Guest Posted December 31, 2001 Report Share Posted December 31, 2001 SanukBoot--- Excellnet observation.. First to be fair.. We need to remember that UAand NW have a MUCH larger fleet and route network & passenger count than CX/SQ does.. This only means that whatever UA/NW wants to do they have to "roll it out" over a much larger fleet (therefore much higher costs involved)... I also believe that UA/NW has a different way of thinking and a different "target market" than does CX/SQ... Let's look.. First, CX/SQ, neither have a domestic network (obviously) so everything they operate is international.. We also know that the longer the flight is, in mileage, the lower the costs become when measured by cost per seat mile.. Therefore... running short-haul, frequent flights is, when compared to running a few long-haul flights not nearly as profitable.. This is the reason that UA seperate their west coast operations into the Shuttle by United.. This is business unit is not nearly as profitable as the international unit is.. Since SQ/CX only operate internationally, they are burdened with the operational costs of a domestic system... What this does is free up capital to improve their international product! This, IMHO.. is the best explanition of why carriers like CX/SQ have a superior product... Obviously, there are some cultural issues as well built in to the concept of service.. Western carriers have to "teach" it to thier cabinb staff, whereby Asian carriers need only "refine" it since "service" is [normally] a very large component of the everyday social structure in asia... --UPSer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 31, 2001 Report Share Posted December 31, 2001 UPser, great start, something I would never have thought of, thanks! something to consider; in Hong Kong, Philippines, Thailand and maybe other asian countries after sales service is pretty rotten and you probably get better service in the west... Therefore, why better in-flight service? Personally, I think the in-flight service is better because Asian's in general are a lot less confrontational that their counterparts in the west. Therefore, in the passengers eyes the problem is dealt with a lot better. Why don't UA and NW have tv screens for each seat in economy class for long haul flights??This is ludcrious and 1 very good reason why I will never fly them again. I love the choice to watch what I want when I want.... Sanukboot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted December 31, 2001 Report Share Posted December 31, 2001 I have to agree that westerners are far more confrontational (and over a less) then their Asian counterparts. I had the misfortune of working on the East coast for way to long, a lot of those people are just plain hotheaded! They will blow up over nothing, and demand things from the service staff (flight attendants, gate crew) that are un heard of. Additionally, in the old days, the gate agents/service agents knew exactly how to handle a situation, and they had the authority to make decisions. Furthermore, if there was a problem the agent could offer some form of compensation. ASn example, the flight is delayed due to scheduling, mechanical etc...(the airlines fault so to speak) the agent could offer meal tickets, rebooking without penalty etc, whatever to make the passenger happy. Now, if anything is to be offered, the passanger has to specifically ask for it. In a lot of cases, there is less to be offered to start with. The result is, a frustrated agent who has to endure far to much wrath un necessarily, and a pissed off passanger. Additionally, as previously stated, we as Americans are just plain rude sometimes. We know very little about how to render service, or receive it (some people are just plain assholes when they are out in public, they think the world is theirs simply because they are paying)(you can't expect 5 star service in a Macdonald's, yet people do). As for the individual T.V./entertainment sets at each seat, you will see them eventually, for now, UA has to deal with the effects of it's long term arrogance towards "the cheap seats." In otherwords, they used to only concentrate on the last minute business travelor, as they pay the most. Now, as the market is tighter, they will have to change their (bad) attitude and start to realize the rest of us are paying and have a choice. Funny thing, no one has answered my question. Which is, once again, How much more are you willing to pay for better service?" $50-100 more per ticket? just wondering! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 31, 2001 Report Share Posted December 31, 2001 Hippie-- No one WANTS to answer that question... We want it CHEAP and FIRST CLASS... Look at all the things people will do to secure a FREE upgrade.. It's is true.. you do get what you pay for.. --UPSer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shygye Posted January 1, 2002 Report Share Posted January 1, 2002 Hip, No need to speculate, look at the prices for Midwest Express, Jet Blue, etc. Southwest has the reputation of giving good service and their fares are lower than the majors. As for me, I have had mostly good customer service with NW (gold elite member). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted January 1, 2002 Report Share Posted January 1, 2002 I always found Southwest to be a horrible experience, a flying Greyhound (bus) of sorts. But then I know that going in, so it's no surprise. I have also only flown then on short hauls. Midwest basically...KICKS ASS! I'm not sure how it is now, but at their inception, they were going to be the all business class airline. It was their mission statement to assure good service! I also like Alaska airline! I also found the service on Thai airways to be pretty good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 1, 2002 Report Share Posted January 1, 2002 Old Hippie, Did I celebrate too much or are we agreeing on something? Midwest Express certainly does kick ass! For years frequent flyers have been angry about the cost and limited availability of Business Class Seats. Midwest Express offers ALL BC Seats and the employees are wonderful. This fact does however shoot down your claim that quality service is directly related to employee compensation. I've had