Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
And now, the latest--- from the link I posted, above. It's never made explicit, but "putting 2 and 2 together," it would appear that the couple in question sat in extra-legroom seats after discovering some bonehead guy sleeping in their ASSIGNED seats. But they didn't pay for extra-legroom seats. But the flight was not full, so more than one single option was open. But hey, says the airline: they did not PAY for extra legroom seats.
The nonsense needs to stop and be regulated: the next "commodity" (like extra legroom) to be rationed will be the air breathed by passengers. Want to be sure you don't suffocate before arriving at your destination? PAY UP.
Alas, the FAA is utterly impotent, and more than likely, the laws are written deliberately in such a way as to give the airlines free rein. Sucks. I can remember when the smart, earliest ones to reserve seats happened to be the lucky ones and grabbed the bulkhead sets. End of story. Now, simply RESERVING a seat costs extra. It is capitalism run amok. https://www.yahoo.com/style/united-airlines-kicks-couple-off-plane-en-route-wedding-181721817.html
Are we not "seeing" a reflection of circumstances and actions reflective of social conditions, thinking and reactions to the circumstances??? A societal unwind.
Crash said "But they didn't pay for extra-legroom seats. But the flight was not full, so more than one single option was open. But hey, says the airline: they did not PAY for extra legroom seats."
I respectfully disagree if you're saying folks should be allowed to grab upgrade seats they didn't pay for. Heck, I've been squashed in small seats on flights where there were unoccupied seats in first class. So what? Want first class? Pay for it (which I'll occasionally do).
Folks need to mellow out I say. The important thing is getting from point A to point B on time and safely. Recently I'd paid maybe an extra $25 for a nicer seat near the front of the smaller jet out of Chicago up to TVC. Unfortunately, there were so many empty seats in the back it threw the "weight and balance" of the aircraft off. Couldn't take off until some volunteers in front moved to the back. I was happy to comply and didn't file a complaint seeking my $25 back. Hey - life happens!
Generally, the cabin crew treat folks very nice I've found. If they can accommodate your needs they try to do so within reason. And if you happen to engage some of them off-flight (around your hotel or while riding a shuttle) you'll find most are first rate people.
I just say....Objectivism, yeah? The "greed is good" gang will never perish and for capitalism to truly work for everyone, the Objectivists have to cease to exist. In a perfect world where capitalism truly rules in its pristine form, communism never takes hold, and socialism is not spouted as a 4-letter word because charity is also not a 4-letter word.
When my husband and I moved from one coast to the other with a dog, we ended up praising United. That was in January, 2011. We talked at length with them starting a month in advance to be sure we met their criteria for dog transport cages and conditions. We paid extra for first class over the normal first class price to guarantee (as best possible) that we would not be separated from the non-stop to Seattle flight we had selected for the dog's transport. We arrived at the airport and a very competent employee inspected and handled the dog. After seating we received a note telling us that the dog had been put on board. The area they flew him in was under the same atmospheric control as the passenger cabin. The dog flew without drugs. When we arrived there was another employee keeping watch over the dog until we were able to claim him. The dog didn't look the least bit stressed by his ordeal but was glad to see us and "tell" us about his adventure.
I was devastated by the videos of humans in coach being treated worse than dogs "in first class".
@Anna. Your experience is what I have always believed, should be attributed to personal responsibility of one or more individuals at United. Leadersh*t always has you believe they driving good behavior in the organization when reality is something else. This may be the COB in me speaking, but I felt the same way at 21 based on my experiences up to then, and my conviction has only got stronger with age.
Similarly, when something goes wrong the same Leadersh*t would now have you believe the real culprit was a few rogue employees or error in judgement on the part of a few rather than a systemic / cultural issue, and for which they don't have to take any blame. Wells Fargo did that recently. Regardless of how successful they were at that, at least it has given an excuse for some "socially responsible" fund families to continue to own their stock.
We don't want to invest in companies that manufacturer whiskey because they are "evil enablers", and because individuals have no personal responsibility when it comes to how much to imbibe. The Leadersh*t will decide for them and their actions are always above reproach. However, when it comes to out and out destroying people's lives, the company did no harm, it was just a few employees who had the wrong whiskey. Rinse, repeat.
My point - we all want to feel good about ourselves, and that starts with feeling good about others. Similar to I feeling very proud of myself for volunteering my time at the local food pantry than if I simply donated some money. We (aka You) are kind enough to feel the same about those United employees, but we also automatically attribute those qualities to company they worked for. I submit to you there's a difference.
Love thy neighbor, but not his employer who has nothing to do with the way he is.
It gets complicated. But, speaking of "the company they work for", I suspect the majority of us here are to some extent "owners" of UAL. The top 12 institutional investors hold 48.65% of UAL's shares. Among those dozen names are: Berkshire, Blackrock, Vanguard, Janus, Fidelity and T. Rowe Price,
Comments
The nonsense needs to stop and be regulated: the next "commodity" (like extra legroom) to be rationed will be the air breathed by passengers. Want to be sure you don't suffocate before arriving at your destination? PAY UP.
Alas, the FAA is utterly impotent, and more than likely, the laws are written deliberately in such a way as to give the airlines free rein. Sucks. I can remember when the smart, earliest ones to reserve seats happened to be the lucky ones and grabbed the bulkhead sets. End of story. Now, simply RESERVING a seat costs extra. It is capitalism run amok.
https://www.yahoo.com/style/united-airlines-kicks-couple-off-plane-en-route-wedding-181721817.html
A societal unwind.
I respectfully disagree if you're saying folks should be allowed to grab upgrade seats they didn't pay for. Heck, I've been squashed in small seats on flights where there were unoccupied seats in first class. So what? Want first class? Pay for it (which I'll occasionally do).
Folks need to mellow out I say. The important thing is getting from point A to point B on time and safely. Recently I'd paid maybe an extra $25 for a nicer seat near the front of the smaller jet out of Chicago up to TVC. Unfortunately, there were so many empty seats in the back it threw the "weight and balance" of the aircraft off. Couldn't take off until some volunteers in front moved to the back. I was happy to comply and didn't file a complaint seeking my $25 back. Hey - life happens!
Generally, the cabin crew treat folks very nice I've found. If they can accommodate your needs they try to do so within reason. And if you happen to engage some of them off-flight (around your hotel or while riding a shuttle) you'll find most are first rate people.
Great discussion.
I was devastated by the videos of humans in coach being treated worse than dogs "in first class".
Similarly, when something goes wrong the same Leadersh*t would now have you believe the real culprit was a few rogue employees or error in judgement on the part of a few rather than a systemic / cultural issue, and for which they don't have to take any blame. Wells Fargo did that recently. Regardless of how successful they were at that, at least it has given an excuse for some "socially responsible" fund families to continue to own their stock.
We don't want to invest in companies that manufacturer whiskey because they are "evil enablers", and because individuals have no personal responsibility when it comes to how much to imbibe. The Leadersh*t will decide for them and their actions are always above reproach. However, when it comes to out and out destroying people's lives, the company did no harm, it was just a few employees who had the wrong whiskey. Rinse, repeat.
My point - we all want to feel good about ourselves, and that starts with feeling good about others. Similar to I feeling very proud of myself for volunteering my time at the local food pantry than if I simply donated some money. We (aka You) are kind enough to feel the same about those United employees, but we also automatically attribute those qualities to company they worked for. I submit to you there's a difference.
Love thy neighbor, but not his employer who has nothing to do with the way he is.
http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-major.html?t=UAL