Rumors / Speculation / Gossip / Hostility / Frustration

Hi Everyone -

Thank you so much for all of your feedback and kind responses to the last two posts.  It has been awhile since I have felt like writing.  Even though I do not fly United as much as I used to, with Facebook and e-mails, you all have kept in touch and take the time to express your frustrations and tell me all about what is happening.  After some time, I begin to question whether or not to put any more energy or money into something that has little hope of making a difference.  In our hearts, and from first-hand experience, we all know that this new United is not the world-class airline that it is meant to be. I am flattered and honored that what I post does get read and that it does help to keep everyone energized.

Recently, in the Wall Street Journal, there was an article about the compensation corporate leaders receive today.  I was unable to find a copy, or else I would post a link so that you could read it.  The gist of the article was that the pro-business bent of the Reagan administration ushered in a new "me-me-me" type of leadership with compensation tied to stock price performance.  Before this time, being the head of a major corporation was not about making themselves and shareholders obscenely rich. In exchange there was prestige and power, plus there were moral imperatives and ethics that came with position.  Good leaders knew they had to treat their employees fairly, and that they should not be enriched at the expense of those who are the backbone of the organization.  Don't get me wrong, corporate leaders did alright for themselves, but there was not this huge gap between what management is paid over their employees.  This article closed by saying that maybe it was time to bring some of that morality back, and by doing so, big business could once again be viewed as a good thing for our economy and society.

2014 was a profitable year for United Continental Holdings, Inc. (UAL), and as his contract stipulates, Mr. Smisek is to be rewarded for guiding the company to achieve this.  With salary, profit sharing, stock options, and other benefits, Mr. Smisek's compensation in 2014 was just nearly $13 million.  His lieutenants, James Compton, John Rainey and Gregory Hart all did well too, earning seven figure amounts.  Combined, the four of them received compensation that totaled $25.9 million.  Was their leadership, wisdom and guidance all worth this much money?  The majority of UAL shareholders, and their Board of Directors, all seem to think so.

I looked at the full-year 2014 and first quarter 2015 financials and there some things that caught my attention:

1. Since the merger was booked in 2010, through the first quarter of this year, nearly $4 billion has been spent or set aside for merger-related costs and severance packages.  This is more than double what was originally estimated.
2. $100 million in this year alone is being set aside for payouts to 2,500 Flight Attendants who took early buyouts or were furloughed.  Yet, this summer, United finds itself in the position of having to pay time and a half for Flight Attendants to voluntarily pick up extra hours to cover shortages.  They are also actively recruiting to hire new Flight Attendants.  Somewhere in all of this are extra costs that did not have to be incurred.
3. In 2014, United carried nearly 3.8 million fewer passengers than it did in 2011.  
4. The $1 billion dollar swing from a loss in the first quarter of 2014 to a profit in the first quarter of 2015 is all coming from lower fuel prices.  

What concerns me though is that excluding fuel expenses, controllable operating expenses have gone up nearly 11% from where they were in 2011.  This is one why UAL's share price performance trails its competitors.  This is where management's focus is now, and once again they are going to be wanting to hammer at labor costs.

All of the above is old news.  This management has made very costly strategic decisions such as shifting domestic business to regional partners and then choosing Continental's reservation system over that used by United.  Twice in the last two months, United has been hit with system wide delays because their computer systems went down.  Over four million passengers who used to fly United are now flying other carriers.  Yet, there is no one on the Board of Directors who wants management to answer for these mistakes.

Looking forward - its your turn...

As I mentioned earlier, I have received feedback from many of you about what is going on at United Airlines, especially for the Flight Attendants.  Sam Risoli blames the lack of progress in the contract negotiations on the three pre-merger groups who are unable to set aside some of their own differences.  I have also of isolated stories from the line that tell of hostility toward pmUA Flight Attendants who crossed over to pmCO.  If any of this remains true, it is discouraging, because management will take advantage of this divide, and it is certainly behavior that would not be expected from a United Flight Attendant.

I can tell that you all are frustrated by the lack of answers, either from management or your union leadership, to key issues that need to be worked out to reach a joint agreement.  If I were to pick one issue that you all want answered now it is "Seniority Integration."  For the pmUA side it is black and white, seniority is determined by date of hire.  However, for the pmCO and pmCMI side, you all do not want to give up the seniority you have earned and you want to some sort of relative seniority factored into a joint agreement.  

