hundred thousand dollars or more in fines from flight by the DOT. It will make me think twice about the flight times I book when traveling to places like LGA, PHL, EWR, ORD, etc..

 

[VAflyGal]

This is not "anti-customer" - this is the way it has to be. I understand the premise but ultimately customers will likely be more delayed in getting to their destinations with this rule than they would have been if they had to sit on the tarmacs. ESPECIALLY with international - 2.5 hours out on the ramp and they will take the aircraft back to the gate. Off you go and then they have to call out another crew because crew number 1 will be illegal to finish the flight. Add 1.5-3 hours for new crew travel time, recater, reboard... Happy now?

This thread title is flamebait and you're showing your logic with it. *golf clap*

 

[SparrowHawk]

You can't fault Doug on this one. Other airline exec's are saying the same thing. Frankly, you can't blame any airline for doing this, rather than risk several hundred thousand dollars or more in fines from flight by the DOT. It will make me think twice about the flight times I book when traveling to places like LGA, PHL, EWR, ORD, etc..

Actually I can because Doug Parker was the ONLY one quoted in print saying what everyone knows. That when it comes to the Government Regulation or Airlines the :"Law of Unintended Consequences" is alive and well. This ill concieved tarmar rule is yet another shining example of a well intentioned bureaucratic agency completely screwing both customers AND airlines. Doug could have just kept his mouth shut but NO he had to point it out which to me proves he has no regard for people, customers, employees or otherwise.

You want to give him points for pointing out the Emporer has no clothes, fine by me,

I choose to believe that him speaking out just further proves he does give a rats arse about customers. Never has, Neve will! To me it's just another piece in a mountain of evidence point to viewing passengers as nothing more than self loading cargo.

 

[ChockJockey]

I choose to believe that him speaking out just further proves he does give a rats arse about customers. Never has, Neve will! To me it's just another piece in a mountain of evidence point to viewing passengers as nothing more than self loading cargo.

Let me get this straight: it's not anti-customer to cancel flights that will incur horrendous fees but it is anti-customer to merely admit we might have to do so?

So like, Parker should have just said nothing and then when we have to start canceling flights it comes as a pro-customer surprise?

Isn't it a bit silly to be mad at a CEO for stating an honest intention/opinion, even (especially?) if it's a rarity?

 

[ebwgs]

Actually I can because Doug Parker was the ONLY one quoted in print saying what everyone knows. That when it comes to the Government Regulation or Airlines the :"Law of Unintended Consequences" is alive and well. This ill concieved tarmar rule is yet another shining example of a well intentioned bureaucratic agency completely screwing both customers AND airlines. Doug could have just kept his mouth shut but NO he had to point it out which to me proves he has no regard for people, customers, employees or otherwise.

You want to give him points for pointing out the Emporer has no clothes, fine by me,

I choose to believe that him speaking out just further proves he does give a rats arse about customers. Never has, Neve will! To me it's just another piece in a mountain of evidence point to viewing passengers as nothing more than self loading cargo.

This article was quoted from "seattle pi reader blogs" posted on April 23, 2010:

"Continental Airlines chief executive Jeffrey Smisek said the airline plans to cancel flights rather than risk fines under the new regulations. According to the AP, Smisek said passengers on delayed flights "really want to go to LA or Mumbai, but the government by God says, 'We're going to fine you $27,500.' Here's what we're going to do: We're going to cancel the flight." More airlines are expected to follow suite if faced with the same situation."

This came out of the mouth of the pretty girl herself. Given your rant I guess this diva is anti-customer too. Cut the ugly girl a little slack. Ugly girls need love too!

 

[FutureUScapt]

Actually I can because Doug Parker was the ONLY one quoted in print saying what everyone knows. That when it comes to the Government Regulation or Airlines the :"Law of Unintended Consequences" is alive and well. This ill concieved tarmar rule is yet another shining example of a well intentioned bureaucratic agency completely screwing both customers AND airlines. Doug could have just kept his mouth shut but NO he had to point it out which to me proves he has no regard for people, customers, employees or otherwise.

NO, he wasn't. Maybe you should try going in with an unbiased stance at first instead of coming out swinging at Parker from the get-go. For all the times that the "Sandcastle spin" is mentioned on here, the opposite is just as prevalent if not worse on here.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Let me get this straight: it's not anti-customer to cancel flights that will incur horrendous fees but it is anti-customer to merely admit we might have to do so?

So like, Parker should have just said nothing and then when we have to start canceling flights it comes as a pro-customer surprise?

Isn't it a bit silly to be mad at a CEO for stating an honest intention/opinion, even (especially?) if it's a rarity?

Doug Parker should be speaking out against the tarmac rule, not how he's going to cancel flights that absolutely WILL punish customers for the dumbarsed actions of a bloated ineffective Federal Government attempting to pander to their constituency.

Here's another thought. Try actually running an airline instead of playing with Excel! Now there's a concept. Run the airline correctly and maybe the tarmac rule doesn't actually affect you. That would work but it would interfere with his Merger & Aquisition activity. This guy wants the big payday but he doesn't want to do any actual work to EARN it.

Truth is what's going on here is CEO saber rattling to get the DOT to relax the rule. Smisek at CO said much the same. This whole think has the stench of Washington Lobbyists from the ATA making threats to harm customers with cancellations, many of which would leave on time or well under the three hour rule. Congress and the Federal Government are playing a high stakes game of poker and the customer takes it in the shorts.

So yes this is another customer unfriendly action. ALL of the airlines are in on it. Doug put himself in the forefront and in doing so he continues his history of customer unfriendly attitudes despite the fact that this debacle is ultimately the fault of a misguded DOT attempt to regulate what amounts to the weather.

 

[cynic]

Parker did speak out about the rule, but you don't care about that. You just want to demonize Parker.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Parker did speak out about the rule, but you don't care about that. You just want to demonize Parker.

No I don't have to lift a finger to demonize Parker!

He's quite effective on his own.

Look the tarmac rule is as f'ed up as the US pilots situation. However it doesn't change the fact that with load factors in the 80% range that ANY cancelation will impact customers. Any overt action from an airline that results in more and psssible unnecessary cancellations is inherently customer unfriendly. Doug Parker is the CEO of such an airline that has publically stated they WILL engage in a behavior that impacts customers negatively.

I get that Parker is in a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. Given the choice HE chose the path that most negatively impacts customers and that adds the Times article to the body of evidence of his near hatred of customers

 

[Itestwell]

“There absolutely will be cancellations that wouldn’t have been canceled otherwise,” US Airways’ chief executive, Doug Parker, said in response to my question about the potential effects of the tough new Department of Transportation rule.

Mr. Parker said his airline and others simply wouldn’t board flights if it appeared that weather or other potential disruptions might lead to takeoff delays that would result in fines.

“More likely, it’ll be pre-emptive — we’ll start canceling flights in bad-weather situations,” he said.

Balance here

Nothing to add folks, his words speak for themselves, who am I to interupt?

You should get that powerhouse FFOCUS to issue an immediate, scathing press release to CNN and all the major newspapers by morning. This is unacceptable. Get them
while they're down!

 

[SparrowHawk]

You should get that powerhouse FFOCUS to issue an immediate, scathing press release to CNN and all the major newspapers by morning. This is unacceptable. Get them
while they're down!

Cute, I'm LMAO right now.

Frankly most of the FFOCUS guys I know don't set foot on US metal anymore BECAUSE of Parker's attitude.

 

[ebwgs]

Hey Sparrow give this one up man.