good experiences with Southwest Airlines also. I like a BC Seat better but Southwest offers the lowest percentage of lost bags of the top 10 U.S. Airlines. They are mostly on time and the employees are nice to deal with. I don't know much about Jet Blue but will one day fly on them. Burp! Time to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted January 2, 2002 Report Share Posted January 2, 2002 Don't get me started on the almost cult like Atmosphere at Southwest As for Midwest, they just have a whole different corporate attitude. A lot of their help at the smaller points are pople who treat it as a second job with decent benifits, and travel privelidges, so they are able to attract better people. I had the privilige of working for Alaska Airlines a few years back, what a place! they did a really great job of treating the employees like family. Great atmosphere, great bosses who bend over to accomodate the employees in every way possible, I never worked in a better place, in all sincerity. But the pay sucked! it was, almost the lowest in the industry, they said screw the union, we have to give you guys a raise, so they did. No real hassles at contract time either. So it isn't all about money. The point I was trying to make was, if you combine low pay with bad working conditions it shows in the final product, service. In the case of UAL and a few of the other majors, they pay bad and screw with the customer contact people for little or no reason, and don't want to let them do their jobs ("...don't tell them they are entitled to whatever unless they specifically ask...let them yell at you and get abusive...") so basically the customer suffers. Also UAL and a few others made a switch in who they hired a few years back, and then lowered the pay and benifits. That failed is now (hopefully) being changed. Anyway, I am sure we can agree on a lot of things! But for now, it is New Years, so lets agree to have a good time!! Happy New year dude! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted January 2, 2002 Report Share Posted January 2, 2002 Old hippie -- Do you notice that (for the most part) those airlines that you/we/us have generally had positive experiences on are regional or even 'nitch carriers?? Do you think that this plays a part? I do.. for example airlines like Jet Blue, Midwest and Alaska are (generally speaking) smaller carriers where the distance from senior management to the front-line employee is not so great... This means that it is much easier for senior management and the rank and file to communicate and "see" each others position.. I have friends who fly (cabin staff) for AS and SW.. Each of these people have met the CEO's and the regional Presidents and other senior management.. I also have friends at UA who (despite 15years) have never seen or met a President, much less the CEO.. At UPS I have had many oppurtinties to meet and speak (briefly) with our (retiring 1/02) CEO... What this does (at least for me) is to help me better understand our mission, corporate stragety and in general to feel appreciated by senior management. I read lots of articles in various publications about Jet Blue and Southwest and the thing that (IMHO) these guys bring to the airline is ATTITUDE.. Attitude that the customer is the SOLE reason that we (as a company) exsist and the ONLY reason that we (as a company) will make it to tomorrow. Also smaller airlines have a fewer "levels" of management. This means fewer chances for that message to get "lost" or diluted. Althought I (myself) am in this so-called management chain, I'm a beliver in "less management is better".... after all, we all know that it is very easy to "over manage" something or to "micro-manage" it to death I suspect that if UA could/would train their local/station management personel to think of their individual locations as a "small individual business" and then give them the authority AND responsibility to run it as such, we would see better results.. Your thoughts? --UPSer Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old Hippie Posted January 2, 2002 Report Share Posted January 2, 2002 UPSer, I don't know Jet Blue, but I know a little about Midwest, and a lot about Alaska! Midwest basically is a small "old School" carrier. That is, they stick to the basic rules of customer service, ettiquite manners etc...The people they (at least used to) hire are a different breed, students, teachers, housewives, people who are interested in benifits and flying perks and oh yeah, a few extra bucks. The company works with them on flexible schedules, day trades etc...so the people are happy, and it shows! As for Alaska! wow, I can't say enough good things about them! Their policy is simple, you earned this job, so it is yours until you don't want it anymore! Unbelievable how well they treat the people! The one guy everyone considered a dickhead (manager) would be considered to nice to promote at UAL, he really wasn't that bad! I remember being out in the field on an engine pull, the head of maintainance came out, introduced himself, and asked if we needed anything, then invited us out to dinner! I was really surprised when he came up to us the next day to say goodbye, he even remembered our names! I really hated to leave that job. I know a lot of guys who won't leave, just because money isn't everything, and because they know the job is theirs! Basically, I agree with you, the majors are "over managed" and even then quite poorly. One of the biggest problems is, they have all these little dynastys with in the company, and that leads to power plays and struggles from the get go. I think the majors could be more efficient if they just changes their attitude at the top. A big part of Southwest's success is they listen to their employees about how to do their jobs better. The result is, the employyees decide how to best do the job at hand, not some guy in an ivory tower. Thus the employee is part of the process rather than a pawn! The majors just decide on how they want something done, then punish people for not doing it that way, even if the employees way is better, more economical etc...Southwest and Alaska are prime examples that the Lunatics can indeed run the asylum!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.