Truk and an aborted Trip - Thanks United

[Zeagle Eagle]

United is getting worse and worse. If any of y'all are interested in flying you should read flyertalk.com It's a frequent flyer board. They have a forum for United. If you read it, you'd never fly them again. Not everyone can do it, but if you are flying UA, I'd allow two or three days to get to your destination. If there is bad weather anywhere, the entire system goes down.

Of course if you're going to Truk, it's the only way to get there.

Not everyone can do it, but certainly if you can, no matter which airline you're flying, allowing a day or two lee way is always a good thing. I know, particularly those of us in the States who get only a few days of vacation a year, it's almost impossible.

On trip insurance. I do 4-5 dive trips a year. Trip insurance, as I have priced it, costs close to 10 percent of the trip. So, it's a risk benefit analysis. What is the risk that the entire trip will go south? Probably a lot less than 10 percent. I bought trip insurance early on in my travel. There was a pilot's strike, we had to drive from Cairns to Sydney and thus lost one part of the trip. What I recovered was just about the cost of the trip insurance. So, I self insure. I realize that if you are doing one expensive trip a year, are on a very, very tight schedule, are in poor health or have family in poor health, there may be very good reasons to buy trip insurance. This is just my perspective.

We'll see how I feel after my upcoming trip to Jakarta on UA and ANA. I've booked a total of 6 days after the scheduled arrival in Jakarta to get to Biak for the boat.

I am on the frequent flyer board. Many people complain. Most people generally do not post when they have a good flight, hence you get a one side opinion. Certainly not enough to make a rational decision. "never fly them again" Don't be ridiculous. They are the largest airline in the world and fly millions of miles and millions of people and most are happy.

---------- Post added July 16th, 2015 at 03:04 PM ----------

WOW! Someone defending the airlines! Obviously someone who does not have to deal with them as a "commoner!!" If you did you would be picking up the pitch fork as well.

There is a simple thing I hope to help you understand Zeagle Eagle. We have all of our choices taken away, shoved like cattle into a metal tube and shot through space. Then we are dropped into a foreign land with no assistance offered by the people who drop us there. The airlines g**damn f***ing well do have a moral obligation to take care of us when they can not fulfill their end of the contract. They have found a way to shirk that obligation at every opportunity and we meekly take it. This will change in time trust me. Yes we have basically two choices go or not go. But if we choose to fly then the airline has some obligations also.

Now let me tell my United story that has me so angry.

Flying to Chuuk as well for a week of liveaboard diving. On the trip out the 777 sputtered on the runway in HNL and we were delayed 3 hours or so getting a replacement. The flight to Guam is 8 hours and then we were connecting to Chuuk. Obviously missed that connection. In the 8 hours we were in the air, the CSA's in Guam found us a hotel, shuttle, and rebooked a 777 load of people to their appropriate destination. We were treated nicely and all things were handled as well as can be expected. On the return we had almost the same thing happen. We loaded in Guam on probably the same 777 and it also had some engine issues. Three hours later the plane was fixed and we were on out way. In the 8 hours we were in the air, the CSA's in Honolulu did......absolutely nothing!!! So we asked where do we go to wait? Not our problem say they. OK well it is nice and air conditioned with some chairs down by baggage claim where we can wait out the 8-10 hour delay until we could figure our way out of this mess. Well they ran us out of there saying we couldn't stay there either. (yeah yeah yeah not United's fault. But it really is. The airport and the airlines are in this together and they should take care of people like us who have all of their options taken away.) Only place available was outside with the homeless. And I am not exaggerating!! It seems that the HNL homeless have basically the same needs as stranded passengers. A place to rest and some bathroom facilities. I spent the night on a stainless steel metal bench used by the agriculture people to inspect bags in the heat and humidity. Became violently ill as a result. My compensation, 7,500 FF miles! Not even enough for an upgrade.

