No more camp Kids makeing connections

[john john]

http://www.goupstate.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art...332/1051/NEWS01
U.S. Airways began its merger with American West in September, and along the way absorbed American's policy on unattended children. Anyone age 5 to 14 can now only fly on


The airline hasn't yet determined if the policy is causing a loss of customers, but it does plan to track that.
U.S. Airways' new policy went into effect in October. Such a policy helps keep costs down and ticket prices lower, Durrant said.
An estimated 8,000 campers are expected to travel through GSP between now and August, a majority of the total that area camps typically draw. In the past, Greenville-Spartanburg saw only between 2,000 and 3,000 campers each summer.
Camp representatives and airport officials say they have made several attempts to get U.S. Airways' policy changed, or to have an exception made, but have not been successful.


The first time in years at least 30. No camp kids making connections I always put up with the good and bad over the many years because it was a cash generator I GUESS WE WERE WRONG.Will someone fill the void?

 

[MarkMyWords]

Couldn't the camps set up ground transportation from CLT to GSP to accomodate unaccompanied campers?

 

[john john]

Yes, this is what you will see along with the parents driving to the camps until another carrier sees the void and moves in if the money is there. I just hope HP/US knows what they are giving up. can’t believe we operate all these years taking connecting UM’s and lost money

 

[MarkMyWords]

what would you say is the average fare for the camp kids?

I do tend to agree with you. When you factor in the cost of the ticket, plus add the UM fee, that SHOULD offset the costs associated with transporting UM's, even in the event of irregular operations.

I know the West had several very public incidents with UM's in the past. That is what may make then a tad gun shy about wanting to accept them again.

 

[exB717Flyer]

AmericaN West?

Sheesh!

 

[john john]

AmericaN West?

Sheesh!

is history

I know the West had several very public incidents with UM's in the past. That is what may make then a tad gun shy about wanting to accept them again.

HP allow kids of employees and college Students to watch the UM's did not work out

 

[hp_fa]

I was peripherally involved in one of the lesser incidents where we had a UM traveling from CMH to SAN. I’ll tell a long story that may make the whole issue more understandable for some and also show how things work (or don’t work). This all occurred after the MCO/DTW problem had occurred a few months prior.

Our crew was coming off a layover and we were to fly CMH-DCA-CMH-PHX for our duty day. We arrived at CMH to see the plane that we had flown in the night before and were to be flying leave for PHX. The LAS-CMH redeye had arrived broken and they swapped out our aircraft. The loads for the DCA turn were, as memory recalls, about 25-28 pax each way. The folks on the CMH-DCA flight were quickly rebooked, but the flight was not formally cancelled because system ops was still trying to see if we could deadhead to DCA and pick up the folks from DCA, as many of them were to fly DCA-PHX with the one stop in CMH. Also, because of the controlled slots for DCA, they did not want to unnecessarily not use a slot that day if that could be avoided.

The problem with the plane was a leaking plumbing line. If I recall it was a hydraulic line. As the day went on we found out that parts were not locally available, especially whatever they used as a sealing agent for that line. Parts were obtained from NW out of MSP, and were being flown to CMH on the first available flight out of MSP.

Probably about five hours after our original departure time the DCA turn finally cancelled and the DCA-PHX passengers were rerouted by the staff at DCA. However, remember that the entire crew had been on duty for nearly six hours at this point and the parts for the plane were just arriving at CMH and the plumbing needed a curing period of one-to-two hours.

Eventually, the plane was declared ready and the flight was boarded, including one female UM. Weather was moving into the CMH area and we got in the takeoff line as approximately the fourth aircraft. Departures were already slowed because of the weather. As we got to the next flight leaving, all westbound flights were placed on departure hold because of the approaching line of weather.

As this was happening, a fairly small area of bad weather in New Mexico, along the planned arrival route started to mushroom in a big way. This often can happen in the summer coming into PHX. Also, mountain thunderstorms along the Mogollon Rim started to fire-up. After about 45 minutes of holding in CMH, the Captain called me to the flight deck and explained that weather was developing over that area and that our flight plan was now being re-routed further south to come in from eastern New Mexico rather then northern New Mexico and that this was adversely affecting our ability to fly that route with the fuel onboard and that if things were to get worse we might need to go back for fuel. The problem with that is that if we were to do that the flight deck crew would time-out with the additional anticipated flight time to PHX. He said that we would probably know in another 20 minutes.

About 15 minutes later I again get called to the flight deck and the Captain tells me that the flight plan had again been changed and that the new routing had us going all the way to El Paso before we could aim at PHX and that we now had insufficient fuel onboard for that routing after all the fuel we had burned off while waiting for the thunderstorms to clear the CMH area and it’s westbound departure routes. The Captain told me that he was going to make an announcement that we needed more fuel and that we were going to taxi to the gate. However, he also said that the second we pulled up to the jetway and turned off the engines those pilots would be timing-out for any trip of that timeframe. He was not going to tell that to the passengers, but rather have the gate staff at CMH say that once the doors were opened.

We got to the gate, the door was opened and the announcement made. The passengers were removed from the plane and the staff at CMH took possession of the UM and signed our UM form accepting the responsibility for the young lady.

In the meantime the PHX-CMH flight had arrived and was also at the gates and the staff at CMH was busily rebooking the customers from our flight to that flight. Operations communicated to the staff at CMH that the cabin crew was “must rideâ€￾ on the CMH-PHX leg and we were boarded. A few minutes later a supervisor came on the plane and said they needed our seats and that we were to get off the plane. I called Scheduling and they said we were to be on the flight and they called System Ops who told CMH Ops to get us on the plane. They took three pax off and placed us on the flight. (Talk about dirty looks…)

While this was going on we had missed our departure time by a fair amount and this new flight was also being routed via El Paso, so we were already late and we were not going to be able to meet our block flying times anyway because of the weather.

