SERVICE CHARGES ! ! ? PLEASE GIVE ME A BREAK!

Does that also include you not releasing the brakes until
you are really ready to push.I mean not just to get a ontime
while the ramp is still loading and you are sitting there
getting paid? Just checking.
 
767jetz,

There was a topic about a year ago about the CH9. Most people think it's great. I always turn on the switch when I go on the A/C. Lately I find it off more than on. I have never heard anything that should worry a pilot. My radio skills are probably comical. If a pilot doesn't feel comfortable with it on then maybe he/she needs to think of the customer that enjoys listening to it.

WTS54,

At this point I really don't care if they kick the breaks before I tell them to. If they do it and I feel it wasn't safe at that time I will let them know.
 
The trouble is that it ISN'T nominal, at least not to me. Here's an example straight out of the letter they sent. ORD-LAX, one way, coach. Service charge is $9.00. Not unreasonable, I can live with that. They say that's 15% above what the charges were in 1996. BUT!!!! The kicker is now we pay the 7.5% federal ticket tax, which I don't even know why that applies to service charges, the $2.50 Sept 11 security tax, and the up to $4.50 PFC. The total service charge for ORD-LAX, one way, coach, comes to over $18.00. Still chump change? Well, most people do come back from their trips, so double that to $36.00. I have a wife and three kids, so now I'm looking at $180.00 just to go to LA and back?!? Forget it, they've taken away my travel benefits.

So why is this important, given the much larger issues going on? Because in their myopic foolishness, management (senior, that is) has thrown away the one relatively low cost method to keep retention and morale up. Why the hell should we work in this industry?!? This is removing the final golden handcuff to staying. Maybe I'm just a grunt that's easily replaceable, though there's only three analysts left in my group. But I'm done. Longer hours, less pay, idiotic assignments, second-guessing by consultants, and now they take the one last benefit worth having. It's over.
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 3:00:12 PM duke_buck wrote:

The trouble is that it ISN'T nominal, at least not to me. Here's an example straight out of the letter they sent. ORD-LAX, one way, coach. Service charge is $9.00. Not unreasonable, I can live with that. They say that's 15% above what the charges were in 1996. BUT!!!! The kicker is now we pay the 7.5% federal ticket tax, which I don't even know why that applies to service charges, the $2.50 Sept 11 security tax, and the up to $4.50 PFC. The total service charge for ORD-LAX, one way, coach, comes to over $18.00. Still chump change? Well, most people do come back from their trips, so double that to $36.00. I have a wife and three kids, so now I'm looking at $180.00 just to go to LA and back?!? Forget it, they've taken away my travel benefits.

So why is this important, given the much larger issues going on? Because in their myopic foolishness, management (senior, that is) has thrown away the one relatively low cost method to keep retention and morale up. Why the hell should we work in this industry?!? This is removing the final golden handcuff to staying. Maybe I'm just a grunt that's easily replaceable, though there's only three analysts left in my group. But I'm done. Longer hours, less pay, idiotic assignments, second-guessing by consultants, and now they take the one last benefit worth having. It's over.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Per UAL, the total cost of keeping eligible flying "free" is 32 million per year. Do the math and that works out to just under $400 per employee. I agree, this is a drop in the proverbial bucket and the benefit seems to be far greater than the cost. This would seem to be a beneift they would have fought harder to keep as a cheap way to retain employees they might want. But again, UAL is in BK, so anything is game, unfortunately.

Having said that, if you're complaining about the $180 cost for ORD-LAX roundtrip for you, spouse, and three kids, just imagine how much it costs for those many people who DON'T work for an airline! Geez, they haven't "taken away your travel benefits". If $180 is too much for you to pay for a round trip flight, then you must have never flown ANYWHERE before you started working for the airline. I mean, ticket prices are low these days, but still.

I'm not happy about the service charges either (I liked doing day trips to various cities and the service charges will probably stop most of that), but it's still a heck of a deal. If you don't realize that ORD-LAX at $36 a pop round trip is dirt cheap, then you're missing something.

-synchronicity
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 7:12:39 PM synchronicity wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 3:00:12 PM duke_buck wrote:

The trouble is that it ISN'T nominal, at least not to me. Here's an example straight out of the letter they sent. ORD-LAX, one way, coach. Service charge is $9.00. Not unreasonable, I can live with that. They say that's 15% above what the charges were in 1996. BUT!!!! The kicker is now we pay the 7.5% federal ticket tax, which I don't even know why that applies to service charges, the $2.50 Sept 11 security tax, and the up to $4.50 PFC. The total service charge for ORD-LAX, one way, coach, comes to over $18.00. Still chump change? Well, most people do come back from their trips, so double that to $36.00. I have a wife and three kids, so now I'm looking at $180.00 just to go to LA and back?!? Forget it, they've taken away my travel benefits.