What is meant by relative seniority?  To clarify this for the civilian readers, it is helpful to have a history of Continental Airlines.  Back in the early 80's, Texas Air, operating as Texas International Airlines acquired Continental.  Texas Air was run by a man named Frank Lorenzo.  Deregulation of the U.S. airline industry was signed into law back in 1978 and Texas International, with their "peanut fares," quickly became the leader in the low-fare industry.  However, if you are going to be a low-fare airline, costs to run that airline had to come down and labor was in Mr. Lorenzo's cross-hairs.  After Texas Air acquired Continental, Lorenzo was unable to get the concessions he wanted from labor, so in 1982 he put the entire company into bankruptcy and voided all the collective bargaining agreements.  Employees were faced with coming back as non-union "scab" labor with big cuts in pay and benefits, or they did not come back at all.  Most of the employees at today's Continental are all new hires after the Texas Air takeover and bankruptcy. 

After Continental, Texas Air acquired Eastern Airlines, and those unions would not roll over for Mr. Lorenzo. Eastern Airlines was then put into bankruptcy and eventually out of business.  Some Eastern employees stayed on working for Continental, but many lost their jobs.  In 1986, Frontier and People Express Airlines both went out of business, with Continental purchasing most of the assets.  Some Frontier and People Express employees were hired by Continental, but most lost their jobs.  Continental employees who were around during the Lorenzo years have put in their dues and seen their share of bankruptcies. They have seen Continental at its worst, and they have seen Continental at its best. 

For the Flight Attendants and their seniority, on the Continental side, there will be few, if any, Flight Attendants that have a hire date before 1978.  On the United side, the Flight Attendant holding the number one spot was hired back in 1958.  If the number one spot on the Continental side belongs to someone hired in 1978, if you go by "date of hire" then that person gets pushed down to the same level as someone who was hired by United in 1978.  Instead of being number one, that person might be assigned as number 2001.

So both sides, United and Continental, have valid arguments for their position on seniority integration.  So the next question to be answered is what is the formula for determining "relative seniority?"  What model should be used to equitably integrate the three groups?  I do not know all the legalities, or all details of what has been discussed, but I do know that the Negotiations Committee is working with a Federal Mediator, and with any impasse, neither side might not like what the Mediator comes up with as a solution.  If I were a Mediator facing this decision, I would just have to so some serious math, look at weighted average time of service and see if there was a middle road to be met.

I polled some of you asking for your date of hire and what number you have on the seniority list.  Then I weighed in estimates for new hires from Pan Am on the United side, and new hires from Frontier and Eastern on the Continental side.  Then I put in estimates for expansion and contraction periods for the two separate airlines.  Finally, I put in my estimate for the early buyouts, furloughs and crossovers that affected the United side.  Using all of these factors I was able to come up with a reasonable distribution by year and the number of Flight Attendants who would have a hire date in that year.  With all that I could calculate a weighted average seniority for both groups.  To my surprise the difference came out to only four years.  On the United side the weighted average year of hire was 1988 and on the Continental side, it was 1992.  I am sure the real numbers are different, but what it does suggest is that there may be room to compromise.  A mediator could split the difference and say that Continental flight attendants hired before the 2010 merger would get their seniority assigned based on a date that is two years before their actual date of hire.        

However this all falls out, Flight Attendants from both sides have to be prepared.  I think they have taken more hits on the United side, so it would be nice if some of the senior people got some of their regular flying back.  Seniority may be assigned system wide, but trips are awarded by domicile.  Depending on where you are based, you may regain some ground you lost, or you may find yourself taking a back seat to many others that work on the other side.  My personal opinion is that "date of hire" should be used straight across, but only because I think the time a person has committed to their job should not be discounted.  On the average, United Flight Attendants may have only four more years of experience, but a lot can be learned in four years.  It took only one day in September of 2001 and Flight Attendants hired before that date will definitely have a different experience story to tell over those hired after September 2001.  My opinion aside, the main point that I finally am getting around to that Seniority Integration may not have the impact you expect and it should not be something that prevents all of you from coming together and presenting a united front to management.

I listened in on last week's teleconference with Sara Nelson and I am encouraged by the show of unity from the Flight Attendants. Your Negotiations Committee is working hard to reach compromises with each other and stand firm with management on issues that are important to all of you.  It is important that all of you come together to back them up. This is why the "Day of Action" set for this Thursday, July 16, is so important.  Take the time to show up and show management that you all can stand together.  Do not let them use what divides you now to their advantage.  This is about a Joint Agreement that makes sense, one that recognizes your contributions to this airline, one that recognizes that you are United Airlines. 

