US uniform discussion

Aug 20, 2002
3,270
306
US Airways bashing over at airliners.net is nothing new. Now they are going after the uniforms. Not that they don't have a point.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5076904/
 
US Airways bashing over at airliners.net is nothing new. Now they are going after the uniforms. Not that they don't have a point.
http://www.airliners.net/aviation-forums/general_aviation/read.main/5076904/
The uniforms are horrible. I wear it and to tell you the truth, the men's options are designed for a larger person (ie. the stretch comfort waistband, polyspandex fabric, high rise waist that makes it possible to pull them up to my chest). In order for me to get mine to fit properly and comfortably I had to spend over $100.00 on 4 pairs of pants for tailoring that the company would not pay for because it wasn't within the guidelines of re-imbursement. As far as the far too casual look the people at Anet are speaking of, I do not wear a necktie when I am working 4-5 legs per day on a 737 in the middle of summer when the jetway A/C doesn't work and the pilots won't turn on the APU until 10 minutes prior to departure. It's very hard to make the uniform look professional but it is possible.
 
:lol: TELL ME something N-e-w!? There is a saying "You only get ONE Chance to Make a first Impression". This uniform for the most part SUCKS B-i-g Time. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay Too Casual. Many people wearing uniforms 'sized' for what they could have worn 10 years ago or maybe hoping to reduce Down to. Muffin Tops?.........hmnn, more like the batter of a layer cake poured into a Loaf pan. It is downright embarassing. There are some pieces that work but low rider pants on 30-40-50-60-70's (yes, survey says) do NOT look so appealing and most people cannot pull it off. The Track Suits? Send them out To Space. The skort........God Help Us. And let's not forget the Blue Smurf Dress improperly sized that makes Miss Piggy look like the Michelin Tire Man's Sister. Oh, I am sure I will offend or shall we say Downright PO some of the people but "I call It Like I see It". Let's not forget "If it looks like a Duck, quacks like a Duck and 'waddles' like a duck........I can pretty much assure You...........it's a GD Duck!". (Or I am sure someone might want to believe it is Natalie Portman playing a new role :lol: ). I am Not about sugar coating some of the BS and flat out nonsense that WE All witness and experience. I couldn't care less about being Politically Correct either..........some people need to Called Out occassionally and it starts from The Top as well. Year's ago they sponsored "IMAGE Fair's for Employees. Now they need a Complete Makeover. And unfortunately there are a few Too Many that simply wouldn't make the Cut.
 
:lol: TELL ME something N-e-w!? There is a saying "You only get ONE Chance to Make a first Impression". This uniform for the most part SUCKS B-i-g Time. Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay Too Casual. Many people wearing uniforms 'sized' for what they could have worn 10 years ago or maybe hoping to reduce Down to. Muffin Tops?.........hmnn, more like the batter of a layer cake poured into a Loaf pan. It is downright embarassing. There are some pieces that work but low rider pants on 30-40-50-60-70's (yes, survey says) do NOT look so appealing and most people cannot pull it off. The Track Suits? Send them out To Space. The skort........God Help Us. And let's not forget the Blue Smurf Dress improperly sized that makes Miss Piggy look like the Michelin Tire Man's Sister. Oh, I am sure I will offend or shall we say Downright PO some of the people but "I call It Like I see It". Let's not forget "If it looks like a Duck, quacks like a Duck and 'waddles' like a duck........I can pretty much assure You...........it's a GD Duck!". (Or I am sure someone might want to believe it is Natalie Portman playing a new role :lol: ). I am Not about sugar coating some of the BS and flat out nonsense that WE All witness and experience. I couldn't care less about being Politically Correct either..........some people need to Called Out occassionally and it starts from The Top as well. Year's ago they sponsored "IMAGE Fair's for Employees. Now they need a Complete Makeover. And unfortunately there are a few Too Many that simply wouldn't make the Cut.
There were way too many cooks in the kitchen on the uniform decisions. Let’s see there were FAs from east & west operations on the uniform committee, CSRs from east and west stations – cold stations, hot stations, tropical stations ¬– from their uniform committees, union reps, Marketing, Uniform Distribution, Purchasing, Finance, Inflight Management, Station Management, Directors, VPs, and just about anyone else who spoke up loudly about getting what they wanted out of the new uniforms. Option number one of using readily-available uniform components from uniform companies was rejected in favor of using a NY designer to create custom pieces to fit an image for the new “brand” at US. Once designed, every piece of the uniform collection put into production as customized pieces, never worn or tested by anyone previous to the rollout. All of this was done in an attempt to gain consensus from all of the above parties which lead to way too many options and styles that didn’t work well for everyone. Uniforms that look good on twenty-somethings weighing in at 110Lbs doesn’t guarantee that they will also look good on those who are at the opposite end of those descriptions, and they don’t.