So why is this important, given the much larger issues going on? Because in their myopic foolishness, management (senior, that is) has thrown away the one relatively low cost method to keep retention and morale up. Why the hell should we work in this industry?!? This is removing the final golden handcuff to staying. Maybe I'm just a grunt that's easily replaceable, though there's only three analysts left in my group. But I'm done. Longer hours, less pay, idiotic assignments, second-guessing by consultants, and now they take the one last benefit worth having. It's over.
----------------
[/blockquote]

Per UAL, the total cost of keeping eligible flying "free" is 32 million per year. Do the math and that works out to just under $400 per employee. I agree, this is a drop in the proverbial bucket and the benefit seems to be far greater than the cost. This would seem to be a beneift they would have fought harder to keep as a cheap way to retain employees they might want. But again, UAL is in BK, so anything is game, unfortunately.

Having said that, if you're complaining about the $180 cost for ORD-LAX roundtrip for you, spouse, and three kids, just imagine how much it costs for those many people who DON'T work for an airline! Geez, they haven't "taken away your travel benefits". If $180 is too much for you to pay for a round trip flight, then you must have never flown ANYWHERE before you started working for the airline. I mean, ticket prices are low these days, but still.

I'm not happy about the service charges either (I liked doing day trips to various cities and the service charges will probably stop most of that), but it's still a heck of a deal. If you don't realize that ORD-LAX at $36 a pop round trip is dirt cheap, then you're missing something.

-synchronicity
----------------
[/blockquote]

You have managed to completely miss the point. Of course, $180 for five people is way under what a normal ticket costs. But these aren't trips home for Thanksgiving. These are trips that I never would have taken if not for the benefit. Key word there is "benefit". That's the one unique, low-to-no cost (I've seen how the CJ idiots compute the $32 million, it's overstated) benefit that the company has, and they threw it away. Of course I can live withouth the day trips and family trips. But without meaningful flight benefits, why on earth would you work for an airline?!? A little clarification here: I'm a professional, not a pilot or other represented group. I'm 'management' though I don't manage anyone but myself (and not even that all that well sometimes). For all the people like me, the financial analysts, the computer programmers, the route planners, the regular slugs who keep HQ running, why put up with it all? We're mobile, our skills are transferable. We're here because we like it, or at least used to. I'm done, I've already had a couple interviews and have more planned. I had a couple offers last year but turned them down, because I liked what I did and I desperately want United to succeed. But I see stupid idea after stupid idea, and I'm not talking about flight benefits. I don't see good people making a difference, I just see Doug "Avolar" Hacker and Jake "$60/share" Brace get PROMOTED! And now, finally, the one last thing that I used to rationalize to myself for staying here is essentially gone. I might as well work at any company if the flight benefits are gone. And in a couple of months, at the latest, I plan to. :(

 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 9:08:35 PM duke_buck wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 7:12:39 PM synchronicity wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 3:00:12 PM duke_buck wrote:

The trouble is that it ISN'T nominal, at least not to me. Here's an example straight out of the letter they sent. ORD-LAX, one way, coach. Service charge is $9.00. Not unreasonable, I can live with that. They say that's 15% above what the charges were in 1996. BUT!!!! The kicker is now we pay the 7.5% federal ticket tax, which I don't even know why that applies to service charges, the $2.50 Sept 11 security tax, and the up to $4.50 PFC. The total service charge for ORD-LAX, one way, coach, comes to over $18.00. Still chump change? Well, most people do come back from their trips, so double that to $36.00. I have a wife and three kids, so now I'm looking at $180.00 just to go to LA and back?!? Forget it, they've taken away my travel benefits.

So why is this important, given the much larger issues going on? Because in their myopic foolishness, management (senior, that is) has thrown away the one relatively low cost method to keep retention and morale up. Why the hell should we work in this industry?!? This is removing the final golden handcuff to staying. Maybe I'm just a grunt that's easily replaceable, though there's only three analysts left in my group. But I'm done. Longer hours, less pay, idiotic assignments, second-guessing by consultants, and now they take the one last benefit worth having. It's over.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Per UAL, the total cost of keeping eligible flying "free" is 32 million per year. Do the math and that works out to just under $400 per employee. I agree, this is a drop in the proverbial bucket and the benefit seems to be far greater than the cost. This would seem to be a benefit they would have fought harder to keep as a cheap way to retain employees they might want. But again, UAL is in BK, so anything is game, unfortunately.