P.S. - unless my day job gets in the way, I will be standing with you all at LAX on Thursday.  I hope to meet many from the pmCO side and let you know how much, as a customer, I appreciate how hard your job is and thank you for keeping the skies friendly.

Be predictable - Be gracious - Be the solution - Be the Brand .....Part 2

This two-part post was started a few months ago and before you get into Part 1, I wanted to start out with an update on the negotiations towards a joint contract for United's Flight Attendants.  As you know, tentative agreements were reached three years ago with each of the three working groups - pre-merger United (pmUA), pre-merger Continental (pmCO) and pre-merger Continental Micronesia (pmCMI).  One part of these tentative agreements was that that Flight Attendants (FA's) from one working group could not work on planes (aka metal) that was once part of another subsidiary.   For example, pmCO FA's could not be trained for or scheduled to work on the 747's which were part of the pre-merger United fleet.  On the other side, pmUA FA's were not going to be permitted to train for or work on the new 787's that had been ordered by Continental.  This arrangement has led to a lot of confusion, and resentment for not only the FA's, but for us customers as well. 

By all appearances over the last three years, Mr. Smisek's buddies cannot make up their mind on where to position aircraft and how to staff the domiciles. For example, when you look at a schedule, a 1:00 PM flight from LAX to Denver can have a different flight number and different aircraft every day (I so long for those days when I used to know the flight numbers and knew what equipment was being used).  In their contract, the pmUA FA's have work rule protections so that they have adequate rest periods, minimum layover hours, and a maximum number of duty hours they can work in one day.  These protections were kept after they were asked to take huge pay and benefit cuts when United was in bankruptcy ten+ years ago, and the pmUA FA's fought hard to keep them.  The pmCO and pmCMI FA's do not have some of these same protections and management has more flexibility in stretching out their duty days.  Add these protections in with the restriction on which metal pmUA FA's can work, and then throw in this daily rotation of flight numbers and aircraft, and scheduling for pmUA Flight Attendants becomes significantly more complicated than for their pmCO and pmCMI partners.  It also does not help when fleet scheduling moves pmUA metal into Continental's hubs in Houston and Newark.  That means more pmUA FA's have to "dead head' to those hubs to start their line, and those "dead head" hours are paid hours.  So with the work rule protections, restrictions on "metal," and more "dead-heading" hours, the contract with pmUA FA's makes them more expensive than their partners at pmCO and pmCMI.  At the outset, Mr. Smisek made his goal very clear - to cut costs, and that they are going for a joint contract for the FA's that does away with many of protections that the pmUA group still has.  

Over the last three years, there has clearly been a bent by management to "stack the deck" and pare down the number of pmUA FA's with the hope of being able to shift the outcome of the vote for a joint contract.  Cash buyouts were offered to encourage senior pmUA FA's to retire.  Those who did not accept the buyouts were then forced to cross over to the pmCO side or be furloughed.  FA's who did cross over lost their seniority and became junior to their pmCO partners.  Then, in April of 2014, 111 pmUA FA's were involuntarily furloughed.  At most domiciles, pmUA Flight Attendants with as much as thirty years of service found themselves back on Reserve.  To add salt to the wound, while all of this was happening on the pmUA side, United management was actively recruiting and hiring new FA's for the pmCO group. Now this was all last year, but the summer of 2015 is a little different picture.

As I wrote about in Part 1 of this post, United management has had some new revelation and you can see some of how the old United used to operate. With more mainline domestic flights, things have turned and United is now having to hire new FA's for the pmUA side.  In addition, within the last three weeks management has also had to declare at least three "Limited Critical Coverage" days, not only in the U.S., but at their domiciles in London and Frankfurt, asking pmUA FA's that had not worked their maximum to pick up trips at 1.5 times their rate of pay.  When the schedules came out for July, all of the pmUA FA's had lines that scheduled them out to 100 or more block hours.  When you add in layovers and added duty hours, some FA's might be home six days during the whole month.  It has been nice to see Mr. Smisek and his buddies actually forced into admitting they need the pmUA FA's.  It is nice to have their arrogance from last year coming back and biting them in the a**.    