We did finally depart, but our arrival in PHX misconnected the UM for the last three flights to SAN. She spent the night in PHX in a hotel with proper procedures having been followed, but her mother was calling every newspaper in the world the next day about AWA having UM problems again.

On arrival in PHX I had filled out an incident report because I smelled potential trouble in light of the entire history. Our entire crew was de-briefed on the incident and it was determined that we had followed all procedure and had acted properly in all respects. However, just a week or two later the company implemented the policy that we would not allow UM’s to travel on connection flights. The negative press, it appears, was too high a price to pay under all the applicable circumstances, despite all procedures having been followed and this young lady having never been in jeopardy or out of the control of AWA personnel.

Anyway, maybe this might shed some light on why the company has decided to act the way they have done in this matter.

 

[Prince of PAWOBs]

Wow! That is quite a story. It seems like everyone did what they were supposed to do and still the UM's mother wasn't satisfied with the outcome.

I can understand the parent being upset, but freaking out over something that couldn't be avoided sounds like the mother was just looking for someone to blame. Unfortunately it was HP.

If a parent is going to send a kid on a plane someplace they should understand that, just like when adults fly, sometimes delays and cancellations are going to happen due to any number of circumstances.

I think despite the possible loss of income, not allowing UM's on connecting flights is a good choice.

 

[john john]

I can not tell how many times UM’s have miss connect to many too count part of the business (use to be) many many many many many many many incident always big on the radar screen parents are all over the map when it comes to there children. Can you operate a airline connecting children YES WE DID. Is it cost
neutral are positive I hope they did there home work. This could be a service failure issue with Express.

 

[Dont call me Shirley]

People who have worked in hubs or "focus cities" can tell just how much staff time is involved in taking care of the connecting "yungins", even during normal ops. Throw in a cancelled flight and someone has to stay with the UM for the next several hours.

 

[hp_fa]

If a parent is going to send a kid on a plane someplace they should understand that, just like when adults fly, sometimes delays and cancellations are going to happen due to any number of circumstances.

That doesn't really work in all circumstances. While there are many UM's who are very savy flyers, including elite status, there are some who are already very fearful of a number of things. Some are going to see a divorced parent whom they may not like, etc. Anyway, some of the UM's are carrying some unwelcome mental baggage as they board the flight. Plus, under 14 years old they don't necessarily have all the wisdom and maturity required to make good decisions on-the-fly. Heck, we would get flyers up to 18 years old who wanted to be treated as UM's and would pay the fee just to have someone really watching out for them.

With the airline having chosen to always (or almost always) crew flights with the minimum allowable FA's, the company did the responsible thing and not put even more pressure and duties on the crew, because days like what I described above do occur on occasion.

 

[tadjr]

I think despite the possible loss of income, not allowing UM's on connecting flights is a good choice.

I agree. If someone really wants to get the kids to AVL/GSP, I believe DL flies there from most of the cities US flies from. If the camp is having problems getting the kids to camp, they could arrange bus transportation from CLT as well. I'm sure the kids would love singing camp songs as soon as they land in CLT.
Anything at all possible to not have to handle kids is a plus. While we still take kids on nonstop flights, its still a problem. You would not believe how many parents come to the airport with no clue about sending their kid across the country. I've had several this past week who dont know who is picking them up, what the phone, address is for who is picking them up, etc.
I even had one who was sending their 8 year old to PHL who DIDNT WANT an escort. He can do it on his own was their response, then she didnt know the dads phone number and was yelling at the kid to call his dad and get it. The kid didnt want to go in the first place so he didnt want to call his dad which made her yell at him even more. You gotta feel sorry for some of these kids.
Loss of some revenue vs the everyday aggravation and potential lawsuit if something happened to these kids I'd vote for the no connecting kids route. Just MPO.

And John John the correct name is AMERICA (NO N) West. That is what the poster was responding to, not that its gone.

 

[jimntx]

I'm jealous. The thing I most dread about summer is having the UMs onboard and keeping track of them until we can get someone to sign off on them. There is always one smart aleck kid who tries to leave the a/c without the required flight attendant or other escort--usually a 15 or 16 year old who is too "grown-up and sophisticated" to be treated as a child.

And, while we're on the subject...
I wish that the Federal government would require the airports across the country to standardize their policies and procedures regarding UMs. Some airports allow the responsible adult to come to the gate to claim the UM. Others make the adult wait outside security which means an airline employee or contract person has to escort them all the way out.

 

[MarkMyWords]

Just the other day I was flying back to PIT from PHX and was sitting next to a young adult (14) who was traveling as an UM. The father dropped the child at the gate completely unprepared for a trip of 4 hours or more. He had no books, magazines, snacks, entertainment and worst of all.....NO MONEY! As the crew came through to do the beverage service, they inadvertantly missed our row. I rang the call bell and the F/A came to get our beverage order. The UM didn't want anything. I made the comment that to him that I was dying of thurst from being in the sun all day. He said something about being hungry and his fathers social security check hadn't come in and he didn't have any money to get something to eat. When the BOB service came around, I offered him the 5.00 to get something to eat, but he refused. Things like that used to drive me crazy at the airport. Parents are so concerned and worried about their children when they travel alone, but yet they don't take any precautions to ensure they will arrive at their destination (by not booking the last flts of the night). Many don't equip their kids with the tools they need for long journeys (entertainment, money, etc.)

 

[hp_fa]

Many don't equip their kids with the tools they need for long journeys (entertainment, money, etc.)

I suspect that AWA still provides free headsets to UM's who have paid the UM fee. That was a perk they used to get for their $30.00.