I am down with getting objective facts and dealing with them. In this case, it is actually possible to do that without a bunch of software. I ran a baggage service office for a while, at an airline with about the same number of mainlines US currently has
.
When analyzing our misconnects, there were generally two problems.
1. The originating station did not load the bags. They'd load them without reroute tags on the next flight, let them wind up at the destination, and then blame the hub for misconnecting. DFW was bad for that at the time.
Solution: Once DFW was identified as a problem, ramp agents unloading DFW flights compared the flight numbers on the tags to the flight number they were working. Discrepancies were sent to me. Once we had a good case built, our manager talked to their manager, etc.
2. We failed to transfer the bag. Sometimes it was human error, once it was a simple as a flight that generally arrived late misconnected bags to one of the first departures of the bank. These two flights happened to be located far away from each other.
Solution: Park habitual late flight next to early departure.
Now, if the software is going to help quantify those problems, fine and dandy. Given the US mindset, it is more likely US will:
1. Take agent solutions, run them through the magic computer, and claim the solution as their own, because everybody knows a drink of cold water and an fresh idea would kill an agent, or
2.The computer solution will blame the agents.
Plus, I think the dirty little secret is, given the reliance US has on RJ's, and given that RJ's cannot routinely carry full passenger and bag loads, US has a problem not easily solved.
