Amended Pass Travel Policy

[RedOne]

A retiree's voice is about the only thing that has not been taken away. They can tell everyone who askes them how bad (or good) they have been and continue to be treated by US Airways. (Both pre and post merger) Negative or positive comments about a company carry an impact.

I get the impression that US-east employees (past and present) are thought of as red-headed-step-children. Too bad. That can make it hard for the new US Airways.

(Still glad I'm gone. )

 

[2BorNot2B]

OK, maybe understand is not the right word. Its hard for me to agree with your point of view on this topic.

The reasons are because I, and people like me, do not plan to retire with the company. They make it too hard to have a career here, and when my time is up, I'll be moving on to make more money elsewhere,(or I hope to god I will), and durring my time here, I do not want to have to compete with retirees for seats.

You are right, I am looking out for my own interest, but maybe you have a little more understanding why, now.

:down:
Well you present HP attitudes very well! You could care less about the success of the company, do not plan to be around very long .. in no way consider your job a career move!

Precisely 180 degrees out from USAir Employees!

You are obviously from the "NOW" generation .... I'll be long gone by the time you reach 65 .. but I would sure like to know what your thoughts are then ...

2B

 

[ClearedToPush]

:down:
Well you present HP attitudes very well! You could care less about the success of the company, do not plan to be around very long .. in no way consider your job a career move!

Precisely 180 degrees out from USAir Employees!

You are obviously from the "NOW" generation .... I'll be long gone by the time you reach 65 .. but I would sure like to know what your thoughts are then ...

2B

Just to clarify and not really get off topic, we are not the "NOW" generation. We are part of a young generation that has learned from the MISTAKES of our elders and are not expecting our former companies or our government to take care of us when we are old. We are grasping the bull by the horns and taking our future into our own hands.

I know that by the time I reach 65 and ready to retire, if I cannot provide for myself the only person I will have to blame is myself. Not some young "whipper-snapper" that doesnt understand all the hard work I put into my career.

 

[ChrisUS]

You're an idiot, you're looking at it from the commuters point of view. Read the first sentence I wrote with me, 'Look at it from the company's point of view, ...'.

I NEVER was a commuter and I read your post several times.
You were the one that started talking about commuters. The ones we had in BUF all allowed themselves PLENTY of time to make flights. Guess that's the way we "old" people do things.

True, the company doesn't care where you live or how you get there and yes, if a commuter doesn't make it, it does count against them. However, when that commuter doesn't show up the company must replace that worker by forcing madatory OT, giving a reserve more hours, delaying/cancelling a flight because there aren't enough line mechanics to fix the plane, sending planes out without all their bags, etc. All because a commuter or two gets bumped, calls in sick and misses their shift. Multiply that across 4 hubs, 5 focus cities and a boatload of outstations and you get a significant cost throughout the year.

One example, maybe I can make this simple enough for you. Beth (20 year CSA, lives in IAH) is scheduled to work the 2nd shift at CLT, but gets bumped from her flight to CLT because Ethel (40 years service, 87 years old) is flying to CLT because it's her great grandson's first day of kindergarten, forcing Beth to call in sick, resulting in Mary (23 year CSA, worked the first shift) to pick up a madatory double. Extrapolate this situation throughout the year and some significant costs could incur. Now I ask you, who should have priority of getting on the flight, Beth or Ethel?

Ethel and Beth is pretty stupid for allowing herself ONE option to get to work. She MUST have a place in CLT and if she was an intelligent employee knowing there are mechanical and weather problems from time to time, she should have gone the night before. She can only blame herself. WOW! Ethel is 87 and still non reving? BLESS HER HEART!

 

[Seatacus]

One example, maybe I can make this simple enough for you. Beth (20 year CSA, lives in IAH) is scheduled to work the 2nd shift at CLT, but gets bumped from her flight to CLT because Ethel (40 years service, 87 years old) is flying to CLT because it's her great grandson's first day of kindergarten, forcing Beth to call in sick, resulting in Mary (23 year CSA, worked the first shift) to pick up a madatory double.

Why is Beth calling in sick because she missed a flight. Isn't that abuse of sicktime? Unless missing a flight makes you sick.

 

[ChrisUS]

Why is Beth calling in sick because she missed a flight. Isn't that abuse of sicktime? Unless missing a flight makes you sick.

Could be. This change in policy is doing it for me!

 

[bigman60]

"I NEVER was a commuter and I read your post several times.
You were the one that started talking about commuters. The ones we had in BUF all allowed themselves PLENTY of time to make flights. Guess that's the way we "old" people do things."

Yes, I did start talking about commuters, but my post said 'look at it from the company's point of view'. You're response looked at it from a commuters point of view. You may never have been a commuter, but that's how you looked at the situation, instead of looking at it from the company's point of view, like I wrote.

"Ethel and Beth is pretty stupid for allowing herself ONE option to get to work. She MUST have a place in CLT and if she was an intelligent employee knowing there are mechanical and weather problems from time to time, she should have gone the night before. She can only blame herself. WOW! Ethel is 87 and still non reving? BLESS HER HEART!"

Let me refine my question, FROM THE COMPANY'S POINT OF VIEW, who should get on first? Beth who is scheduled to work that day and won't cost the company anything extra if she doesn't show, or Ethel who will happily sit in the terminal knitting a sweater for little Johnny while she waits on the next flight?

 

[Seatacus]

One example, maybe I can make this simple enough for you. Beth (20 year CSA, lives in IAH) is scheduled to work the 2nd shift at CLT, but gets bumped from her flight to CLT because Ethel (40 years service, 87 years old) is flying to CLT because it's her great grandson's first day of kindergarten, forcing Beth to call in sick, resulting in Mary (23 year CSA, worked the first shift) to pick up a madatory double. Extrapolate this situation throughout the year and some significant costs could incur. Now I ask you, who should have priority of getting on the flight, Beth or Ethel?