Negotiations towards a joint contract began in 2012; however, it was not until a year ago after a Federal Mediator was brought in, that these negotiations began a small crawl forward.  When I say a small crawl, in realty, there has been nothing substantive that has been agreed to.  FA's from all three groups have become very frustrated and rumors circulate about what is going on with negotiations.  The AFA has been very quiet and very little public information made available.  On the management side, Sam Risoli, United's Senior Vice President for Inflight Operations has sent out generic memos saying that negotiations are moving forward, but he too has not been able to offer anything substantive.  All he can offer is "Thank You for all you do."

On July 1 the AFA MEC Presidents, as well as members of the negotiations committee, for the United, Continental and Continental Micronesia groups all came out with a joint announcement for a "Systemwide United Flight Attendant Day of Action" to be held on July 16 at all domiciles.  FA's from all three groups will be coming together to publicly declare their frustration at the pace of negotiations and that they will not back down to management.  I cannot tell you how encouraged I feel to see this kind of unity after all these years, and I encourage all of you reading this, to do your part to support this effort. There are so many other inefficiencies and problems that need to be dealt with at this airline.  United's Flight Attendants are hard working and dedicated and they are not the problem.  They are not going to be Mr. Smisek's sacrificial lamb in order to boost the stock price.  

The AFA has also come out with a red "Unity" pin that all AFA members are going to be receiving and wearing this month.  If you are a customer flying United or another airline and you see a Flight Attendant wearing this pin, take the time to thank them and let them know you support them.  I hope to be able to pick up my own pin this month to wear when I fly United, and I hope to have time on the 16th to go out to the airport to lend my support and say thank you.  Mr. Smisek this "Day of Action"' is not about pay and benefits - it is about what this airline has become under your leadership.  These Flight Attendants are gracious, they are the solution and they are the Brand.  These hard-working dedicated professionals are the Friendly Skies and they are United Airlines.   

Be predictable - Be gracious - Be the solution - Be the Brand .....Part 1

United calls these four directives their "Service Principles."  For the last year or so, when United employees log in to the company's intranet, they have been greeted with this message.  The intent of the message is not only to motivate United's employees to do their best, but it is also intended to unify them and get them to rally around a common idea.  That idea being the "Brand" that is United Airlines.

All big corporations have their catch phrases and jargon that is put out there to encourage and inspire.  Young MBA's coming out of their A-school programs land jobs in the executive office or with a consulting firm; and leap over those on the front line with the customers. While in school they have read, discussed and come up with their own theories from numerous case studies of actual missteps made by major corporations.  At the same time, you have academics shaping those young minds with their own theories of what should have happened, even though many of these academics would not last a month in the corporate world.  This is where concepts such as "Service Principles," as well catch phrases and jargon are bred.  

Some of the missteps studied include the introduction of a new product to replace something that was tried and true (new Coke); leveraged buyouts and how they overvalued companies at the expense of shareholders and employees (KKR and Nabisco); and one that I studied, how the delay in upgrading computer reservation systems was critical to the demise of a highly respected and profitable airline (the original Frontier).  I suspect that if they are not already being written, in a few years business schools are going to be studying the merger of United and Continental and the mistakes made in trying to unify two disparate corporate cultures.  

I suspect there is some highly paid MBA, most likely a consultant, who came up with these four service principles for United Airlines.  Had he or she spent any time on the front line beforehand, they would have realized that the dedicated employees at both United and Continental had already embraced these service principles on their own from the very first day they reported for duty.   The suits in the Willis Tower need to show they too are contributing to ensure the success of this airline, and that is why you see crap like this coming down to the line.  Yet some hard working flight attendant, who did not get any sleep the night before in their glamorous layover hotel near the airport, is supposed to check-in for what could end up being a 13 or 14 hour duty day, read these service principles, and then all is right with the world.  This merger has cost hundreds of millions of dollars more than originally projected, much of that cost coming from overpriced consultants with ivy league MBA's and PhD's; all of whom are so arrogant to think they know for certain that their solution is the right solution.  Buried in this is probably a cost that ran at least seven figures for someone to come up with these four service principles.

Like a lot of corporate jargon and feel good catch phrases that get pushed down the line from management - many of United's front line employees just think of the four service principles as a load of bullsh*t. It is obvious they are not being embraced sincerely.   Here is the proof - since the merger was completed five years ago, United has consistently placed last or near last in many national customer service surveys (e.g. J.D. Power).  Add to that the number of complaints registered with the DOT by passengers in just 2014 alone, where United was second only to Skywest.  Ironically, Skywest is United's largest Express partner.   

