Don't fly United

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

I posted this up thread, but you might find it interesting so I'll repost it here.

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/united-denied-boarding-fiasco/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

I posted this up thread, but you might find it interesting so I'll repost it here.

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/united-denied-boarding-fiasco/

Interesting. Continental sucks. They should have merged the two airlines' staffs by now - inexcusable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

Continental sucks too. I remember years ago when I had an international flight where the connecting flights were JAL and Continental. The service and experience was night and day.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

+1 and a merger of this size should not have been OK'd by the feds without questions about the merging of staffing and systems explained. Lots of blame to go around and the consumer is the loser very time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

Yes, I said that above. For the flying public it really doesn't matter, but it may be helpful to pinpoint what caused the problems so they can be fixed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

Continental sucks too. I remember years ago when I had an international flight where the connecting flights were JAL and Continental. The service and experience was night and day.

The only good thing that happened in this fiasco is that there were a number of videos from actual passengers providing proof of what really happenned. Because if we did not have these, then United would have just insisted that the passenger was belligerent, and I'm sure the chicago police would easily back that up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As it should - not only when it suits United.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

Yes, I said that above. For the flying public it really doesn't matter, but it may be helpful to pinpoint what caused the problems so they can be fixed.

I doubt that they don't know this. I'm sure management knows the issue but have chosen to ignore it and just focus on getting the profits up, and in turn, they pay out big salaries and bonuses to upper management to "reward" them in achieving this goal. They were able to do whatever they want for so long they got comfortable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

As a customer, this is not my problem. It's United's job to make their systems work for them, that is their choice.

Yes, I said that above. For the flying public it really doesn't matter, but it may be helpful to pinpoint what caused the problems so they can be fixed.

Good - now we have United, City of Chicago AND Continental to be named in the lawsuit. Anyone else?

Love to see the guilty parties squirm and try to spin their way out of this one!

Who is betting on a settlement?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll never fly united.

Me too. They suck. I don't trust them. The whole crew were so rude when we flew with them 2 years ago. I'm a frequent flyer. Never again.

+1,000

I completely agree that what happened was wrong, but as a frequent flyer you're never going to fly them again? Since IAD is a hub for UA, that means it's often the best choice as far as direct flights. You would connect through another city using another airline and take more time to get to your destination with a greater possibility of delay, just so you don't fly United?

[Anonymous]

This incident terrifies me because my DH is a doctor and would have also refused to get off the plane because he had patients the next day and say he would call his lawyer. I am sure he would not have expected to be dragged off and if something like that happened to him he would have injuries that could cripple him for life. Will never fly united again, they treat paying customers worse than chattel

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'll never fly united.

Me too. They suck. I don't trust them. The whole crew were so rude when we flew with them 2 years ago. I'm a frequent flyer. Never again.

+1,000

I completely agree that what happened was wrong, but as a frequent flyer you're never going to fly them again? Since IAD is a hub for UA, that means it's often the best choice as far as direct flights. You would connect through another city using another airline and take more time to get to your destination with a greater possibility of delay, just so you don't fly United?

Not the pp but why yes I would.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I didn't realize there were so many American and Delta employees on DCUM.

Anyone who takes a plane these days can relate to Dr Dao's story. United has brought this on themselves. I used to fly all the time on United and still have over 200k miles with them. I used to feel a good deal of loyalty towards them, but I am just done, done, done at this point.

pp here. I did too and never had a problem. Have they really gotten that bad?

FWIW, I've flown hundreds of thousands of miles over forty years and have never got bumped from a flight. I can't excuse what UAL did, but it seems to occur to no one in this 75 page thread that none of this would have happened if Dr. Dao had just GTFO the aircraft when asked to do so. What an attitude.

Not surprising, because the airlines will tell you they try not to bump frequent fliers with status.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Continental's management took over and runs United. The United flight attendants are not allowed to work on the Continental aircraft -- even now, four years after the merger the company is using Continental's cumbersome, complicated computer system and the flight attendant staffs have not been merged. Munoz is Continental. I know for the public this all makes little difference, but United's name is taking a beating because of the Continental management.

I posted this up thread, but you might find it interesting so I'll repost it here.

http://onemileatatime.boardingarea.com/2017/04/11/united-denied-boarding-fiasco/

Interesting- thanks for sharing. United really has gone downhill compared to a few years ago.