Having said that, if you're complaining about the $180 cost for ORD-LAX roundtrip for you, spouse, and three kids, just imagine how much it costs for those many people who DON'T work for an airline! Geez, they haven't "taken away your travel benefits". If $180 is too much for you to pay for a round trip flight, then you must have never flown ANYWHERE before you started working for the airline. I mean, ticket prices are low these days, but still.

I'm not happy about the service charges either (I liked doing day trips to various cities and the service charges will probably stop most of that), but it's still a heck of a deal. If you don't realize that ORD-LAX at $36 a pop round trip is dirt cheap, then you're missing something.

-synchronicity
----------------
[/blockquote]
You have managed to completely miss the point. Of course, $180 for five people is way under what a normal ticket costs. But these aren't trips home for Thanksgiving. These are trips that I never would have taken if not for the benefit. Key word there is "benefit". That's the one unique, low-to-no cost (I've seen how the CJ idiots compute the $32 million, it's overstated) benefit that the company has, and they threw it away. Of course I can live withouth the day trips and family trips. But without meaningful flight benefits, why on earth would you work for an airline?!? A little clarification here: I'm a professional, not a pilot or other represented group. I'm 'management' though I don't manage anyone but myself (and not even that all that well sometimes). For all the people like me, the financial analysts, the computer programmers, the route planners, the regular slugs who keep HQ running, why put up with it all? We're mobile, our skills are transferable. We're here because we like it, or at least used to. I'm done, I've already had a couple interviews and have more planned. I had a couple offers last year but turned them down, because I liked what I did and I desperately want United to succeed. But I see stupid idea after stupid idea, and I'm not talking about flight benefits. I don't see good people making a difference, I just see Doug "Avolar" Hacker and Jake "$60/share" Brace get PROMOTED! And now, finally, the one last thing that I used to rationalize to myself for staying here is essentially gone. I might as well work at any company if the flight benefits are gone. And in a couple of months, at the latest, I plan to. :(


----------------
[/blockquote]
Ergh. I do get the point, but for reasons I explain below, I think you're overstating it. On the one hand, I agree with you completely. First, I think that the flight benefit is exactly the sort of benefit a well-managed company would love: it's relatively low cost to the company (at 32Mil it's about $400 per employee, which is under 1% for most employees, and less than 2% for everyone; we'll set aside the issue of 32M being high for the cost estimate, it's cheap even at that price), but highly valued by employees. I also have said several times that everyone should do their own little cost-benefit evaluation of their job at United and leave if it makes sense, which it will for an increasing number of people. I've also said several times that I think United has been one of the worst managed companies around for awhile with terrible morale throughout the organization as well as a company arrogance that prevents change, and last, I'm not impressed with the recent moves of senior management (let's promote the guys who had the "brilliant" ideas in the past, the men who put United where it is today!) Also, how much the flight benefits are a "benefit" or not will vary from person to person, depending on your own circumstances.

That said...

I [b]still[/b] don't understand your griping about the service charges as "taking away your flight benefit"! First, I find my biggest constraint on travel is [b]time[/b]. I have a whopping two weeks vacation a year (plus a few extra days our boss gives us for the long hours during "busy season"), so it's tough to plan any trip longer than a weekend (and during busy season, even weekend trips are out). For a trip to the west coast from Chicago you realistically need more than a weekend, as the trip there and back takes so long. And besides, flying standby on a Sunday can be a real rhymes-with-witch. So, realistically, if you;re talking flights, there's only so many one can take. If you're talking about flying with three kids, then I assume you can't just haul them out of school at the drop of a hat, and I also assume you don't just fly out to LA for a day and then fly back.

Second, another constraint on travel is the cost of accommodations. Unless you have relatives somewhere or friends you can stay with (tough to do if you're talking about 5 people dropping in), you've got to pay for a hotel. Heck, 2 nights at most hotels in LA for a couple and three kids will run you over $180 right there. And I haven't even mentioned rental cars yet. Most of my trips are day trips to cities so as to avoid both car rentals and hotels, and the occasional weekend visit to a friend or relative. We only take one long "vacation" trip per year, just over a week to wherever. It's tough to imagine taking 4 true "vacations" in a year, even if the flights were free, we had twice as much vacation time, and friends were begging us to stay).