Further evidence that confirms that the service principles have not been working are the significant changes in how United Airlines has been operating in the last few months. There are hints of some of the old United Airlines coming back, although much of it is too little and too late to woo back many premium customers who have already defected to other carriers.  To make my point here it is best to compare what what was happening a year ago, the mistakes that were made to that point, and then look at what is happening today.

Summer of 2014
As you know, most of the senior management ranks at United are made up of those who came from Continental Airlines, and they all brought with them an attitude that they were certain that what had worked at Continental was going to work for what was now the world's largest airline.  Starting in 2010 through to the summer of 2014, United's new management implemented changes that they certain would make this airline better then the rest.  This is a picture of where United was a year ago:

• With delivery of the new ERJ-175 jets, for which United committed hundreds of millions of dollars, many domestic routes were being switched to United Express carriers, and stations in mid-sized cities became entirely outsourced. Long-time United and Continental employees either had to transfer out of those stations, accept lower paying positions with the Express partner, or retire.  These new jets were also being put into service on flights between hubs, such as Denver to Washington-Dulles, replacing mainline service, taking away jobs from mainline Pilots, Flight Attendants, Mechanics, etc..
• 757's were being retired or put into service on shorter Atlantic routes, and then replaced by the newer 737-900's.  Most legacy United flights to the Hawaiian islands were now flying pmCO 737-700 or 737-800's because they used less fuel, and pmCO crews could be scheduled for longer duty days and work more turns rather than having to layover.    
• Expensive and heavy In-flight entertainment systems were being pulled off and far cheaper broadband internet wi-fi installed so that customers could use their own devices to stream movies and TV shows.  This became known as BYOD, or bring your own device, flying. 
• A new thin-line economy seat was introduced that would reduce weight and allow for an extra row or two on the planes.  Passenger comfort was not a concern.    
• There were very few wide body aircraft on domestic flights, all of these planes had been repositioned to be put into service solely on international routes.  The new 787 was flying, but it had been grounded for awhile because of the battery problem, and Boeing was still experiencing delivery delays.  The 787's being delivered were planes that had been ordered by Continental and are configured with only two classes of service.  These did not fit with United's, 3-cabin, International Premium Travel Experience product that long-time United customers were accustomed to.
• Across the system food service was being cut.  Meals were only going to be served on flights over two hours.  There would be no meal service on the United Express flights.
• Bag fees were increasing, and United was adding everything in that was possible that could be purchased for an an extra charge.  You no longer had to be a frequent flyer to have "Premier Access," you could buy that for a nominal charge.  Long-time loyal premium flyers were being pushed aside.

All of this was done so that each and every flight segment was profitable.  That was the Continental way of doing things.  

Something happened with all these changes though - the customers were not embracing them, and there were operational glitches that led to costly delays and even more customer service problems -

• Global Services and other premium frequent flyers in those mid-sized cities that were now outsourced took their business to American and Delta.  Why endure a long-trip across the Atlantic in a cramped narrow-body 757 only to be crammed into a smaller regional jet for another 3 to 4 hour flight from IAD, ORD or EWR to their home airport.  
• The wi-fi roll-out was a clusterf**k and for most of last year many domestic flights flew "dark," being without wi-fi or any inflight entertainment system.  If you did not bring your own already downloaded entertainment or a good book, trans-continental flights got pretty long.  Another problem is that management did not see the need to install additional power outlets on these planes, even in the First class seats. Customers now have make sure they are "charged-up" before getting on one of these flights.   Even so, the charge is not going to hold on a five hour trans-continental flight.
• Any problems with headwinds and the trans-Atlantic 757 flights had to stop for refueling causing delays.  The same for the 737's now flying to Hawaii.  Flights from LAX to Hawaii were being diverted to SFO to top off the fuel before heading out over the Pacific.
• The new generation 737's with their longer fuselage and being closer to the ground require longer runways for takeoffs.  Where a 757 may be able to take off at 140 knots, a 737-900 requires 180 knots before being able to lift off.  United won a coveted transcontinental route from San Francisco to Reagan National Airport in Washington.  Other than the 757, the only other planes United can use are the A-320 and A-319, plus the smaller, cramped older 737-700 or 737-800.  I think United chose to use the older 737's because they can schedule the pmCO flight attendants to work the return flight the same day rather than having to pay a crew to layover.  These older 737's have have fewer seats to sell, and transcontinental routes to DCA are premium and business flyers will pay the higher fare for the convenience of landing at this airport closer in to Washington, D.C.  I don't think the cost savings exceeds the lost potential revenue had the 757 been put into service on this flight, and now there are not enough 757's available.  Some of the Hawaiian island airports previously served with 757's and 767's are also not able to accommodate the 737-900.  
• Premium frequent flyers are defecting at far greater rates than anyone could have expected. Loyalty no longer mattered - status could be purchased for a price.  This is all evidenced by the losses in market share in cities where United faces competition.  