So don't try and defend the airlines. We have to give up all of our freedom and choices in order to travel. We put our trust in people to get us to our destination quickly and safely and when that does not happen the people we trust should take care of us. No profit or margin bull$hit allowed when you have people trapped you had better take care of them or we will revolt. THAT REVOLT IS COMING SOON AND THE AIRLINES WILLL NO LIKE IT!!!! No one is asking for the airlines to put us all up at the Ritz every time there is a weather or mechanical delay but we have to be given basic human comforts and a place to be. And that most definitely should be in the contingency plans of every airline in the world.

1. You are 100% wrong! The Airlines DO NOT have an obligation to take care of you because of weather any more than the DOT has an obligation to take care of you because rain delayed your car travel. That's the law. I understand you don't like it.
2. You can leave off the swearing. I don't respond well to that. It lowers your IQ in my opinion.
3. You do not have to give up "all of our freedom and choices in order to travel". I don't think you have thought that statement through. Maybe it's just a bit of exaggeration?
3. Don't tell me who I may or may not defend. That is not up to you. BTW, I am not defending any airline. I am merely laying out the facts so passengers can make more informed choices.
4. There are lots of places to stay in Hawaii. You can get a day room reasonably and there is a bus service which costs almost nothing to take you there. I know, I have done it.
5. No profit or margin bull$hit allowed when you have people trapped you had better take care of them or we will revolt. THAT REVOLT IS COMING SOON AND THE AIRLINES WILLL NO LIKE IT!!!! No one is asking for the airlines to put us all up at the Ritz every time there is a weather or mechanical delay but we have to be given basic human comforts and a place to be. And that most definitely should be in the contingency plans of every airline in the world." Unfortunately you are wrong. You are due nothing, zero, nada from the airlines due to weather.
6. " THAT REVOLT IS COMING SOON AND THE AIRLINES WILLL NO LIKE IT!!!! No one is asking for the airlines to put us all up at the Ritz every time there is a weather or mechanical delay but we have to be given basic human comforts and a place to be. And that most definitely should be in the contingency plans of every airline in the world." You are cracking me up with your threats and spewage. Take a deep breath, give it a rest.
6. These are the facts. You may choose to believe them and make the necessary plans to include contingencies; or not. You may roll with the punches when you travel to remote destinations or not. It's up to you. I really don't care.



---------- Post added July 16th, 2015 at 03:15 PM ----------

"Really,"airlines blame every possible delay" and you base this on what information. That is total nonsense. You have not a clue what you are talking about on this issue. "

You are obviously tied to airlines and your unrealistic comments are not accurate. I, and pretty much everyone, agrees that weather was the cause here and the pilots acted appropriately. I even agreed that there was likely no aircraft immediately available in GUM, and that ground staff made it up to sound helpful etc. But 5 days for a response is not acceptable to anyone nor should it be. But it's apparently ok to the airline employee, which shows exactly why people are unsatisfied with airlines. When a diversion happened on Midway last year, United had a replacement plane within 36 hours, even dealing with the birds there. If an airline can't figure out a replacement in a day or two, and they don't have a plan for IRROPS that is better than 5 days, then they are severely incompetent and they have not trained their workers well.

As for my info, I have no desire to argue or reveal any sources. You wouldn't believe me if I said I knew $mi$ek himself. I stand by my claim, standard procedure is to blame delays on weather as often as possible, and only admit to a MX or other delay when finally confirmed by management.

As for Flyertalk, the United forum does list many problems. However, the same is true for every other airline on the site, there are many complaints for each. The site has loads of good info, and many insiders, but it also is a place for venting and attracts many complaints.

"You wouldn't believe me if I said I knew $m i$ek himself. I stand by my claim, standard procedure is to blame delays on weather as often as possible,"

Of course you have that in writing don't you. Shades of Deep Throat, LOL, Unless you have some sort of proof, then I am raising the BS flag on this one.
Weather is an easy delay to prove. You can't hide a weather delay. It affects all the airlines. BTW. I know Smisek too. I had dinner with him a few months ago.