Third bit is simply the fact that it's standby travel. For one person that's not much of a constraint, and for two adults it's not bad either (you don't have to sit together, you can take separate flights if absolutely necessary, sitting around an airport all day is an inconvenience but not a chore). With 5 people, three of whom are kids, it's a lot tougher, even when it's free.

Anyway, I don't know your exact situation, maybe you have friends or relatives in LA who you can always stay with and give you transportation. Maybe in your situation you have everything else covered so you go to LA over five times a year with your entire family. But for the overwhelming majority of people, the "service charge" for flying still remains an excellent benefit, and saying that by imposing the service charge they're "taking away the benefit" is ridiculous. If it takes the benefit away specifically from you, then you have one of the most unusual situations around so that all the other costs and constraints associated with travel with 3 children are inapplicable to you, but the service charge of $180 round trip LAX-ORD for a family of five is the deal breaker.

-synchronicity
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 10:26:39 PM synchronicity wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 9:08:35 PM duke_buck wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/24/2002 7:12:39 PM synchronicity wrote:

[...

That said...

I still don't understand your griping about the service charges as "taking away your flight benefit"! First, I find my biggest constraint on travel is time. I have a whopping two weeks vacation a year (plus a few extra days our boss gives us for the long hours during "busy season"), so it's tough to plan any trip longer than a weekend (and during busy season, even weekend trips are out). For a trip to the west coast from Chicago you realistically need more than a weekend, as the trip there and back takes so long. And besides, flying standby on a Sunday can be a real rhymes-with-witch. So, realistically, if you;re talking flights, there's only so many one can take. If you're talking about flying with three kids, then I assume you can't just haul them out of school at the drop of a hat, and I also assume you don't just fly out to LA for a day and then fly back.

Second, another constraint on travel is the cost of accommodations. Unless you have relatives somewhere or friends you can stay with (tough to do if you're talking about 5 people dropping in), you've got to pay for a hotel. Heck, 2 nights at most hotels in LA for a couple and three kids will run you over $180 right there. And I haven't even mentioned rental cars yet. Most of my trips are day trips to cities so as to avoid both car rentals and hotels, and the occasional weekend visit to a friend or relative. We only take one long "vacation" trip per year, just over a week to wherever. It's tough to imagine taking 4 true "vacations" in a year, even if the flights were free, we had twice as much vacation time, and friends were begging us to stay).

Third bit is simply the fact that it's standby travel. For one person that's not much of a constraint, and for two adults it's not bad either (you don't have to sit together, you can take separate flights if absolutely necessary, sitting around an airport all day is an inconvenience but not a chore). With 5 people, three of whom are kids, it's a lot tougher, even when it's free.

Anyway, I don't know your exact situation, maybe you have friends or relatives in LA who you can always stay with and give you transportation. Maybe in your situation you have everything else covered so you go to LA over five times a year with your entire family. But for the overwhelming majority of people, the "service charge" for flying still remains an excellent benefit, and saying that by imposing the service charge they're "taking away the benefit" is ridiculous. If it takes the benefit away specifically from you, then you have one of the most unusual situations around so that all the other costs and constraints associated with travel with 3 children are inapplicable to you, but the service charge of $180 round trip LAX-ORD for a family of five is the deal breaker.

-synchronicity
----------------
[/blockquote]

OK, I see what you're saying. I would better state my position as saying they have devalued the benefit, not taken it away. But greatly devalued it. I do have family in LA, with a house. And with five people, we don't travel much. But we always knew we could if we wanted to. Irrational, but I like the idea of being able to go whenever, even if soccer games and other weekend activities preclude them. When we do go, I pinch pennies where I can. It's bad enough to shell out bucks for a rental, and I have to rent an SUV or minivan, and if we're not staying with family we stay at the cheap hotels. Frankly, we don't do much overnights, mostly day trips to D.C. and all. Cheaper to fly there and hit the museums than pay $15 each to the Field Museum. At least it was.

It's not that this was the biggest deal, or is this is the largest problem here at United. It's more of an exasperating last straw. In reality, I've been lying to myself for staying at this company for months, even years now. I keep deluding myself that I'll make manager soon, though I'm not part of the boys club, or that we'll take that big international trip for free, or whatever. This isn't the only or even biggest reason that I've finally admitted to myself that this company makes the Titanic look seaworthy. But it was the epitome of the myopic pettiness that permeates the rich-boy senior management we have. Something nominal like $5 for coach, $10 for first, ok. But a couple hundred bucks, forget it. For as little as I actually travel, I'll go get a better paying job without all these headaches and pay more for my tickets without worrying about getting bumped.

It didn't have to be this way.