Summer of 2015

This summer there is a much different picture at United; however, it does not mean that flying United is a better experience.  It is just interesting to watch how schizophrenic this management seems to be as they make change after change after change.  Most notable of these changes is the reintroduction of mainline flights to many domestic mid-size cities.  United's premium customers were put off by the down gauging of service and they defected to Delta and American who still had or increased mainline service either to their home airport or destination cities.  Looking at market share statistics for 2014, it actually looks like Delta increased their mainline flying to accommodate the customers that were defecting from United.  In addition, the regional carriers are notoriously bad when handling irregular operations.  The bad winter of early 2014 is a good example - United lost hundreds of millions of dollars because of canceled flights, the majority of them being on Express carriers.  

But to show that this short-sighted management can't get their eye off of every nickel, even though mainline jets are back in many cities, staffing at those stations is still outsourced.  I don't think these agents have been trained in the four service principles - case in point being my most recent experience in Albuquerque a few weeks ago.  I don't think it can be called First Class service when the agent working that line suddenly walks away leaving premium customers to wonder how they can get checked in and their bags checked.

United has also committed a lot to upgrading the United Clubs.  They are a big profit center now where anyone can buy a day pass.  Membership is no longer limited or exclusive to those willing to commit to a full year, and another reason why they can no longer call it a "Red Carpet Club."  Some of the upgrades are nice and long overdue.  With new furnishings, there is not much fighting over an electrical outlet to charge up your device so that it will last long enough for a movie on the next flight. On the down side, they are testing new food offerings in some clubs which are kind of a joke.  I am not sure what was wrong with what they had before - long time members were not expecting a meal when they went into the club, but I suspect the single day users want a lot for their $50.  So the new offerings include hot soup - even in the summer - which languishes all day in a tureen, hummus that is uncovered and left under hot lights, pita chips, "artisan" breads that are at least a day old, olives (which I am highly allergic to) left uncovered under hot lights, salami left uncovered, chunks of cheese on a wood cutting board uncovered under hot lights, and disgusting hard brownie chips (they taste like something you would scrape off of the pan from a burnt batch of brownies).  Gone are the sanitary individually wrapped cheeses, fresh crudite, little packages of fresh carrots, and fresh cookies.  Again, some highly paid bozo came up with something that would appear as an upgrade, but is really kind of a mess and appears more difficult to maintain.  Why do they keep trying to fix things that were not broken?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

While United began cutting back on service, the competition stepped things up, and premium customers began defecting at a rate that this management did not expect. This is all evidenced by the loss of market share across the board, and most critically, United's long held dominance across the Pacific is eroding.  What is apparent about this "Continental" management is that they do not know how to compete.  Case in point, the pulling out of JFK.  Granted, United only has service to and from LAX and San Francisco, but they were the first to come up with Premium Service flights, and for a time, well-heeled bi-coastal frequent fliers were left with a feeling that flying United's Premium Service was something special.  Slowly, the niceties on these flights were taken away, and then the down gauging from three cabin to two cabin service.  Seats that went for $6,000 round-trip were taken out - saving a nickel only to lose a hundred dollars.  Those who flew United P.S. flights for prestige are now flying American or Delta, both of whom upgraded service on these routes.  I don't think Mr. Smisek and his buddies do not fully understand what it means to "Be the Brand"  and thus they themselves are not embracing all of the service principles that they push on to their front line.  Mr. Smisek, if you want to cut costs and make this airline run better, do some house cleaning there in the Willis Tower first.  In the safety videos you keep talking about making United a world class airline, well to do so, you have to know how to compete, not know how to run away from a challenge.

There is so much more that I want to write about, but time is limited and you are probably already bored at this point.  I just do not have the desire to fly like I used to, but I do stay loyal to United Airlines.  I hear that I can get a better experience for my dollars at other carriers, but it is nice to see my friends, who through all of this, show up and, like they have been doing since the first day they started at United - thank me for flying the Friendly Skies