---------- Post added July 16th, 2015 at 03:19 PM ----------

All right people, We all have our opinions. I really don't have a dog in this fight. There is nothing else to say. We have beaten this one to death. Let's move on to more important topics. Like splits or paddles or AI or gauges. "Over and Out".

 

[ev780]

1. You are 100% wrong! The Airlines DO NOT have an obligation to take care of you because of weather any more than the DOT has an obligation to take care of you because rain delayed your car travel. That's the law. I understand you don't like it.
2. You can leave off the swearing. I don't respond well to that. It lowers your IQ in my opinion.
3. You do not have to give up "all of our freedom and choices in order to travel". I don't think you have thought that statement through. Maybe it's just a bit of exaggeration?
3. Don't tell me who I may or may not defend. That is not up to you. BTW, I am not defending any airline. I am merely laying out the facts so passengers can make more informed choices.
4. There are lots of places to stay in Hawaii. You can get a day room reasonably and there is a bus service which costs almost nothing to take you there. I know, I have done it.
5. No profit or margin bull$hit allowed when you have people trapped you had better take care of them or we will revolt. THAT REVOLT IS COMING SOON AND THE AIRLINES WILLL NO LIKE IT!!!! No one is asking for the airlines to put us all up at the Ritz every time there is a weather or mechanical delay but we have to be given basic human comforts and a place to be. And that most definitely should be in the contingency plans of every airline in the world." Unfortunately you are wrong. You are due nothing, zero, nada from the airlines due to weather.
6. " THAT REVOLT IS COMING SOON AND THE AIRLINES WILLL NO LIKE IT!!!! No one is asking for the airlines to put us all up at the Ritz every time there is a weather or mechanical delay but we have to be given basic human comforts and a place to be. And that most definitely should be in the contingency plans of every airline in the world." You are cracking me up with your threats and spewage. Take a deep breath, give it a rest.
6. These are the facts. You may choose to believe them and make the necessary plans to include contingencies; or not. You may roll with the punches when you travel to remote destinations or not. It's up to you. I really don't care.

1. Actually to use your analogy the FAA has no responsibility. But I do hire a car and driver from time to time and if they can't get me where I am going they take me home. Rarely have I been left at a random street corner in a bad neighborhood because that taxi couldn't get there. Yes it is the law bought and paid for. But there is a moral obligation.
2. Fine. Like I give a $hit what anyone thinks of my IQ. (OK now that was funny, I don't care who you are.)
3. A bit exaggerated, maybe. We are told where to sit and when we can get up. What we can bring with us. What to eat. Say the wrong thing and out you go. "Fail to comply with the instructions of a uniformed crew member." We have no other control other than the go or no go decision. So we turn our very lives over to the airline and for our trouble we get dropped off on some random island with little hope of rescue and not even a clean bathroom.
4. At that time there were zero. Same situation as was happening to the OP. Convention in town and no commercial options. So don't you think think there could be a reasonable safe comfortable space that we could wait out the issue?
5. Actually I disagree. If there wasn't built in legal protection I would argue that there is a breach of contract. One of the conditions of the contract is to get me where I am going and on time. But since the airlines have negated those provisions of the contract through several legal means, I leave it only to the moral responsibility. Which the legacy carriers have zero morals.
6.(a) We shall see. If there is not an improvement in this, then regulation or business competition will take care of it. You call it spewage I call it Darwinism! Customers will win.
6.(b) You are correct those are the facts. Glad you said it. Cause those facts are indeed the impetus of the coming revolt.

 

[Zeagle Eagle]

Let it go ev780, let it go!

 

[WetPup]

It happened. It was what it was.

To be honest, I think much of the issue I'm seeing here is the difference between US-based airlines and airlines that operate outside of North America. This is something that is obvious when reading through Flyertalk (yes, I too am an active member there, although primarily on the Qantas forum).