What was spent on just that program? $10M, $15M, $20M+? It just goes to show that having lots of direct user input (too much), trying to make everyone happy, hiring a seasoned designer, and spending a lot of money doesn’t guarantee a successful outcome. Besides, who really buys a plane ticket based on how FA’s and CSRs look in their uniforms (notwithstanding those airlines that once tried to use sex appeal as a marketing tool)? Dockers and a Polo seems to work fine for other cost-conscience airlines.
 
Option number one of using readily-available uniform components from uniform companies was rejected in favor of using a NY designer to create custom pieces to fit an image for the new “brand” at US. Once designed, every piece of the uniform collection put into production as customized pieces, never worn or tested by anyone previous to the rollout.

Exactly, isn't that how Tempe does everything? Think back....Kiosks, Shares cutover, website....why Beta test....just get the crap out there.
 
Exactly, isn't that how Tempe does everything? Think back....Kiosks, Shares cutover, website....why Beta test....just get the crap out there.
US wasn't the launch customer on the kiosks or Shares, and EDS had completed multiple res migrations prior to HP/US. Didn't the website have a beta online running parallel with the legacy site for several months prior to a final cutover? I think you are reaching for an equivalency that isn’t there. None of those projects were saddled with far too many decision makers like the above-wing uniform program was.
 
There were way too many cooks in the kitchen on the uniform decisions. Let’s see there were FAs from east & west operations on the uniform committee, CSRs from east and west stations – cold stations, hot stations, tropical stations ¬– from their uniform committees, union reps, Marketing, Uniform Distribution, Purchasing, Finance, Inflight Management, Station Management, Directors, VPs, and just about anyone else who spoke up loudly about getting what they wanted out of the new uniforms.

What was spent on just that program? $10M, $15M, $20M+? It just goes to show that having lots of direct user input (too much), trying to make everyone happy, hiring a seasoned designer, and spending a lot of money doesn’t guarantee a successful outcome. Besides, who really buys a plane ticket based on how FA’s and CSRs look in their uniforms (notwithstanding those airlines that once tried to use sex appeal as a marketing tool)? Dockers and a Polo seems to work fine for other cost-conscience airlines.


1. If it isn't broke - don't TEMPE it up. I have never been involved with an organization (until 2005) that HAS to reinvent the wheel at every juncture - and then never succeeds.

2. Another insight into and example of our MANAGEMENT team's decision making process.
Your worried about uniforms and relative seniority? I would be worried about still having a "career" in six months with these arrogant chuckle heads at the helm. Uniforms and the other myriad of problems we confront are merely symptoms of the same illness.

3. Years later, after all the fanfare, and all press releases (you know how Tempe like their press releases) they still couldn't even manage to come up with something NEW or launch it ON TIME. They settled on a retread "retro" design circa 1984 from the Stan Herman's 1984 UAL Collection. When a decision was made it was months late and no better than the previous uniform. Who's fault again?

4. Like everything else at CACTUS: much-a-do-about-nothing and wasn't done right the first time.

In their defense they did add those very important (and gaudy) HERITAGE COLORS that have SYMBOLICALLY brought us all together as ONE company.
Well, maybe that was stretching it a a bit.

Pastel shirt that is garnished with Lime Green, Baby Blue, and Ketchup Red accents don't command respect on board an aircraft, or at a salad bar.

Maybe you think a a ball cap, pastel pink polo shirt , and khaki pants says professional - well in some circles it does - PILOT AND FLIGHT ATTENDANT LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. In SWA's case - it just means they are getting paid.

Now your ATTEMPTING to make the point that the problem we have experienced with the uniforms was due to:

TOO many choices and TOO much input from the employees (that were going to wear them) - and we should have just deferred by default to the infinite wisdom of the Arizona Politburo. Now a few less choices wouldn't have hurt, but neither would having a few better choices.

But your saying that Tempe knows better and has demonstrated that point so far, right?

I respectfully disagree - Tempe's track record suggests otherwise. (RES migration and the elimination of SABRE, Fleet Configuration, Envoy Service, Dividend Miles, On-Board Announcements)

Nothing was wrong with the old uniforms - when you saw it - you knew whoever was wearing it worked for an airline - now that is debatable. Maybe all it needed was some additional shirt choices and accents.
It's wasn't about making a fashion statement - it was about getting a better uniform.