Please answer me this........What if Beth gets bumped from flight by 21 year active CSA? Would significant cost to company occur? What if Beth gets bumped by a 21 year part-time CSA who works 20 hours a week, and gives away as many hours as they can ,and doesn't need the money, and only works to get the healthcare bennies (this scenario is real)? Would signifacant cost to the company occur? It sounds like the problem with cost would not be the fault of the bumper. Since Beth can be bumped in a myriad ( I can't believe I used that word) of ways it seems like you have an issue with a certain group of nonrevs, and that would be those "wascally wetiwees".

 

[allunionsdeceive]

"I NEVER was a commuter and I read your post several times.
You were the one that started talking about commuters. The ones we had in BUF all allowed themselves PLENTY of time to make flights. Guess that's the way we "old" people do things."

Yes, I did start talking about commuters, but my post said 'look at it from the company's point of view'. You're response looked at it from a commuters point of view. You may never have been a commuter, but that's how you looked at the situation, instead of looking at it from the company's point of view, like I wrote.

"Ethel and Beth is pretty stupid for allowing herself ONE option to get to work. She MUST have a place in CLT and if she was an intelligent employee knowing there are mechanical and weather problems from time to time, she should have gone the night before. She can only blame herself. WOW! Ethel is 87 and still non reving? BLESS HER HEART!"

Let me refine my question, FROM THE COMPANY'S POINT OF VIEW, who should get on first? Beth who is scheduled to work that day and won't cost the company anything extra if she doesn't show, or Ethel who will happily sit in the terminal knitting a sweater for little Johnny while she waits on the next flight?

move to the job, dont relay on flt's to get to work. company do not want people reling on a flt( that might be full) to get to work. bad work practice

 

[john john]

Have you never been there before? They're almost as bad as the CR9 seats.

If the CRJ900 is so bad why do we contract them?

 

[ChrisUS]

Let me refine my question, FROM THE COMPANY'S POINT OF VIEW, who should get on first? Beth who is scheduled to work that day and won't cost the company anything extra if she doesn't show, or Ethel who will happily sit in the terminal knitting a sweater for little Johnny while she waits on the next flight?

Well, I guess the question is WHICH company are we talking about? US East would say Ethel did many years of service and is now elderly and close to death, she deserves the seat. Beth is much younger employee who should know better and has to plan not to fly in the day she is scheduled. If you are talking US west, from what Ive seen lately, screw the old broad, she should have died long ago anyway since she isnt productive and Beth should have been working overtime.
PS I dont know of any 87 year olds who like last minute changes to what they have planned or like sitting in noisy, busy airports.

it seems like you have an issue with a certain group of nonrevs, and that would be those "wascally wetiwees".

Yes, apparently its ok if a senior active employee shows up or one who checks in ahead of Beth if we are going THAT route. (color me surprised if we dont)

It's funny how they SAY they are listening and then go do just what the hell they want to anyway. Corporate America. As long as it is easier for them, they listen.

I know that by the time I reach 65 and ready to retire, if I cannot provide for myself the only person I will have to blame is myself. Not some young "whipper-snapper" that doesnt understand all the hard work I put into my career.

These are brave words from a young person. Wish we coud go into the future from a bit and see how things will REALLY pan out for you and what you think THEN!


I have never planned on social security since I am questioning wether it will be around when Im ready for it in 7 years.

 

[bigman60]

"PS I dont know of any 87 year olds who like last minute changes to what they have planned or like sitting in noisy, busy airports. "

I don't know of anyone, short of the nutcases on airliners.net who enjoy spending extra time in the airport, just saying that Ethel could make productive use of her time with the knitting and all. I've had 3 delays over two hours the past two weeks, not fun at all. Although I do enjoy watching the general public and their complete lack of airline knowledge try to get their way through our system. For example, I was standing behind a woman in her mid-40's who got into an argument with the CSA because she wanted a boarding pass from him and didn't believe him when he told her that what she had was a boarding pass. I politely pointed out the words 'boarding pass' on her ticket and she went on her way. And then there's the people who ask what movie is playing on a flight from DCA to ORD.

 

[ChrisUS]

And then there's the people who ask what movie is playing on a flight from DCA to ORD.

I know this is a cliche by now but I always used to say look out the window and they are playing GONE WITH THE WIND.
After many years, I had certain replies to the DFQ's as we called them. I think you can guess what the initials stood for. ;-)

 

[2BorNot2B]

learned from the MISTAKES of our elders and are not expecting our former companies or our government to take care of us when we are old. .

I wish you well ... we all tried our best to plan also! We never "expected our former companies or Government" to "take care" of us. Pensions AND benefits are part of the pay package agreed upon during employment. What if you took a job that was to pay $25/hr, and when you received your paycheck it was only for $15/hr., what would your reaction be?? What if your "Company" told you they would contribute to your 401-K , and when you retired you found out they never did!
And what if you invested $200/ mo into an Annuity Fund only to find out at age 65 that there were no funds to pay you as they were squandered elsewhere? (refering to SS here) These are not handouts ...they are earned and in the case of Social Security, paid-for Benefits!! Ever wonder why Government Employees do not have to pay Social Security?? It is because they are fully aware that it is one of the poorest investments one can make for the future! I doubt I shall ever recover the monies I was forced to pay!

I hope you have a REALLY good plan for yourself!

2B

 

[cltbay1homie]

I hope you have a REALLY good plan for yourself!

2B
[/quote]


and to the point..Great post.