What Zeagle Eagle is saying is by and large very true of US-based carriers. What may not be so apparent is that this attitude we got from United is highly uncommon on other full service global airlines (low cost carriers are the bane of my existence and something to be avoided at all costs). I've had flights diverted regularly around the world due to volcanic activity (I'm a geologist, and am constantly in parts of the world where this is an issue). Yet these diversions and delays have always been handled with appropriate care by the airlines. They may not have gotten us where we were going any faster, but the information provided was accurate, we weren't told bold faced lies to our faces, and while the airlines may have never had any financial responsibility for our situation, they at least assisted in finding appropriate accommodation and transport.

 

[Zeagle Eagle]

Agree with you Wet Pup. The difference is many of these foreign carriers are government supported. Here in the states it's every man for himself and tax them to death. If you got a good Samaritan to help you the great. I love it when it happens; but, don't expect it on an American carrier.

 

[Peter69_56]

It happened. It was what it was.

To be honest, I think much of the issue I'm seeing here is the difference between US-based airlines and airlines that operate outside of North America. This is something that is obvious when reading through Flyertalk (yes, I too am an active member there, although primarily on the Qantas forum).

What Zeagle Eagle is saying is by and large very true of US-based carriers. What may not be so apparent is that this attitude we got from United is highly uncommon on other full service global airlines (low cost carriers are the bane of my existence and something to be avoided at all costs). I've had flights diverted regularly around the world due to volcanic activity (I'm a geologist, and am constantly in parts of the world where this is an issue). Yet these diversions and delays have always been handled with appropriate care by the airlines. They may not have gotten us where we were going any faster, but the information provided was accurate, we weren't told bold faced lies to our faces, and while the airlines may have never had any financial responsibility for our situation, they at least assisted in finding appropriate accommodation and transport.

I agree with your comments, and I think most understand that airlines cannot be held accountable for bad weather delaying or preventing making the destination. We all get that!

Hence why I keep saying; Its not that the disaster happened, its how you handle the aftermath that matters most.

 

[bakodiver391]

It is a well known fact that United's island hopper flight is the most profitable flight per mile IN THE WORLD. This was confirmed by a leaked memo a few years age. They can afford to take care of you. I also have first hand knowledge of them flat out lying about a wholly fabricated weather event at Kwajalein to explain bypassing and flying on to Majuro. The reality was that there was a secret missile test at Kwajalein that coincided with the flight. On the other hand, the 737 is specially equipped for the island hopper flight, and I think there are only 2 of these planes so equipped at any given time, so they can't just substitute another. It sucks to be stuck in a captive market.

 

[Peter69_56]

It is a well known fact that United's island hopper flight is the most profitable flight per mile IN THE WORLD. This was confirmed by a leaked memo a few years age. They can afford to take care of you. I also have first hand knowledge of them flat out lying about a wholly fabricated weather event at Kwajalein to explain bypassing and flying on to Majuro. The reality was that there was a secret missile test at Kwajalein that coincided with the flight. On the other hand, the 737 is specially equipped for the island hopper flight, and I think there are only 2 of these planes so equipped at any given time, so they can't just substitute another. It sucks to be stuck in a captive market.

I agree with your comments regarding specialty planes and understand that. My comment I believe still stands;

Its not that the disaster happened, its how you handle the aftermath that matters most.

 

[ev780]

I agree with your comments regarding specialty planes and understand that. My comment I believe still stands;

Its not that the disaster happened, its how you handle the aftermath that matters most.

Peter, as I was told earlier in the thread, I guess we just have to let it go. We have to accept bad service and take it without comment or complaint. Get in. Sit down. Shut up. And hang on. Heaven forbid we actually demand good customer service and expect airlines to give a holy hell about anything except for the dollar.

The backlash is coming and right soon.

 

[bakodiver391]

A friend of mine was on the same flight and made the same comment. The ground staff at Pohnpei acted like a bunch of muppets. And per my information, this flight is wildly profitable, and they CAN afford proper training, and afford to pre- position essential supplies so that when this happens again, as it surely will, they can at least meet basic human needs. There is simply no excuse for this complete and utter failure on the part of United.