Neither was achieved.
Just another DECISION to be REVISED later.
 
OK do you go to the gas station, bank, restaurants, and other places of business and complain about their uniforms?

I mean a passenger complaining about a uniform is a waste of time and petty, let them live out of a suitcase and hotel for three to four days a week.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #9
Didn't read every reply on the discussion, but something did not see mentioned is the horrible quality of the uniform (regardless of one thinks of the look. Sweaters that fall aprt in the wash, zippers that get stuck, liners that come undone. Penny wise and Pound foolish strikes US Airways yet again.

As far as looks go, my USD 0.02 is that there too many options, many of which are more suited fast food joint than an international airline.

Anyone else remember the PI unforms that came along in '87 or so? Now those were sharp.
 
:lol: TELL ME something N-e-w!? There is a saying "You only get ONE Chance to Make a first Impression". I couldn't care less about being Politically Correct either..........some people need to Called Out occassionally and it starts from The Top as well. Year's ago they sponsored "IMAGE Fair's for Employees. Now they need a Complete Makeover. And unfortunately there are a few Too Many that simply wouldn't make the Cut.

I agree we need a "CORPORATE MAKEOVER".
Certainly couldn't hurt. And your right - "there are a few too many that simply wouldn't make the cut". AMEN

Oh you said "C-o-m-p-l-e-t-e Makeover" - My bad

Still couldn't hurt.
 
The new uniform was a disaster from the very beginning when you look back on it. They chose a vendor that gave them the lowest cost while NEVER proving they could handle such a large undertaking. They chose fabric and colors that DO NOT match regardless of their "heritage". Who puts PSA orange together with HP teal and the rest? The dress was meant for those who should wear such a garment but nooooo they upped the size to a circus tent and look what we have now. They offered shirts for women that can be worn un tucked, shirts for men that can go tie less oh and top it off mock turtlenecks that show mens manboobs and love handles. The quality of the articles are poor at best yet you are to look YOUR best. Granted some here wouldn't look their best in Vera Wang or Dolce & Gabanna but give us something to work with. I could go on and on but all one has to do is stroll through the terminal. I do think it's a bit much for a customer to write about an airlines uniform though. Really? :rolleyes:
 
1. If it isn't broke - don't TEMPE it up. I have never been involved with an organization (until 2005) that HAS to reinvent the wheel at every juncture - and then never succeeds.

2. Another insight into and example of our MANAGEMENT team's decision making process.
Your worried about uniforms and relative seniority? I would be worried about still having a "career" in six months with these arrogant chuckle heads at the helm. Uniforms and the other myriad of problems we confront are merely symptoms of the same illness.

3. Years later, after all the fanfare, and all press releases (you know how Tempe like their press releases) they still couldn't even manage to come up with something NEW or launch it ON TIME. They settled on a retread "retro" design circa 1984 from the Stan Herman's 1984 UAL Collection. When a decision was made it was months late and no better than the previous uniform. Who's fault again?

4. Like everything else at CACTUS: much-a-do-about-nothing and wasn't done right the first time.

In their defense they did add those very important (and gaudy) HERITAGE COLORS that have SYMBOLICALLY brought us all together as ONE company.
Well, maybe that was stretching it a a bit.

Pastel shirt that is garnished with Lime Green, Baby Blue, and Ketchup Red accents don't command respect on board an aircraft, or at a salad bar.

Maybe you think a a ball cap, pastel pink polo shirt , and khaki pants says professional - well in some circles it does - PILOT AND FLIGHT ATTENDANT LABOR NEGOTIATIONS. In SWA's case - it just means they are getting paid.

Now your ATTEMPTING to make the point that the problem we have experienced with the uniforms was due to:

TOO many choices and TOO much input from the employees (that were going to wear them) - and we should have just deferred by default to the infinite wisdom of the Arizona Politburo. Now a few less choices wouldn't have hurt, but neither would having a few better choices.

But your saying that Tempe knows better and has demonstrated that point so far, right?

I respectfully disagree - Tempe's track record suggests otherwise. (RES migration and the elimination of SABRE, Fleet Configuration, Envoy Service, Dividend Miles, On-Board Announcements)

Nothing was wrong with the old uniforms - when you saw it - you knew whoever was wearing it worked for an airline - now that is debatable. Maybe all it needed was some additional shirt choices and accents.
It's wasn't about making a fashion statement - it was about getting a better uniform.

Neither was achieved.
Just another DECISION to be REVISED later.
I’m saying that this program wasn’t successful because there were too many opinions on both the labor and management side. On the management side their first issue was to let Marketing drive the bus and charged them with trying to get consensus from employees who were threatening grievances and generally throwing juvenile tantrums over uniform pieces, fabrics, colors, and what have you. This led to the hiring of Stan Herman and ultimately Twin Hill to produce an entire catalog of custom uniform pieces that simply didn’t need to be customized and designed as if US Airways has different requirements than every other airline in America in terms of outfitting FAs & CSRs.

Marketing has and always had the wrong perspective on how this should have been accomplished. Rather than focusing on fit, function and durability, they chose to try to win popular approval by tinkering with colors, fashion looks, and puting endless choices out so that everybody “got what they wanted.” Of course Marketing has no clue as to how to 1) make cost-conscious decisions, 2) how to run a uniform program, 3) how to manage an international supply chain or 4) how to gain acceptance from labor groups without being a doormat. And while I’m on the subject, the Marketing point person, who came over from legacy US, creates disasters every time she gets involved with any project.

On the labor side, well what do you expect? The uniform committees come in with unrealistic expectations and scream bloody murder if they either have to make a change or don’t get exactly what they want. Then, multiply that recalcitrant attitude by 20,000 and you get a uniform program that no one is happy with. Big surprise.

There is no reason why US could not have gone to Aramark or Lion Apparel or whoever and just start placing orders for garments already in production and in use at a major airline somewhere in the country. Maybe a couple of customized, logo pieces would be okay, but certainly not every piece in the collection which was already too large for what was needed.
 
The new uniform was a disaster from the very beginning when you look back on it. They chose a vendor that gave them the lowest cost while NEVER proving they could handle such a large undertaking. They chose fabric and colors that DO NOT match regardless of their "heritage". Who puts PSA orange together with HP teal and the rest? The dress was meant for those who should wear such a garment but nooooo they upped the size to a circus tent and look what we have now. They offered shirts for women that can be worn un tucked, shirts for men that can go tie less oh and top it off mock turtlenecks that show mens manboobs and love handles. The quality of the articles are poor at best yet you are to look YOUR best. Granted some here wouldn't look their best in Vera Wang or Dolce & Gabanna but give us something to work with. I could go on and on but all one has to do is stroll through the terminal. I do think it's a bit much for a customer to write about an airlines uniform though. Really? :rolleyes:
I agree with most all of your post except that Twin Hill did not offer the lowest cost alternative. They were the only company willing to covert all of Stan Herman's designs into custom uniform pieces. The program is not where it is today because there wasn't enough money spent. The whole concept of customized uniforms which meet every employee's whims is the root cause of the problem.
 
The name you are lloking for is Karen from Marketing.

Was Karen responsible for the uniforms? Was KAREN responsible for the "Swooshliner" paint jobs, chopping up the Galleys, Envoy, and the airplanes, the Heritage (crop) circles, not hedging fuel, elimination of SABRE, and all the other arrogant dim witted decisions that are made around here on a daily basis. If so - is Karen still even employed at the Tempe Crystal Palace (TCP)? And if she is, Why?

I am not just asking the question, EVERYONE should be asking that question.

Seems to be this delusional corporate mantra around here since 2005, that if your any good at what you do - you should leave.
We don't want you because we don't want to pay you. That sure would explain the results we have been experienced. It seems the TCP stands for "Taking Care of my Peeps" Peeps you know everyone except those that Pay for all these mistakes and actually WORK here.

Since Travis Christ's departure a few years back - it was assumed (by all that knew him) that his departure was a good thing for the company, our employees , and most of all our passengers. If I may be allowed to use "Tempe speak" marketing was on an "upward trending metric", recalcitrant(ly) speaking of course. Also for the record the number of the "recalcitrant" was actually more like 35,000 (more than US/AWA combined today) - not 20,000.

So Karen is "now" the fall person of the week? It wasn't really Travis Christ after all it was Karen? What else has been the one constant the past 6 years? Think hard.

Those of you out there are too dense or belligerent to make the correlation, The individual that IS culpable is Doug Parker - A.K.A. "the Maverick of the Airline Industry and a true wall street corporate TOOL.

That's where the buck stops , the CEO - not Karen in Marketing.

IMHO - Recalcitrant(ly) speaking of course.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top